Gun Control Proposed in US House

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Coming up with that post where John or I advocated giving guns to those who have proven a danger yet, Jeanne?

Put up or shut up time.

Sorry... that may work with your locals... but I will pass.. thanks.

So, this is the usual "make an accusation that has no basis in truth" that you use so often?

You only need read your body of work Mikeee.. it is replete with glossing over the facts that Jared and Cho.. and others. were ticking away just waiting for the trigger for them to go off and kill innocent people. Instead of demanding that those that have already shown a propensity towards a mental illness get some help, and in the meantime utilize a SANE approach to a recurring problem and denying them the firearms that will ensure they have an EXCELLENT body count.. You are standing on the rather untennable position that they deserved to have all the guns they could afford even if they did have contacts with people who were worried they would do just what they did.

Saying, "Yes, it's the same 'make a baseless accusation' I always use" would have been a lot less typing for you.

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[Amazon 7]

Quote

Quote

Oh I think its perfectly clear that mental illness was at work... plenty of people saw it.. but in your world... that is great. Fine .. how about we move all the people like Jared and Cho into YOUR neighborhood when you retire and wish to live a nice quiet life.

Uh, it's clear now, after the fact. But people, including school administrators, are not qualified to pass judgment on mental condition, other than he acted 'weird.' They are able to require that he get checked by a mental professional before returning. Still, you have no actual finding to base your conclusion on.

Without a finding, your solution really is just to deny guns to weird people. Most of them are harmless, you know.

Not good enough... at what point will the rights of the unarmed vicims come to bear???


You have the right.... to be murdered by a mentally ill perpetrator... your rights really do not matter to him or to people unwilling to put a little temporary roadblock in their way to protect the rest of us from them... the mental ill spree killers you are trying so hard to justify.

I guess the innocent victims are at fault, they should have armed themselves too by your logic, since they were harmless, you know.

[Amazon 7]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Coming up with that post where John or I advocated giving guns to those who have proven a danger yet, Jeanne?

Put up or shut up time.

Sorry... that may work with your locals... but I will pass.. thanks.

So, this is the usual "make an accusation that has no basis in truth" that you use so often?

You only need read your body of work Mikeee.. it is replete with glossing over the facts that Jared and Cho.. and others. were ticking away just waiting for the trigger for them to go off and kill innocent people. Instead of demanding that those that have already shown a propensity towards a mental illness get some help, and in the meantime utilize a SANE approach to a recurring problem and denying them the firearms that will ensure they have an EXCELLENT body count.. You are standing on the rather untennable position that they deserved to have all the guns they could afford even if they did have contacts with people who were worried they would do just what they did.

Saying, "Yes, it's the same 'make a baseless accusation' I always use" would have been a lot less typing for you.

More mikee circular word games... as usual.

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Coming up with that post where John or I advocated giving guns to those who have proven a danger yet, Jeanne?

Put up or shut up time.

Sorry... that may work with your locals... but I will pass.. thanks.

So, this is the usual "make an accusation that has no basis in truth" that you use so often?

You only need read your body of work Mikeee.. it is replete with glossing over the facts that Jared and Cho.. and others. were ticking away just waiting for the trigger for them to go off and kill innocent people. Instead of demanding that those that have already shown a propensity towards a mental illness get some help, and in the meantime utilize a SANE approach to a recurring problem and denying them the firearms that will ensure they have an EXCELLENT body count.. You are standing on the rather untennable position that they deserved to have all the guns they could afford even if they did have contacts with people who were worried they would do just what they did.

Saying, "Yes, it's the same 'make a baseless accusation' I always use" would have been a lot less typing for you.

More mikee circular word games... as usual.

More evidence that you can't back up your accusations, as usual.

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[skydivr 0]

I bought 6 more 30 rd mags today, because I still CAN...

Keith Abner
D-17590

"Those who do, can't explain; those who don't, can't understand"

[billvon 2,384]

>I bought 6 more 30 rd mags today, because I still CAN...

The democrats better hurry up and ban guns, or a lot of right wingers are going to look really stupid.

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

or a lot of right wingers are going to look really stupid.

So, they'll be catching up to the Dems *again*?

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[turtlespeed 212]

Quote

Quote

or a lot of right wingers are going to look really stupid.

So, they'll be catching up the Dems *again*?

Catching up TO . . .

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

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

or a lot of right wingers are going to look really stupid.

So, they'll be catching up the Dems *again*?

Catching up TO . . .

Yes, thanks...fixed.

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[turtlespeed 212]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

or a lot of right wingers are going to look really stupid.

So, they'll be catching up the Dems *again*?

Catching up TO . . .

Yes, thanks...fixed.

