|
Post by melanell on Jul 24, 2015 19:57:39 GMT
Personally, I would like to see all those saying it's about lack of mental health services, voluntarily and without complaint, pony up the additional tax dollars necessary to reopen the closed facilities and start lobbying your Congress members and state reps to begin amending the laws which make it so difficult for family members to get help for their mentally ill relatives. In some cases the facilities are open. But far less patients are using them. Which still rolls back to the idea that the people who need the help are not getting it. People have to let go of the stigma surrounding mental health issues. We need to stop hiding if we have our own mental health issues (And in all fairness, here you go....I suffered with depression and anxiety about 12 years ago. I was on medication for about a year and saw a therapist regularly during that time. I did not however, ever feel one tiniest speck of desire to harm anyone.) and we need to not feel ashamed or guilty if our children have them. We need to be able to seek and receive help and we need some way of being able to help those who don't want help. And that last part is big, because families with adults who won't get help on their own currently feel helpless.
|
|
|
Post by PEArfect on Jul 24, 2015 20:04:58 GMT
Prayers to the families of the victims.
Strict gun laws/gun free zone in Chicago, IL. 1,493 shooting victims so far this year. Unfortunately, it's not just about gun control.
|
|
|
Post by traceys on Jul 24, 2015 20:09:34 GMT
Not sure I agree, but anyhow, that's not what vigilante justice means. It would mean that if the Billy Joes patrolling recruiting stations to protect your unarmed "armed" forces were forced to take action against an attacker. Or are they just going to stand there like dummies and " frighten" the attackers away? If so what is the point of them being there! I imagine that the point of being there is primarily deterrence. How likely is it that someone will pull up in front of a business and start shooting if there is someone there with the capability of shooting back? I don't think they should be necessary, though. I don't for the life of me understand why active duty personnel cannot at least carry a sidearm.
|
|
|
Post by Merge on Jul 24, 2015 20:12:32 GMT
I have lost two relatives to gun "accidents." And yes, if you'd seen the idiots who pushed so hard for open carry here in Texas, you'd know there's a whole lot of compensating going on. We had an incident here in Houston in the past year or so where a citizen with a concealed carry permit took it upon himself to open fire on some guys who were robbing a GameStop. He fired several rounds in a retail strip mall type area and killed at least one of the thieves. Of course lots of people cheered his bravery, and no charges were brought against him, but the fact is that he thought it was OK to risk killing innocent bystanders to keep someone from stealing some PlayStations. I'm sorry, but that shows an incredible lack of judgment and IMO should be grounds for having his CHL revoked. I don't want some civilian shooting the place up and hitting me or my kid to prevent a property crime. That's not bravery; it's stupidity of the highest order and should be illegal. So how did they know at the time of the robbery it was just a property crime? If I was behind the counter being robbed for property, I would be scared to death that they would pull out a gun and kill us as they left. Because the guys had already left the store and were headed toward their car when he shot them. He'd seen everything happen from a restaurant across the way and decided to come and get the gun out of his own car and confront them. Shots were exchanged and it's only dumb luck that no innocents were killed.
|
|
AnotherPea
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 2,968
Jan 4, 2015 1:47:52 GMT
|
Post by AnotherPea on Jul 24, 2015 20:15:37 GMT
My personal, layman's opinion and that we have a HUGE problem with diagnosing mental illness in the US. You can buy a diagnosis if you shop around. So many people want to excuse away behavior and we clearly have idiots hanging up shingles when they shouldn't be. There aren't clear, quantitative tests for mental illness like there are for other problems. It is too subjective and so many problems have a spectrum aspect to them. "Take a pill" has replaced "work through it." Because of all of this we have too many over-diagnosis conditions and some conditions that are dismissed by "professionals."
I had a student a few years ago that was clearly a sociopath. But he was diagnosed with autism. I'm not an expert by any means, but I've seen a large number of autistic children. He did not fit any of the descriptors of autism, except those that were in common with sociopathy. Now, if you were his mother, which would you rather say your son had? Getting a doctor to say he had autism would not be difficult.
