Another massacre because of a crazy person

[Deleted]

Oct 3, 2015 19:48:01 GMT -5 IndianSaint said:

I wouldn't care if someone had a panzer tank, as long as the didn't commit a crime with it.

Sig heil mein Fuhrer!

[IndianSaint]

I don't pretend to follow politics like many of you do.

I simply think that politics, when it comes to preventing crimes, will never reach the desired outcome.

What do I mean, God gave everyone free will. Even if you don't believe in any type of higher being, humans obviously have some sort of free will to follow laws or commit crimes. Laws will allow the system to prosecute those who break the laws but It'll never stop those from committing them. Heck that religious lady from KY didn't even follow the law to issues marriage license to gay couples, what's to stop an unstable person from shooting someone else?

Regarding gun control, I simply don't see it as a deterrent to stopping crimes. Those who want to commit crimes or inflect harm will still do so, with or without additional laws on gun control. IMO.

[CellarRat]

Oct 3, 2015 19:51:06 GMT -5 @misspractice said:

Rat, why do you ALWAYS resort to personal insults and attacks instead of making clear, concise arguments with facts to back up your positions? Calling people idiots or pretending to "know" what another person thinks even when you have no friggin' clue what they really believe just destroys any modicum of credibility you might have. Your emotions are exposed when you can't even construct a simple sentence - e.g., "Again, another liberal but for your personal experience wouldn't know better." - WTF is that supposed to be saying? Take a deep breath, relax your shoulders, think, compose, read, correct, think again and the click on "Post Quick Reply"! LOL! OBTW, calling someone a Liberal is only an insult as seen from your closed mind little cellar - most of us are proud of the liberal, free thinking label.

You're the emotional one without control big boy, and I have messages to prove it. So stop it I don't want to embarrass you. You are also the proven bully on this board.

"Free thinking" liberal, that's funny! The perfect example of an oxymoron. Go to sleep old man.

[Deleted]

Let's get back to the discussion at hand and put a cap on the personal attacks and threats!

Rat, earlier in this thread you posted:

"...But what concerns me is your statement about not needing 13 guns for home protection. And your point is? Would you limit the amount of guns a person can own?...."

The whacko whose actions stimulated this thread proved by his own actions that he had too many guns. He only took half of his arsenal when he went off on a self planned offensive action. It would seem reasonable that a person would only need one gun for personal protection. Pistols, one, are allowed under concealed carry permits. You don't see gun rights advocates walking the streets with an AR-15 slung across their shoulder for personal protection but I'd even go along with the notion that one long rifle for home protection would seem reasonable. As for those that are target shooting regulars, it would make sense that they would be working to be proficient with their defensive weapons. Hunters would want one or two shotguns, a long rifle, and a smaller caliber long rifle for small game and target practicing on their estates! All of the weapons I just gave examples of should be registered. Not sure how collectors could be monitored or regulated but limits on ammunition purchases just might flag a potential threat from someone with a need to purchase hundreds of rounds of AR-15 ammo and multiple clips.

Both you and IS have stated/implied that gun registration and background checks would hamper gun purchases by law abiding citizens. I don't see it! We are required to register and renew registrations periodically for our automobiles, motorcycles, boats, trailers and those processes certainly don't inhibit buyers.

Background checks are fairly routine in today's job market. Law abiding citizens should have no fear of a background check - what problems do you see if the requirements for a background check were instituted for ALL gun sales. Person to person sales could be monitored via the transfer of the gun's registration (as we do with motor vehicles, etc.) to the new owner. A seller would not want to be tied to a weapon no longer in their control via an undocumented sale, IMO anyway.

Solving the increasing gun violence problem is not an easy task but something has to be done - we just can't continue business as usual. No one is saying do away with the 2nd amendment and no one is looking to take weapons away from mentally healthy, law abiding citizens. We may never completely diminish the chances of guns falling into the wrong hands but we certainly should be attempting to make that as hard as reasonably possible.

The shooter's own father is questioning how his son could ever have amassed a "collection" of 13 guns!

[CellarRat]

It's church day so I'll keep it brief. Here are some cryptic thoughts.

I have a problem with the government putting any restrictions on the amount of weapons one can accumulate for personal use. This includes a collector.

Most people including myself don't have an issue with background checks.

If someone has been diagnosed with a mental disorder and is declared to have have suicidal ideation or harmful to others, obviously they shouldn't own a gun.

Registration and confiscation are 1st cousins.

Laws and regulations that restrict use either by making it cost prohibitive or otherwise onerous are not acceptable.

A final thought, what's laws would you passed that would have prevented the most recent massacre?

[Deleted]

Oct 4, 2015 6:43:00 GMT -5 CellarRat said:

It's church day so I'll keep it brief. Here are some cryptic thoughts.