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

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

Not good enough... at what point will the rights of the unarmed vicims come to bear???

uh, this is the stance typically taken by right wingers to deny criminals (or hippies, or socialists, or ...) their rights, you know. When did you become a fan of authoritarian regimes?

Civil liberties are not to be sacrificed because something bad might happen. You essentially believe this, but the gun thing is a huge blind spot of your's.

Quote

You have the right.... to be murdered by a mentally ill perpetrator... your rights really do not matter to him or to people unwilling to put a little temporary roadblock in their way to protect the rest of us from them... the mental ill spree killers you are trying so hard to justify.

You continue to gloss over the argument I made that your proposal will result in more mentally ill people, who can easily get guns. You're taking away rights from millions of people for the edge cases, and won't even succeed in getting the result you seek.

[Amazon 7]

Quote

Quote

Not good enough... at what point will the rights of the unarmed vicims come to bear???

uh, this is the stance typically taken by right wingers to deny criminals (or hippies, or socialists, or ...) their rights, you know. When did you become a fan of authoritarian regimes?

Civil liberties are not to be sacrificed because something bad might happen. You essentially believe this, but the gun thing is a huge blind spot of your's.

Quote

You have the right.... to be murdered by a mentally ill perpetrator... your rights really do not matter to him or to people unwilling to put a little temporary roadblock in their way to protect the rest of us from them... the mental ill spree killers you are trying so hard to justify.

You continue to gloss over the argument I made that your proposal will result in more mentally ill people, who can easily get guns. You're taking away rights from millions of people for the edge cases, and won't even succeed in getting the result you seek.

See what you and others keep missing is they just do not wake up one day to turn into a complete and utter homicidal maniac .

I keep saying it and it keeps going WHOOSH if you have someone in school who is exhibiting anti social behaviors... engage the professionals.. the earlier the better. I would think that the parents would prefer to have a regular kid that will grow up that they can be proud of. Instead of a family named Laughner that now will be considering changing their family name out of shame. I would rather see a well-adjusted child turn into a productive member of society that can exercise all of his constitutional rights . Letting a young man turn into a "lone wolf" anti-social little twat that might turn into a spree killer is not a desired outcome.

[popsjumper 2]

Quote

... and won't even succeed in getting the result you anyone seek(s).

Point 1.
Known, convicted criminals banned from possessing guns?
Not working is it?

Known, certified loonies banned from possessing guns?
Not working is it?

Suspected loonies banned from possessing guns?
That won't work either.

Ban guns altogether?
That won't work either.

Best anyone could hope for is a slow-down because you sure ain't gonna stop it.


Point 2
How does one get to be a certified loony?
-One first does something that causes a court-ordered evaluation and determination by professionals.
-One does something that attracts the attention of those professionals to the point that they do an involuntary commitment.

The problem is that sometimes what one first does is a murder or some such. You have "prevented" nothing...and you can't prevent that.

What about indicators such as acting "weird". What's "weird"?
How do you define that? As something that YOU wouldn't do? Can we rightfully deny rights based on that? The pros define that.

And here's where I think Amazon's point comes in.
If someone is acting "weird" what's the problem in bringing that to the attention of the powers that be? The pros will determine whether or not that "weirdness" warrants any further action. Ignoring it could very well be the one thing that sets the scene for later violence.

So,
If the nut case does something that brings them to the attention of the pros, and the pros determine that they are right then a danger to themselves or others, then deny them them possession of guns by all means.

OK..now what? Prove you're sane so you can get your ownership rights back? Be banned for life regardless of the success or failure of treatment? Hard one, eh?

I'm just against the wholesale testing of everyone and a database that captures your "score" and trying to determine what one "might" do in the future and applying that to someone who has done nothing. Shades of Big Brother.

My reality and yours are quite different.
I think we're all Bozos on this bus.
Falcon5232, SCS8170, SCSA353, POPS9398, DS239

[turtlespeed 212]

Quote

See what you and others keep missing is they just do not wake up one day to turn into a complete and utter homicidal maniac .

I keep saying it and it keeps going WHOOSH if you have someone in school who is exibiting ant social behaviors... engage the professionals.. the earlier the better. Iwould think that the parents would prefer to have a regular kid that will grow up tht they can be proud of. Instead of a famliy named Laughner that now will be considering changing their family name out of shame. I would rather see a well adjusted child turn into a productive member of society that can exercise all of his constitutional rights . Letting a young man turn into a "lone wolf" anti-social little twat that might turn into a spree killer is not a desired outcome.

Could you please publish your list of qualifications that would demand evaluationn and then re-evaluation.

I'd like to see the impact on a subjects professional life if that information were to ever get out . . . because the person was a little shy and introspective.

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

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

See what you and others keep missing is they just do not wake up one day to turn into a complete and utter homicidal maniac .