So, not only did his behavior get excused under the autism umbrella, which gave him so much license to misbehave in my district, he wasn't receiving the treatment he should have been receiving.
|
|
|
Post by Merge on Jul 24, 2015 20:22:37 GMT
Prayers to the families of the victims. Strict gun laws/gun free zone in Chicago, IL. 1,493 shooting victims so far this year. Unfortunately, it's not just about gun control. Ugh. I am so tired of people trotting out Chicago as an example of failed gun laws. It's an island in the middle of a nation where any yahoo can walk into Walmart and buy a gun, and there are no means to prevent someone from driving to Iowa and buying a weapon capable of quickly killing dozens, and then returning to Chicago with it. Of course gun control isn't working there. You want a better comparison? Look at Australia. Zero mass shootings and few mass killings. By contrast, there have been 204 mass shootings (defined as four or more people shot in a single event) in the U.S. this year alone. Coincidentally, yesterday was the 204th day of the year. A mass shooting every. single. day. in this country. NONE of them were able to be prevented by a good guy with a gun. The whole idea of citizens with guns for protection is a laughable failure and we need to stop pretending that it isn't. www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2015/07/24/there-have-been-204-mass-shootings-and-204-days-in-2015-so-far/?tid=sm_fb
|
|
|
Post by traceys on Jul 24, 2015 20:30:18 GMT
My personal, layman's opinion and that we have a HUGE problem with diagnosing mental illness in the US. You can buy a diagnosis if you shop around. So many people want to excuse away behavior and we clearly have idiots hanging up shingles when they shouldn't be. There aren't clear, quantitative tests for mental illness like there are for other problems. It is too subjective and so many problems have a spectrum aspect to them. "Take a pill" has replaced "work through it." Because of all of this we have too many over-diagnosis conditions and some conditions that are dismissed by "professionals." I had a student a few years ago that was clearly a sociopath. But he was diagnosed with autism. I'm not an expert by any means, but I've seen a large number of autistic children. He did not fit any of the descriptors of autism, except those that were in common with sociopathy. Now, if you were his mother, which would you rather say your son had? Getting a doctor to say he had autism would not be difficult. So, not only did his behavior get excused under the autism umbrella, which gave him so much license to misbehave in my district, he wasn't receiving the treatment he should have been receiving. I agree. i did testing for my district before I retired and had to have a conversation every year with one particular teacher about how even the law of averages would suggest that out of her 15 students, 10 of them probably did not have a behavior disorder.....sigh..... I think we just want to believe that when someone does something horrific, they must be mentally ill. Otherwise, do we have to worry that the neighbor we chat with over the fence, or the nice checker at the grocery is just going to go off one day? Or maybe it will be us. Or our child. I wish I had some good answers.
|
|
|
Post by freecharlie on Jul 24, 2015 20:36:38 GMT
There is going to come a day, probably not too long from now, when we won't even bother posting about these mass shootings anymore because they've become so common place. Three in the last 5 weeks. Way to go America. Personally, I would like to see all those saying it's about lack of mental health services, voluntarily and without complaint, pony up the additional tax dollars necessary to reopen the closed facilities and start lobbying your Congress members and state reps to begin amending the laws which make it so difficult for family members to get help for their mentally ill relatives. If you can't find it in your conscience to consider that gun control might make a difference, at least do something that isn't just obstructive. I would have zero problem ponying up tax dollars to go to this cause. I believe that the government's job is to keep us safe and to build, fix, and maintain the infastructure. To me, this falls under protecting the people. And I have lobbied my congress and state reps. I'm a sped teacher who has dealt with kids with mental health issues. As long as they are in the school system, we provide at least some services, but when they age out, they are left to their own devices. They often end up in prison or dead. I do believe that it needs to be easier to get help for relatives, but not as easy as it was when the laws started being put in place. I think that the doctors and not the insurance companies should get to decide when a patient is ready. Or hell, have a team that includes the insurance company as I don't want doctors keeping people just for the insurance money. The mental health team at our local hospital is a joke. They give kids who are brought in root beer floats. I had students who would get violent or plan to kill themselves just so they could get the float. I've had students who had no business being released released because their x number of days were up. One student was on such a cycle. He'd be committed for x days and then get out, not because he was better, but because that was all medicaid would pay for. He'd be good for a week or so, end up back in the juvenile detention center until his court date at which time he would be committed again for x number of days. Lather, rinse, repeat. This boy would make progress and then they'd throw him back out. What may have happened had they actually worked with him until he no longer needed it? What would happen if after being released he got to see someone for more than a monthly med visit? You believe that gun control will stop this. I'd like to know what kind of gun control you want. What is going to fix this problem? It isn't only the gun. It is the person behind the gun.