I have a problem with the government putting any restrictions on the amount of weapons one can accumulate for personal use. This includes a collector.

Most people including myself don't have an issue with background checks.

If someone has been diagnosed with a mental disorder and is declared to have have suicidal ideation or harmful to others, obviously they shouldn't own a gun.

Registration and confiscation are 1st cousins.

Laws and regulations that restrict use either by making it cost prohibitive or otherwise onerous are not acceptable.

A final thought, what's laws would you passed that would have prevented the most recent massacre?

I disagree on the familial relationship you offer between registration and confiscation - a little "the sky is falling" thinking going on there.

Just suppose the 14 guns the shooter owned were registered and the local authorities had access to that database. Over the two days leading up to the shooting, the shooter posted that he was going to do what he did but with no details. Had a reader of that post notified authorities and they had checked their database they could have linked a well armed guy with a personality trait that could lead to a mass shooting. They could have then gone and interviewed him and possibly have prevented it. Low probability that scenario would have played out ideally but a low probability is infinitely better than having no chance at all.

Mr. Conservative, aka "The Donald" claims that had a few students and/or teachers been carrying that a different outcome would have manifested himself. I won't even discuss what utter mayhem that would have led to in a classroom based shootout - more casualties is my guess and a few friendly ones to boot. As an aside, the trained and armed police that arrived were NOT able to bring the shooter down - he killed himself - further indication that a classroom shootout with untrained students/teachers would have been a disaster as well.

[CellarRat]

What prevented authorities from interviewing this guy anyway? Registration is irrelevant here. If I tell you I'm going to run over someone with a car tomorrow, what difference does it make if the car is registered? It's nonsensical.

[Deleted]

Oct 4, 2015 7:38:50 GMT -5 CellarRat said:

What prevented authorities from interviewing this guy anyway? Registration is irrelevant here. If I tell you I'm going to run over someone with a car tomorrow, what difference does it make if the car is registered? It's nonsensical.

Had his arsenal of 14 guns been registered and that info available I would think a police response in the form of an interview might have some urgency. Didn't happen so we will never know. Have a great day!

[CellarRat]

Oct 4, 2015 10:22:07 GMT -5 @misspractice said:

Oct 4, 2015 7:38:50 GMT -5 CellarRat said:

What prevented authorities from interviewing this guy anyway? Registration is irrelevant here. If I tell you I'm going to run over someone with a car tomorrow, what difference does it make if the car is registered? It's nonsensical.

Had his arsenal of 14 guns been registered and that info available I would think a police response in the form of an interview might have some urgency. Didn't happen so we will never know. Have a great day!

Had his "arsenal" been registered they would have known how many guns he had but not much more. Unless you are suggesting, like Cuomo has implemented with assault rifles, registration so that gun owners could be on a watch list. What you want would be discriminatory.

[Deleted]

Oct 4, 2015 11:05:29 GMT -5 CellarRat said:

Oct 4, 2015 10:22:07 GMT -5 @misspractice said:

Had his arsenal of 14 guns been registered and that info available I would think a police response in the form of an interview might have some urgency. Didn't happen so we will never know. Have a great day!

Had his "arsenal" been registered they would have known how many guns he had but not much more. Unless you are suggesting, like Cuomo has implemented with assault rifles, registration so that gun owners could be on a watch list. What you want would be discriminatory.

If you want to call a searchable database a "watch list" so be it. DMV maintains very large similar "watch lists" of registered automobiles, drivers/driving records and you might be the only person on the planet that would find them discriminatory. OBTW, an automobile seems, by your own admission, to be one of your favorite straw man "weapons".

PS - You have yet to answer my query as to why registering a gun would be such a hard thing for a law-abiding citizen to do when he/she/or you buy one.

[CellarRat]

Oct 4, 2015 12:14:01 GMT -5 @misspractice said:

Oct 4, 2015 11:05:29 GMT -5 CellarRat said:

Had his "arsenal" been registered they would have known how many guns he had but not much more. Unless you are suggesting, like Cuomo has implemented with assault rifles, registration so that gun owners could be on a watch list. What you want would be discriminatory.

If you want to call a searchable database a "watch list" so be it. DMV maintains very large similar "watch lists" of registered automobiles, drivers/driving records and you might be the only person on the planet that would find them discriminatory. OBTW, an automobile seems, by your own admission, to be one of your favorite straw man "weapons".

PS - You have yet to answer my query as to why registering a gun would be such a hard thing for a law-abiding citizen to do when he/she/or you buy one.

Hand guns already require registration in NY, the bulk of crimes are committed with them, not long guns. The registration of pistols hasn't stop the murders in Chicago's "gun free" zones. Has it? I guess I'm asking what the purpose is? Even with registration this killer would not have been stopped. I don't want any more infringements on a citizen's constitutional right.

