DFWAJG 4 #126 June 30, 2010 QuoteQuoteUnder California law, once you have been admitted for Danger to Self/Danger to Others, there are prohibitions to your buying guns. I recall, during residency, having to fill out paperwork for patients that had to be reported to the local police agencies. Keep in mind, that the psychiatrically ill are more likely to become victims of violent crimes, than as perpetrators of violent crimes. http://mabpro.com/community/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=74&Itemid=84 Who is going to do the screenings? And, would every person be required to have a screening? If not, then you would be discriminating against someone for having a disability, thus, violating the Americans with Disabilities Act. Are you trying to prevent suicides? Or homicides? If suicides, then don't give men over 85 a gun. They have the highest suicide rates. Those with depression and substance use disorders are next in line. Homicide by the mentally ill, especially the homicide of strangers, is very rare, and account for less than 8% of the homicides committed. Generally, if the mentally ill are going to harm someone, it will be their family members. As I said previously, the mentally ill are more likely to be targets of homicide, as opposed to being the perpetrators. I would be more concerned, with those with personality disorders, especially borderlines, narcissists, and anti-socials than any other. While many borderlines often seek psychiatric help, narcissists and anti-socials, often don't, unless for secondary gain. These are your most dangerous with weaponry. ooh, good, someone qualified to talk on this subject. do you have any immediate thoughts on the subject of possible changes to mental screening wrt gun purchases? Ignoring the issue of scale, I don't see the notion of a positive checkoff before purchase going anywhere aside from a virtual ban because it seems like no doctor would want the liability of saying "he's safe, give him a canon." It's much easier to create a no sell list based on criteria, but that has the potential consequence of discouraging people to seek care, esp given the legitimate fear that this list could be used for employment screening at high profile jobs (ex, pilots). Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
futuredivot 0 #127 June 30, 2010 QuoteQuoteSimple. It gives a legal path to give punitive justice to those that are caught breaking the law again. Guess a felon isn't allowed to protect his family. Choices have consequensesYou are only as strong as the prey you devour Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SkyDekker 1,145 #128 June 30, 2010 Quote Maybe they're more concerned with "loonies" having them. ;-) I thought it pretty clear that loonies don't stick to laws almost by definition There really shouldn't be any laws pertaining to loonies...I mean, most of them won't understand it anyways, or follow them. It just makes criminals out of perfectly fine loonies. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
turtlespeed 212 #129 July 1, 2010 Quote>Guess a felon isn't allowed to protect his family. Correct. Yep, I agree with Bill - he lost that right when he was conviceted of the felony. He still has the right to protect his family, just not with a firearm. If that was a major concern to him, then he shouldn't have allowed himself to be convicted of the felony. Still pretty simple. Next.I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rehmwa 2 #130 July 1, 2010 QuoteQuote>Guess a felon isn't allowed to protect his family. Correct. Yep, I agree with Bill - he lost that right when he was conviceted of the felony. He still has the right to protect his family, just not with a firearm. If that was a major concern to him, then he shouldn't have allowed himself to be convicted of the felony. Still pretty simple. Next. but what if his grandma needed intravenous medicine and they only have a knife and not a gun? someone might get tased looks like a pretty classic example of bias against old people ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DFWAJG 4 #131 July 1, 2010 Quote Quote Maybe they're more concerned with "loonies" having them. ;-) I thought it pretty clear that loonies don't stick to laws almost by definition There really shouldn't be any laws pertaining to loonies...I mean, most of them won't understand it anyways, or follow them. It just makes criminals out of perfectly fine loonies. Just because someone is "crazy" does not make him/her incompetent to make his/her own decisions, including the purchase or use of a gun. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
skypuppy 1 #132 July 1, 2010 Quote>I don't see anywhere in his post that he said violent murderers should be given guns. . . Exactly. That's the point of the post. Actually, you'd have to be pretty dumb not to read a negative connotation into the title of this thread. That is not true about the reply which you gave a snarky remark to. Again, it is unseemly for a moderator to make fun of posters.If some old guy can do it then obviously it can't be very extreme. Otherwise he'd already be dead. Bruce McConkey 'I thought we were gonna die, and I couldn't think of anyone Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DaVinci 0 #133 July 1, 2010 QuoteYou will get no apology from me for thinking that many of the right wing posters here would be giddy with earthly delight with a Christian Theocracy in America... The apology is waiting for you to prove it, or apologize for talking out of your ass. But I never expected someone like you to apologize when they were proven wrong. Quote You go read the Christian Identity sites for your own proof.. Nah, you will keep reading them for all of us. It is in your nature. But if you are unwilling to admit when you are wrong... It says more about you than anyone else. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DaVinci 0 #134 July 1, 2010 QuoteThe pro-gun crowd usually states that gun laws are useless, since criminals will get guns anyways. So, why then would so many of them be in favour of felons not having gun rights? Because, unlike you, we actually don't have a problem with honestly reasonable restrictions. We just do not agree on your definition of "reasonable". People with violent history, or a history of mental illness should not be allowed certain things. But people that have not been proven to be a criminal, or proven to have a mental problem should be allowed to have pretty much any type of firearm they want till they are proven a danger. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 2,434 #135 July 1, 2010 And your one warning. Cut it out. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #136 July 1, 2010 QuoteThis applies to the USA only. Feel free to explain your response. Until/unless GCA 68 is repealed, felons and the insane are already barred - why is this coming up yet again?Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DaVinci 0 #137 July 1, 2010 Ah, but it is fine for her to accuse me of embracing "The American Taiban"? Post 78 http://www.dropzone.com/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?post=3893454;search_string=American%20Taliban;#3893454 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JohnRich 4 #138 July 1, 2010 QuoteUntil/unless GCA 68 is repealed, felons and the insane are already barred - why is this coming up yet again? Because some of the gun-o-phobes like Presto-Changeo don't even know what the existing laws are, and so they run around demanding more gun laws, which in fact are already in place. All this really does is reveal their own ignorance on the issue. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Amazon 7 #139 July 1, 2010 Quote Ah, but it is fine for her to accuse me of embracing "The American Taiban"? Post 78 http://www.dropzone.com/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?post=3893454;search_string=American%20Taliban;#3893454 American Taliban We do seem to have a few of their supporters here in SC..... and I wonder who they might have voted for?????????????????????? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DaVinci 0 #140 July 1, 2010 QuoteAmerican Taliban We do seem to have a few of their supporters here in SC I don't see DaVinci listed on that site???? And I don't seem to recall supporting any of those people on that site??? Do have proof of my support of them? Unless you can provide proof that I have, then you should apologize for lying. I don't expect you to actually do it..... But it would be wonderful if you realized that some of the crap you claim is just not true. BTW JFK :The supreme reality of our time is our indivisibility as children of God and the common vulnerability of this planet 6:28:1963 JFK: The same revolutionary beliefs for which our forebearers fought — are still at issue around the globe — the belief that the rights of man come not from the generosity of the state but from the hand of God. ... With a good conscience our only sure reward, with history the final judge of our deeds, let us go forth to lead the land we love, asking His blessing and His help, but knowing that here on earth God's work must truly be our own. Inaugural address 1961 So if mentioning "God" is cause to join that group of yours..... Then you should add JFK and a bunch of others. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Amazon 7 #141 July 1, 2010 QuoteQuoteAmerican Taliban We do seem to have a few of their supporters here in SC I don't see DaVinci listed on that site???? And I don't seem to recall supporting any of those people on that site??? Do have proof of my support of them? Unless you can provide proof that I have, then you should apologize for lying. I don't expect you to actually do it..... But it would be wonderful if you realized that some of the crap you claim is just not true. BTW JFK :The supreme reality of our time is our indivisibility as children of God and the common vulnerability of this planet 6:28:1963 JFK: The same revolutionary beliefs for which our forebearers fought — are still at issue around the globe — the belief that the rights of man come not from the generosity of the state but from the hand of God. ... With a good conscience our only sure reward, with history the final judge of our deeds, let us go forth to lead the land we love, asking His blessing and His help, but knowing that here on earth God's work must truly be our own. Inaugural address 1961 So if mentioning "God" is cause to join that group of yours..... Then you should add JFK and a bunch of others. Might I suggest a fine Gruyère Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DaVinci 0 #142 July 6, 2010 QuoteMight I suggest a fine Gruyère Sure, but what you have done is proven you are willing to make wild accusations without a single bit of truth in them and then refuse to admit you just lied. It is clear your words have more heat than light in them and that you are not afraid to lie. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Amazon 7 #143 July 6, 2010 QuoteQuoteMight I suggest a fine Gruyère Sure, but what you have done is proven you are willing to make wild accusations without a single bit of truth in them and then refuse to admit you just lied. It is clear your words have more heat than light in them and that you are not afraid to lie. Neener Neener Neener Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DaVinci 0 #144 July 6, 2010 QuoteNeener Neener Neener I got it already... But you just like to keep proving you are unable to stand behind your word. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Amazon 7 #145 July 6, 2010 QuoteQuoteNeener Neener Neener I got it already... But you just like to keep proving you are unable to stand behind your word. BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ChangoLanzao 0 #146 July 6, 2010 QuoteQuoteQuoteNeener Neener Neener I got it already... But you just like to keep proving you are unable to stand behind your word. BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA +1 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DaVinci 0 #147 July 12, 2010 Quote BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA The proof is in your posts. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DaVinci 0 #148 July 12, 2010 Quote+1 Still waiting on you to provide your proof on your claims of phony quotes. You know... Like I did when you claimed Jesus, Gandhi, and Mandela did not approve of guns. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ChangoLanzao 0 #149 July 12, 2010 QuoteQuote+1 Still waiting on you to provide your proof on your claims of phony quotes. You know... Like I did when you claimed Jesus, Gandhi, and Mandela did not approve of guns. I don't have to prove anything to you. Bug off. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #150 July 12, 2010 QuoteQuoteQuote+1 Still waiting on you to provide your proof on your claims of phony quotes. You know... Like I did when you claimed Jesus, Gandhi, and Mandela did not approve of guns. I don't have to prove anything to you. Bug off. So, you're admitting that you can't prove your claim?Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