|
|
happymomma
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 4,078
Aug 6, 2014 23:57:56 GMT
|
Post by happymomma on Jul 24, 2015 20:42:36 GMT
There is going to come a day, probably not too long from now, when we won't even bother posting about these mass shootings anymore because they've become so common place. Three in the last 5 weeks. Way to go America. Personally, I would like to see all those saying it's about lack of mental health services, voluntarily and without complaint, pony up the additional tax dollars necessary to reopen the closed facilities and start lobbying your Congress members and state reps to begin amending the laws which make it so difficult for family members to get help for their mentally ill relatives. If you can't find it in your conscience to consider that gun control might make a difference, at least do something that isn't just obstructive. I believe we need better mental health care. I also believe that we do have mental health care available under Obamacare, but I might be wrong on that. My income is under $30,000 a year. I'm not willing to pay more taxes. What I'd like to see is less spending on wasteful things. Blast me if you'd like, but we need some serious welfare reform IMO. Also, I'd love for our government to stop sending money to other countries and spend it on our own citizens, including mental health programs and facilities. More taxes isn't the answer either. Let's spend the money we do have a lot more wisely.
|
|
Sarah*H
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 3,989
Jun 25, 2014 20:07:06 GMT
|
Post by Sarah*H on Jul 24, 2015 20:46:09 GMT
I've said repeatedly that we should require insurance for each gun and let the very smart bean counters determine who does and does not constitute a risk. I also believe there should be severe civil and criminal liability when someone fails to properly secure their gun and that gun is stolen and later used in a crime. You want to keep your loaded gun in an unlocked night stand? Have at it. But if MethHead Hank steals it to sell for his next fix and MurdererMaurice uses it to kill someone, you'll be held criminally responsible for your part in that sequence of events.
|
|
|
Post by crimsoncat05 on Jul 24, 2015 20:47:49 GMT
^^^ I, for one, am trusting that this will never (hopefully not, anyway) come to pass. I don't want to live in the age of Minority Report. The 'bean counters' have done so well with the things they're in charge of so far...
|
|
|
Post by PEArfect on Jul 24, 2015 20:52:33 GMT
Prayers to the families of the victims. Strict gun laws/gun free zone in Chicago, IL. 1,493 shooting victims so far this year. Unfortunately, it's not just about gun control. Ugh. I am so tired of people trotting out Chicago as an example of failed gun laws. It's an island in the middle of a nation where any yahoo can walk into Walmart and buy a gun, and there are no means to prevent someone from driving to Iowa and buying a weapon capable of quickly killing dozens, and then returning to Chicago with it. Of course gun control isn't working there. You want a better comparison? Look at Australia. Zero mass shootings and few mass killings. By contrast, there have been 204 mass shootings (defined as four or more people shot in a single event) in the U.S. this year alone. Coincidentally, yesterday was the 204th day of the year. A mass shooting every. single. day. in this country. NONE of them were able to be prevented by a good guy with a gun. The whole idea of citizens with guns for protection is a laughable failure and we need to stop pretending that it isn't. www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2015/07/24/there-have-been-204-mass-shootings-and-204-days-in-2015-so-far/?tid=sm_fbPopulation of Austrailia 23.13 million Population of United States 318.86 million
Population is another factor. Not much of a comparison. My point was that it's not just about gun control.
|
|
|
Post by freecharlie on Jul 24, 2015 20:52:49 GMT
I've said repeatedly that we should require insurance for each gun and let the very smart bean counters determine who does and does not constitute a risk. I also believe there should be severe civil and criminal liability when someone fails to properly secure their gun and that gun is stolen and later used in a crime. You want to keep your loaded gun in an unlocked night stand? Have at it. But if MethHead Hank steals it to sell for his next fix and MurdererMaurice uses it to kill someone, you'll be held criminally responsible for your part in that sequence of events. okay, on the bean counter front, since mental health is covered under a patient's privacy, how are you going to get around that? I've heard the argument that fewer people will seek mental health services if it can be reported when the go to buy a gun. I'm thinking if they are mentally ill and not currently in the planning stages, they may not think that far. I would advocate a way to ping someone as not able to buy a gun based on the findings of a mental health practiioner without letting the clerk know what it was. Maybe just a ping for any reason and then the person could take it up with the state BI. I think most people do insure their guns, but I am thinking you want them to have to take out insurance policies in case their gun hurts someone? Isn't that was a civil case would cover? The stolen and then used in a crime, do you advocate the same for cars that are stolen?