I keep saying it and it keeps going WHOOSH if you have someone in school who is exibiting ant social behaviors... engage the professionals.. the earlier the better.

WHOOSH is right - you cannot articulate a policy in anything more than vague generalities. Worthless.

Every fucking teenager in America shows antisocial behavior. So at what point does a teacher or parent or administrator engage a professional? Will it be mandatory for the school official, like it is for suspected abuse? Who pays for the professional? What is the professional tasked with? Under what criteria do you want them to label the kid as risky, thus prohibiting him from attending college, or purchasing a gun. And how does the kid get removed from this list, or will it be like the No Fly list?

your stance here is as useless as "Won't someone please think of the children!" Grow some detail into it. Try to address the negative consequences that are a given. How much of HIPPA gets to survive this? And what about those who are fine until after school? How much effort/money do you think this will cost and how many lives do you estimate will be saved?

[Amazon 7]

Quote

Quote

See what you and others keep missing is they just do not wake up one day to turn into a complete and utter homicidal maniac .

I keep saying it and it keeps going WHOOSH if you have someone in school who is exibiting ant social behaviors... engage the professionals.. the earlier the better. Iwould think that the parents would prefer to have a regular kid that will grow up tht they can be proud of. Instead of a famliy named Laughner that now will be considering changing their family name out of shame. I would rather see a well adjusted child turn into a productive member of society that can exercise all of his constitutional rights . Letting a young man turn into a "lone wolf" anti-social little twat that might turn into a spree killer is not a desired outcome.

Could you please publish your list of qualifications that would demand evaluationn and then re-evaluation.

I'd like to see the impact on a subjects professional life if that information were to ever get out . . . because the person was a little shy and introspective.

Oh thats right all the teachers and professionals in schools are evil liberals and can't be trusted

Paranoid much?

[Amazon 7]

Quote

Quote

See what you and others keep missing is they just do not wake up one day to turn into a complete and utter homicidal maniac .

I keep saying it and it keeps going WHOOSH if you have someone in school who is exibiting ant social behaviors... engage the professionals.. the earlier the better.

WHOOSH is right - you cannot articulate a policy in anything more than vague generalities. Worthless.

Every fucking teenager in America shows antisocial behavior. So at what point does a teacher or parent or administrator engage a professional? Will it be mandatory for the school official, like it is for suspected abuse? Who pays for the professional? What is the professional tasked with? Under what criteria do you want them to label the kid as risky, thus prohibiting him from attending college, or purchasing a gun. And how does the kid get removed from this list, or will it be like the No Fly list?

your stance here is as useless as "Won't someone please think of the children!" Grow some detail into it. Try to address the negative consequences that are a given. How much of HIPPA gets to survive this? And what about those who are fine until after school? How much effort/money do you think this will cost and how many lives do you estimate will be saved?

Yeah.. you are right.. it would cost money... for evil "social Programs" that we cant afford because we need to spend at least what.. 20 million or so per kill on a guy half way around the world that lives in a dirt floor hovel in the mountains

How many Americans lives could be made better with a smaller death toll by staffing schools with people who would actually make a difference in spotting and educating young people ... ya know.... the future of our country.

Remember this???

1. AGAIN: Get deniers like you, Mike and Marc to admit that there is a problem.

2. Engage experts in constitutional law, criminology and psychiatry to address the problem.

[turtlespeed 212]

Quote

Quote

Quote

See what you and others keep missing is they just do not wake up one day to turn into a complete and utter homicidal maniac .

I keep saying it and it keeps going WHOOSH if you have someone in school who is exibiting ant social behaviors... engage the professionals.. the earlier the better. Iwould think that the parents would prefer to have a regular kid that will grow up tht they can be proud of. Instead of a famliy named Laughner that now will be considering changing their family name out of shame. I would rather see a well adjusted child turn into a productive member of society that can exercise all of his constitutional rights . Letting a young man turn into a "lone wolf" anti-social little twat that might turn into a spree killer is not a desired outcome.

Could you please publish your list of qualifications that would demand evaluation and then re-evaluation.

I'd like to see the impact on a subjects professional life if that information were to ever get out . . . because the person was a little shy and introspective.

Oh thats right all the teachers and professionals in schools are evil liberals and can't be trusted

Paranoid much?

All these years that you scream that you are a libertarian . . .

I bolded again the part that you deflected from and avoided answering.

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

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

Quote

I keep saying it and it keeps going WHOOSH if you have someone in school who is exibiting ant social behaviors... engage the professionals.. the earlier the better.

WHOOSH is right - you cannot articulate a policy in anything more than vague generalities. Worthless.