[glen]

I'm not sure about Oregon but in most places registration already exists. Either way it wouldn't prevent this UNLESS there is a link to mental health records. I know that is problematic because of HIPAA. Mental health pros often discourage such a link because it may prevent someone from getting the help they need. I'm not sure what the best answer to this is. Partial pre-screens don't seem to help much. Stiffer penalties don't matter if the criminal is planning on dying anyway.

[IndianSaint]

Oct 3, 2015 9:18:56 GMT -5 IndianSaint said:

Oh, I forgot the reason why I attached the link to the article (because I was too busy on my rant).

I'm more upset about the "method" in which this NY Dem wants to push his agenda (more so than what he's trying to accomplish). Last time Gov't was shut down to push someone's agenda it cost us tax payers "$24 Billion and 100,000 jobs".

Hey, I have a novel idea, why don't politicians do the job they were't elected to do, effectively, rather than making it more expensive for taxpayers because the "want their way at whatever the cost". Sounds to me that if you have to resort to extortion then you're not a good politician. JMO

Besides aren't elected officials supposed to serve their constituents? If the majority of NYers want gun control then so be it, he should listen and do it (without costing the entire country more money).

Just to be clear, I'm not for or againt guns or gun control(s). Although I don't believe most gun controls will stop criminals, the unstable or anyone who doesn't respect other human beings. They'll find a way to get a weapon illegally.

I'm against NYs bully of a governor. I don't believe in shutting down gov't to push your agenda at a cost to all taxpayers. Do your job and try and get it passed w/o bullying, shutting down gov't or costing tax payers due to the shut down.

[th24]

Our society is really shot to hell! Everyday there seems to another horror story! I honesty believe that within America..we have lost touch with "  Family Values " and " Religious teachings ".  If child is brought up with both- there should be enough safeguards in place..to insure something like this does not happen!
But we also live in a society that runs from psychological issues- nobody wants to talk about it! Patrick Kennedy just did a great interview on 60 minutes about how society and even some families ( including is own ) want ignore stigma of it!  And our government does little about it ! NOT for common place citizens and not for veterans! Its really sad!

[Deleted]

Oct 5, 2015 21:16:14 GMT -5 th24 said:

Our society is really shot to hell! Everyday there seems to another horror story! I honesty believe that within America..we have lost touch with "  Family Values " and " Religious teachings ".  If child is brought up with both- there should be enough safeguards in place..to insure something like this does not happen!
But we also live in a society that runs from psychological issues- nobody wants to talk about it! Patrick Kennedy just did a great interview on 60 minutes about how society and even some families ( including is own ) want ignore stigma of it!  And our government does little about it ! NOT for common place citizens and not for veterans! Its really sad!

I agree with what you say but I also think society has helped to create conditions that seem to push some over the edge. We have long touted the idea that to succeed you need a college education instead of encouraging kids to pursue realistic careers that fit their desires and skill sets. Many go to college to get a 4 yr degree with no goal of landing a job in a specific field. They graduate and are unable to find a job and possibly still saddled with a college loan. Similarly, you constantly hear that ANYONE WILL succeed if they just work hard at it - I'm trying to avoid bringing in the obvious politics inherent in that statement but I am certain most understand which side of the aisle it is loudest on. Kids growing up in the inner city, no matter how hard they work or what realistic goals they set, simply don't have the resources, contacts or mentors to help them on their way up and out. They remain in their environments and continue or begin a level of dependency that carries with it the guilt of failure with no realistic hope of breaking the cycle. The myth that those carrying the yoke of poverty and dependence are doing it willingly or are just plain lazy and comfortable in taking aid is put out to justify efforts to severly reduce or stop aid to those in need. More than ever, our society is service oriented and a climate should be reinstituted that, for some, 2 yr degrees developing marketable skills are more likely to result in well paying employment that should break the chains of dependency, bolster confidence and enable growth in the chosen field.

Mental health issues have always been hidden in family attics. The historically terrible climates of abuse and ill treatment in our institutions led to changes that released many back into the community but again, fail to adequately fund organizations that provide housing, job mentoring, employment and health services to levels needed to accommodate ALL those that need that type of care. Families are forced to keep loved ones in their homes until openings occur, if they ever do. Those families are not equipped to provide the care, mentoring, job placement opportunities, or professional help that could diagnose more serious devolvement leading to things like Sandy Hook or the recent shootings in Oregon.

As a society, we have to do better and help those that need it.

th24, I did get a little "I thought so chuckle" out of your closing where you said that "Government does little about it..." - Your "Don't Tread On Me" screams less government and keep the government out of our lives. I guess you, as most that wave that flag, quitely add the phrase "... unless or until I need its help"!