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Jun 28, 2024 2:19:15 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 24, 2015 20:52:46 GMT
^^^ I, for one, am trusting that this will never (hopefully not, anyway) come to pass. I don't want to live in the age of Minority Report. The 'bean counters' have done so well with the things they're in charge of so far... Yeah, because what an absolutely terrible idea for the people who insist they need to own guns to actually be accountable and responsible for how those guns are used. That's just crazy talk! :-P
|
|
|
Post by freecharlie on Jul 24, 2015 20:55:11 GMT
Amendments have been revoked before. But even if that never happens, the idea that the only possible interpretation of the 2nd is to allow Billy Joe Jim Bob to carry around his prosthetic penis so he can "protect" the public is asinine. Why is no one throwing a fit over this stereotypical name? We all know the person that comes to mind when this type of name is mentioned and yet nobody has a problem with it. If someone used the name Lakesha or Jose to describe a group, this board would be up in arms. Why is this okay?
|
|
|
Post by crimsoncat05 on Jul 24, 2015 20:56:39 GMT
I've said repeatedly that we should require insurance for each gun and let the very smart bean counters determine who does and does not constitute a risk. I also believe there should be severe civil and criminal liability when someone fails to properly secure their gun and that gun is stolen and later used in a crime. You want to keep your loaded gun in an unlocked night stand? Have at it. But if MethHead Hank steals it to sell for his next fix and MurdererMaurice uses it to kill someone, you'll be held criminally responsible for your part in that sequence of events. okay, on the bean counter front, since mental health is covered under a patient's privacy, how are you going to get around that? I've heard the argument that fewer people will seek mental health services if it can be reported when the go to buy a gun. I'm thinking if they are mentally ill and not currently in the planning stages, they may not think that far. I would advocate a way to ping someone as not able to buy a gun based on the findings of a mental health practiioner without letting the clerk know what it was. Maybe just a ping for any reason and then the person could take it up with the state BI. I think most people do insure their guns, but I am thinking you want them to have to take out insurance policies in case their gun hurts someone? Isn't that was a civil case would cover? The stolen and then used in a crime, do you advocate the same for cars that are stolen? That's pretty much what I meant, but written in a much more articulate way. (very well-written post, freecharlie!)
|
|
|
Post by Merge on Jul 24, 2015 21:06:26 GMT
Amendments have been revoked before. But even if that never happens, the idea that the only possible interpretation of the 2nd is to allow Billy Joe Jim Bob to carry around his prosthetic penis so he can "protect" the public is asinine. Why is no one throwing a fit over this stereotypical name? We all know the person that comes to mind when this type of name is mentioned and yet nobody has a problem with it. If someone used the name Lakesha or Jose to describe a group, this board would be up in arms. Why is this okay? Maybe because I'm not using it to broad brush a racial or ethnic group, but rather to signify (albeit mockingly) a person with a specific lifestyle choice. Regardless; your point is taken. I apologize and I'll desist.
|
|
Sarah*H
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 3,989
Jun 25, 2014 20:07:06 GMT
|
Post by Sarah*H on Jul 24, 2015 21:06:38 GMT
It's pretty simple. If you want to buy insurance for a weapon, you'll have to provide proof of mental competency to the insurance company. If you aren't willing to do that, that's your free agency at work. If it's all about personal responsibility, let's make it all about personal responsibility.
As far as welfare reform, what specifically would you like to see? Do you know specifically what the current welfare rules, requirements and limitations are (and not just what pundits say they are?) Do you know what percentage of the budget is considered "welfare?"
|
|
Rainbow
Pearl Clutcher
Where salt is in the air and sand is at my feet...
Posts: 4,103
Jun 26, 2014 5:57:41 GMT
|
Post by Rainbow on Jul 24, 2015 21:08:47 GMT
I also believe there should be severe civil and criminal liability when someone fails to properly secure their gun and that gun is stolen and later used in a crime. You want to keep your loaded gun in an unlocked night stand? Have at it. But if MethHead Hank steals it to sell for his next fix and MurdererMaurice uses it to kill someone, you'll be held criminally responsible for your part in that sequence of events. This isn't true if you have reported it stolen.