Every fucking teenager in America shows antisocial behavior. So at what point does a teacher or parent or administrator engage a professional? Will it be mandatory for the school official, like it is for suspected abuse? Who pays for the professional? What is the professional tasked with? Under what criteria do you want them to label the kid as risky, thus prohibiting him from attending college, or purchasing a gun. And how does the kid get removed from this list, or will it be like the No Fly list?

your stance here is as useless as "Won't someone please think of the children!" Grow some detail into it. Try to address the negative consequences that are a given. How much of HIPPA gets to survive this? And what about those who are fine until after school? How much effort/money do you think this will cost and how many lives do you estimate will be saved?

Yeah.. you are right.. it would cost money... for evil "social Programs" that we cant afford because we need to spend at least what.. 20 million or so per kill on a guy half way around the world that lives in a dirt floor hovel in the mountains

How many Americans lives could be made better with a smaller death toll by staffing schools with people who would actually make a difference in spotting and educating young people ... ya know.... the future of our country.

Remember this???

1. AGAIN: Get deniers like you, Mike and Marc to admit that there is a problem.

2. Engage experts in constitutional law, criminology and psychiatry to address the problem.

Actually, no, I ignored that thread as it spun out of control early on when media reporting was scattered. I don't follow every thread, and I do tune out some when they become uninteresting. So thanks for including the reference.

That said, "engage the experts" is the sort of non solution that Ross Perot would give us. I was asking you for a real answer.

I asked about costs because 1) we have a massive deficit and 2) there are much more significant causes of death than mass shootings.

Motor accidents still are the #1 cause on acute deaths. 40k/year. Smoking and obesity dominate the causes for chronic deaths. Hundreds of thousands die earlier than they would otherwise.

Mass shootings - a rare year makes 100, with a liberal definition of mass. Spending billions on mental health care monitoring and forced care might pay dividends in the overall, and perhaps the suicide rate, but the reductions in crazed shootings would be unmeasureable, insignificant. And as I suggested, can easily result in an increase in poor mental health when it scares people away.

Furthermore, rights aren't for sale.

[kallend 1,621]

Quote

That said, "engage the experts" is the sort of non solution that Ross Perot would give us. I was asking you for a real answer.

If you have trouble peeing, would you propose your own solution or ask a urologist?

If you have acute abdominal pain that lasts for days, would you take out your own appendix or consult a surgeon?

If you are arrested on a serious charge, will you conduct your own defense or get an attorney?

We have experts for a reason. But first we have to admit that there is a problem.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[popsjumper 2]

Quote

WHOOSH is right - you cannot articulate a policy in anything more than vague generalities. Worthless

Kelp, you read like a somewhat intelligent guy but surely you don't believe that, do you? Worthless?
Have you never heard of the phrases "food for thought" or "topic for discussion"?

Is it a requirement that only solid answers are to be posted here? Is it mandatory that one has all the answers before a question is raised? I think not.

If you're hammering on somebody for not posting solutions you'll be doing a lot of hammering. I get the feeling that even if a solution WAS posted, you'd be vehemently bad-mouthing it. Well, that's not uncommon here but you get my point.

Quote

your stance here is as useless

Sorry, your entire post is useless as it stands. Do YOU have all the answers? Do YOU have any input on a viable solution? If not, do you suggest one or do you hammer yourself?

My reality and yours are quite different.
I think we're all Bozos on this bus.
Falcon5232, SCS8170, SCSA353, POPS9398, DS239

[rushmc 18]

Ya ya ya

and if an expert proposes a soultion you disagree with they are a political hack or bought out by a corp

You are one funny sob dude

Thanks for today
'
been a long one and you helped me get through it

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[kallend 1,621]

Quote

Ya ya ya

and if an expert proposes a soultion you disagree with they are a political hack or bought out by a corp

How will you ever know if you continue in denial that there is a problem.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

Quote

Ya ya ya

and if an expert proposes a soultion you disagree with they are a political hack or bought out by a corp

How will you ever know if you continue in denial that there is a problem.

None of the gun owners here have said violent crime isn't a problem.

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

Kelp, you read like a somewhat intelligent guy but surely you don't believe that, do you? Worthless?
Have you never heard of the phrases "food for thought" or "topic for discussion"?

Gotta disagree - kallend couches his arguments in terms so vague that they can't be answered. He talks abut the laws being badly written and insufficiently enforced, then, when asked how the subject broke the letter of the law, responds that you 'value access to your toys more than the lives of innocent victims".

That's not the response of someone wanting an answer - that's the response of someone that only wants to demonize his opponent.

Quote

Is it a requirement that only solid answers are to be posted here? Is it mandatory that one has all the answers before a question is raised? I think not.

I don't think anyone is saying that's required. However, if you're claiming enough expertise to harp on the deficiency in the construction or enforcement of a law, it's reasonable to expect the person to have SOME sort of concrete suggestion for improvement.

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706