|
|
|
Post by birukitty on Jul 24, 2015 21:08:55 GMT
Prayers to the families of the victims. Strict gun laws/gun free zone in Chicago, IL. 1,493 shooting victims so far this year. Unfortunately, it's not just about gun control. Ugh. I am so tired of people trotting out Chicago as an example of failed gun laws. It's an island in the middle of a nation where any yahoo can walk into Walmart and buy a gun, and there are no means to prevent someone from driving to Iowa and buying a weapon capable of quickly killing dozens, and then returning to Chicago with it. Of course gun control isn't working there. You want a better comparison? Look at Australia. Zero mass shootings and few mass killings. By contrast, there have been 204 mass shootings (defined as four or more people shot in a single event) in the U.S. this year alone. Coincidentally, yesterday was the 204th day of the year. A mass shooting every. single. day. in this country. NONE of them were able to be prevented by a good guy with a gun. The whole idea of citizens with guns for protection is a laughable failure and we need to stop pretending that it isn't. www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2015/07/24/there-have-been-204-mass-shootings-and-204-days-in-2015-so-far/?tid=sm_fb Exactly! Same thing with Washington DC-which is a tiny city surrounded by Northern Virginia and Maryland. You can easily drive out of DC into Virginia or Maryland, buy a handgun and drive back within say an hour (I've never bought a gun so I'm estimating time here). That analogy doesn't work, unless you are talking about a large country all having the same laws. Obviously we need to fix the mental health problem in this country. Urgently. But it will take time and money. In the meantime we have to do something to stop this avalanche of death. Gun control. I think we should follow Australia's example and do exactly what they did in their country. They are a country much like ours. They had guns, they have huge ranches, and they had a mass killing in Tasmania that left 35 people dead in 1996 that made them sit up and take notice-like Sandy Hook should have done for us. What did they do that we didn't? They decided enough was enough and that things had to change. What they did was very successful-they haven't had a mass killing since, and it's been 19 YEARS! Like the Pea above me said, we've had 204 just this year! Those are cold, hard facts! If we put this type of gun control in effect across our entire nation we should have these results too. Don't you think it would be worth it to save lives? I do. Control doesn't mean banning guns. It means control. It means being able to sit in a movie theatre and watch a movie without the fear that some madman will come in with a gun and shoot up the place killing several people. It means going to the mall and not worrying that the same thing will happen. Wouldn't it be wonderful to live in this country and have that? Yes, I know it's not a guarantee. I'm not an idiot. But hey, Australia’s result of 19 years without a mass gun killing sure does give me hope. Debbie in MD.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Jun 28, 2024 2:19:15 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 24, 2015 21:09:37 GMT
Ugh. I am so tired of people trotting out Chicago as an example of failed gun laws. It's an island in the middle of a nation where any yahoo can walk into Walmart and buy a gun, and there are no means to prevent someone from driving to Iowa and buying a weapon capable of quickly killing dozens, and then returning to Chicago with it. Of course gun control isn't working there. You want a better comparison? Look at Australia. Zero mass shootings and few mass killings. By contrast, there have been 204 mass shootings (defined as four or more people shot in a single event) in the U.S. this year alone. Coincidentally, yesterday was the 204th day of the year. A mass shooting every. single. day. in this country. NONE of them were able to be prevented by a good guy with a gun. The whole idea of citizens with guns for protection is a laughable failure and we need to stop pretending that it isn't. www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2015/07/24/there-have-been-204-mass-shootings-and-204-days-in-2015-so-far/?tid=sm_fbPopulation of Austrailia 23.13 million Population of United States 318.86 million
Population is another factor. Not much of a comparison. My point was that it's not just about gun control.
Australia has roughly 7% of our population, so it's not unreasonable to think they'd have about 7% of our mass shootings too, right? Since it's all about the lunatics and has nothing to do with the accessibility of guns? Well, nope. They havent had one of the 14 mass shootings we could expect so far this year. Not one.
|
|
|
Post by freecharlie on Jul 24, 2015 21:13:14 GMT
It's pretty simple. If you want to buy insurance for a weapon, you'll have to provide proof of mental competency to the insurance company. If you aren't willing to do that, that's your free agency at work. If it's all about personal responsibility, let's make it all about personal responsibility. As far as welfare reform, what specifically would you like to see? Do you know specifically what the current welfare rules, requirements and limitations are (and not just what pundits say they are?) Do you know what percentage of the budget is considered "welfare?" So now only the weathly with medical insurance are able to own a gun? Because now, not only do I have to purchase insurance, but I have to make an appointment with a mental health doctor and give that to the insurance company? Is this a one time deal or do I have to go get checked out every year? I'm not responding to the 2nd part because I have no idea what you are talking about.
|
|
|
Post by birukitty on Jul 24, 2015 21:15:07 GMT
There is going to come a day, probably not too long from now, when we won't even bother posting about these mass shootings anymore because they've become so common place. Three in the last 5 weeks. Way to go America. Personally, I would like to see all those saying it's about lack of mental health services, voluntarily and without complaint, pony up the additional tax dollars necessary to reopen the closed facilities and start lobbying your Congress members and state reps to begin amending the laws which make it so difficult for family members to get help for their mentally ill relatives. If you can't find it in your conscience to consider that gun control might make a difference, at least do something that isn't just obstructive. I believe we need better mental health care. I also believe that we do have mental health care available under Obamacare, but I might be wrong on that. My income is under $30,000 a year. I'm not willing to pay more taxes. What I'd like to see is less spending on wasteful things. Blast me if you'd like, but we need some serious welfare reform IMO. Also, I'd love for our government to stop sending money to other countries and spend it on our own citizens, including mental health programs and facilities. More taxes isn't the answer either. Let's spend the money we do have a lot more wisely. Obamacare isn't a type of insurance. It's like an insurance selling place for several kinds of health insurance-the companies available depend on your state. They range from very cheap policies that offer bare bones coverage with no mental health coverage with names of companies you've never heard of, to Kaiser Permanente, to Blue Cross/Blue Shield, Aetna, and so on. Each one is a different price, different deductibles. Some have mental health coverage, some don't. Debbie in MD.
|
|
|
Post by peasapie on Jul 24, 2015 21:16:17 GMT
In a perfect world, I'd love to live in a place where guns are illegal. Far fewer of these incidents in that environment. Unfortunately, that's not going to happen in the U.S. Ever.
As far as mental health - sure, the system can always be improved. I'm sure there are many examples. In my personal experience, everyone I know who wants help has found a way to get help. For example, I have a cousin who is schizophrenic. For 8 years she refused help, but she now receives medication and sees a counselor, all as part of disability coverage.
The biggest problem I see is that there are people who don't realize they need help and who have access to guns. Those are the wild cards. I'd like to see the system for getting a gun permit much more restrictive and comprehensive, and more accountability for family members. Applicants should have to provide references who have known the person for longer than six months attest to their reliability, in addition having a clear background check. I don't care if people don't like the extra steps -- it's necessary.
|
|
|
Post by freecharlie on Jul 24, 2015 21:16:54 GMT
Ugh. I am so tired of people trotting out Chicago as an example of failed gun laws. It's an island in the middle of a nation where any yahoo can walk into Walmart and buy a gun, and there are no means to prevent someone from driving to Iowa and buying a weapon capable of quickly killing dozens, and then returning to Chicago with it. Of course gun control isn't working there. You want a better comparison? Look at Australia. Zero mass shootings and few mass killings. By contrast, there have been 204 mass shootings (defined as four or more people shot in a single event) in the U.S. this year alone. Coincidentally, yesterday was the 204th day of the year. A mass shooting every. single. day. in this country. NONE of them were able to be prevented by a good guy with a gun. The whole idea of citizens with guns for protection is a laughable failure and we need to stop pretending that it isn't. www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2015/07/24/there-have-been-204-mass-shootings-and-204-days-in-2015-so-far/?tid=sm_fb Exactly! Same thing with Washington DC-which is a tiny city surrounded by Northern Virginia and Maryland. You can easily drive out of DC into Virginia or Maryland, buy a handgun and drive back within say an hour (I've never bought a gun so I'm estimating time here). That analogy doesn't work, unless you are talking about a large country all having the same laws. Obviously we need to fix the mental health problem in this country. Urgently. But it will take time and money. In the meantime we have to do something to stop this avalanche of death. Gun control. I think we should follow Australia's example and do exactly what they did in their country. They are a country much like ours. They had guns, they have huge ranches, and they had a mass killing in Tasmania that left 35 people dead in 1996 that made them sit up and take notice-like Sandy Hook should have done for us. What did they do that we didn't? They decided enough was enough and that things had to change. What they did was very successful-they haven't had a mass killing since, and it's been 19 YEARS! Like the Pea above me said, we've had 204 just this year! Those are cold, hard facts! If we put this type of gun control in effect across our entire nation we should have these results too. Don't you think it would be worth it to save lives? I do. Control doesn't mean banning guns. It means control. It means being able to sit in a movie theatre and watch a movie without the fear that some madman will come in with a gun and shoot up the place killing several people. It means going to the mall and not worrying that the same thing will happen. Wouldn't it be wonderful to live in this country and have that? Yes, I know it's not a guarantee. I'm not an idiot. But hey, Australia’s result of 19 years without a mass gun killing sure does give me hope. Debbie in MD. I'm not well versed in Austrialian history. What did they do in 1996? I also wonder, does Australia have a gang problem like we do here? Do they have segments of populations who are disenfranchised? do they have the same type of corrections as we do here?
|
|
happymomma
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 4,078
Aug 6, 2014 23:57:56 GMT
|
Post by happymomma on Jul 24, 2015 21:19:58 GMT
Ugh. I am so tired of people trotting out Chicago as an example of failed gun laws. It's an island in the middle of a nation where any yahoo can walk into Walmart and buy a gun, and there are no means to prevent someone from driving to Iowa and buying a weapon capable of quickly killing dozens, and then returning to Chicago with it. Of course gun control isn't working there. You want a better comparison? Look at Australia. Zero mass shootings and few mass killings. By contrast, there have been 204 mass shootings (defined as four or more people shot in a single event) in the U.S. this year alone. Coincidentally, yesterday was the 204th day of the year. A mass shooting every. single. day. in this country. NONE of them were able to be prevented by a good guy with a gun. The whole idea of citizens with guns for protection is a laughable failure and we need to stop pretending that it isn't. www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2015/07/24/there-have-been-204-mass-shootings-and-204-days-in-2015-so-far/?tid=sm_fb Exactly! Same thing with Washington DC-which is a tiny city surrounded by Northern Virginia and Maryland. You can easily drive out of DC into Virginia or Maryland, buy a handgun and drive back within say an hour (I've never bought a gun so I'm estimating time here). That analogy doesn't work, unless you are talking about a large country all having the same laws. Obviously we need to fix the mental health problem in this country. Urgently. But it will take time and money. In the meantime we have to do something to stop this avalanche of death. Gun control. I think we should follow Australia's example and do exactly what they did in their country. They are a country much like ours. They had guns, they have huge ranches, and they had a mass killing in Tasmania that left 35 people dead in 1996 that made them sit up and take notice-like Sandy Hook should have done for us. What did they do that we didn't? They decided enough was enough and that things had to change. What they did was very successful-they haven't had a mass killing since, and it's been 19 YEARS! Like the Pea above me said, we've had 204 just this year! Those are cold, hard facts! If we put this type of gun control in effect across our entire nation we should have these results too. Don't you think it would be worth it to save lives? I do. Control doesn't mean banning guns. It means control. It means being able to sit in a movie theatre and watch a movie without the fear that some madman will come in with a gun and shoot up the place killing several people. It means going to the mall and not worrying that the same thing will happen. Wouldn't it be wonderful to live in this country and have that? Yes, I know it's not a guarantee. I'm not an idiot. But hey, Australia’s result of 19 years without a mass gun killing sure does give me hope. Debbie in MD. What I asked on another thread is this: What laws exactly do they have that we don't? What laws are they making and how are they getting people to follow those laws? Because these shooters are not even following the laws we do have and I'm not sure how we will get them to follow new ones. I'd LOVE it if we could find the answer to that.
|
|
Sarah*H
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 3,989
Jun 25, 2014 20:07:06 GMT
|
Post by Sarah*H on Jul 24, 2015 21:23:16 GMT
How ever often a smart person at the insurance company decides it's necessary to mitigate the risk. With Medicaid and Obamacare, there is no plausible argument that it's a burden that can't be born by someone who can afford to buy a gun in the first place. It's a market based solution - it doesn't involve the government taking any rights away, it's not an undue burden (unless you're someone who shouldn't have a gun in the first place) and it's all about personal responsibility. If you're a responsible, competent, non-addicted adult, it will be as simple as getting life or homeowner's insurance. The second part was in response to HappyMomma. ETA: freecharlie, you and I already had this discussion on the Charleston shooting thread: five weeks ago. You said at that time that you wouldn't be opposed to it.
|
|
happymomma
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 4,078
Aug 6, 2014 23:57:56 GMT
|
Post by happymomma on Jul 24, 2015 21:26:38 GMT
I believe we need better mental health care. I also believe that we do have mental health care available under Obamacare, but I might be wrong on that. My income is under $30,000 a year. I'm not willing to pay more taxes. What I'd like to see is less spending on wasteful things. Blast me if you'd like, but we need some serious welfare reform IMO. Also, I'd love for our government to stop sending money to other countries and spend it on our own citizens, including mental health programs and facilities. More taxes isn't the answer either. Let's spend the money we do have a lot more wisely. Obamacare isn't a type of insurance. It's like an insurance selling place for several kinds of health insurance-the companies available depend on your state. They range from very cheap policies that offer bare bones coverage with no mental health coverage with names of companies you've never heard of, to Kaiser Permanente, to Blue Cross/Blue Shield, Aetna, and so on. Each one is a different price, different deductibles. Some have mental health coverage, some don't. Debbie in MD. I have CHAMPVA insurance, so I'm not familiar with other insurances. I just googled to find out that policies deemed acceptable with Obamacare must include mental health coverage. Im thankful for my insurance every day. Sadly, even mental health care doesn't even always work. At this very moment my husband is standing guard as a member of the Patriot Guard at the funeral of a 29 year old Iraq and Afghanistan Veteran who committed suicide Monday. He was receiving mental health care on a regular basis at our local VA clinic. I'm heartbroken.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Jun 28, 2024 2:19:15 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 24, 2015 21:31:49 GMT
Ugh. I am so tired of people trotting out Chicago as an example of failed gun laws. It's an island in the middle of a nation where any yahoo can walk into Walmart and buy a gun, and there are no means to prevent someone from driving to Iowa and buying a weapon capable of quickly killing dozens, and then returning to Chicago with it. Of course gun control isn't working there. You want a better comparison? Look at Australia. Zero mass shootings and few mass killings. By contrast, there have been 204 mass shootings (defined as four or more people shot in a single event) in the U.S. this year alone. Coincidentally, yesterday was the 204th day of the year. A mass shooting every. single. day. in this country. NONE of them were able to be prevented by a good guy with a gun. The whole idea of citizens with guns for protection is a laughable failure and we need to stop pretending that it isn't. www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2015/07/24/there-have-been-204-mass-shootings-and-204-days-in-2015-so-far/?tid=sm_fbPopulation of Austrailia 23.13 million Population of United States 318.86 million
Population is another factor. Not much of a comparison. My point was that it's not just about gun control.
Furthermore, does Australia have a constitution or ever have a constitution that gave them the right to have a weapon? I don't really think you can compare the two. I also get tired of people scoffing when the failure that is Chicago gun control/laws is brought up.
The numbers in Chicago are factual. I'm really sorry that the gun control lobby doesn't like the factual numbers that Chicago presents. You don't like Chicago factual numbers being brought up...too bad.
If there is any "good" news from this latest shooting, I have heard that this man's wife removed all of the guns from their marital home because she had concerns about his mental health. Her doing so didn't have an impact on the outcome, but if more family members recognized when it was no longer safe to have weapons in the home, I'd like to think it would make a positive impact.
Still trying to process our own local shooting that happened early Wednesday morning with a man killing his common law wife/girlfriend/fiancée, her two little boys, and wounding her father...before turning the gun on himself. Police had been called to the home the night before for a domestic...he was no longer at the home, but the woman assured police that there was nothing to worry about. Man returned at 6am to shoot everyone in the house. He has a lengthy criminal record and while I don't know if he was a felon, I'm pretty sure he probably was so I'm not sure how he got the gun...so once again...throwing more laws on the books about additional gun control isn't going to matter to those that don't go by the laws that the rest of us do.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Jun 28, 2024 2:19:15 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 24, 2015 21:34:15 GMT
How ever often a smart person at the insurance company decides it's necessary to mitigate the risk. With Medicaid and Obamacare, there is no plausible argument that it's a burden that can't be born by someone who can afford to buy a gun in the first place. It's a market based solution - it doesn't involve the government taking any rights away, it's not an undue burden (unless you're someone who shouldn't have a gun in the first place) and it's all about personal responsibility. If you're a responsible, competent, non-addicted adult, it will be as simple as getting life or homeowner's insurance. The second part was in response to HappyMomma. Are there other rights granted to us in the constitution that require to pay insurance for? Whether or not this is a good idea (and I don't necessarily think it's a great idea) I don't think this would ever get past the courts.
|
|