Father of Oregon killer blames GUNS, not son, for massacre?

[Cecilie1200]

Meh, understandable that the dad would try to find something else to blame besides his child though. No parent wants to believe that their child would be capable of doing something like this. I would NOT want to be in his shoes.

Nor would I. But the fact is, his son was mentally ill and he was still able to get 14 guns.

That's fucking crazy.

Did he have a psychiatrist? Was he getting therapy? A psychiatrist is SUPPOSED to be able to pick up if a patient is homicidal/suicidal. The biggest problem I see here is our mental health system revolving door policies. They want to get these people in an out ASAP. The insurance companies do NOT want to pay for people to have lengthy hospital stays. If it is at all possible to avoid a lengthy stay, they will stabilize and send a patient home. They usually load them up with anti-psychotics and send them on their way, leaving it up to the patient whether or not to take the medication. These people need to be locked up on a long-term basis in a mental institution. Not given meds and sent away. THAT is our problem here in this country. We rely on medications to solve all of our problems.

It's not insurance companies, actually. The system has been dismantled to the point where it's viewed - as Avg keeps saying - as "their right" to wander the streets, whether they're capable of doing so safely or not. The hospitals don't really have much choice in many cases. Insurance companies are made up of human beings, people who no more want to live with homicidal lunatics than anyone else does. Rules and profits are one thing; sending your children to schools to be gunned down is something else entirely.

 

[ChrisL]

Meh, understandable that the dad would try to find something else to blame besides his child though. No parent wants to believe that their child would be capable of doing something like this. I would NOT want to be in his shoes.

Nor would I. But the fact is, his son was mentally ill and he was still able to get 14 guns.

That's fucking crazy.

Did he have a psychiatrist? Was he getting therapy? A psychiatrist is SUPPOSED to be able to pick up if a patient is homicidal/suicidal. The biggest problem I see here is our mental health system revolving door policies. They want to get these people in an out ASAP. The insurance companies do NOT want to pay for people to have lengthy hospital stays. If it is at all possible to avoid a lengthy stay, they will stabilize and send a patient home. They usually load them up with anti-psychotics and send them on their way, leaving it up to the patient whether or not to take the medication. These people need to be locked up on a long-term basis in a mental institution. Not given meds and sent away. THAT is our problem here in this country. We rely on medications to solve all of our problems.

It's not insurance companies, actually. The system has been dismantled to the point where it's viewed - as Avg keeps saying - as "their right" to wander the streets, whether they're capable of doing so safely or not. The hospitals don't really have much choice in many cases. Insurance companies are made up of human beings, people who no more want to live with homicidal lunatics than anyone else does. Rules and profits are one thing; sending your children to schools to be gunned down is something else entirely.

I'm sorry, but I am very familiar with how the insurance companies refuse to pay for long-term treatment for psychiatric patients. I've typed reports where doctors have had to write their own letters to insurance companies and argue with them.

 

[JoeB131]

Joe, try to be realistic sometimes.

I am realistic.

NO OTHER COUNTRY considers gun ownership an unrestricted right. that would be fucking crazy.
We have 33,000 gun deaths (the most for any industrialized country) a year and you guys shrug your shoulders or try to change the subject to the mental health system or gangs or some other distraction so no one asks the obvious question...

How the Hell did someone like Christopher Harper-Mercer get his hands on not one, but FOURTEEN guns?

 

[JoeB131]

It's not insurance companies, actually. The system has been dismantled to the point where it's viewed - as Avg keeps saying - as "their right" to wander the streets, whether they're capable of doing so safely or not. The hospitals don't really have much choice in many cases. Insurance companies are made up of human beings, people who no more want to live with homicidal lunatics than anyone else does. Rules and profits are one thing; sending your children to schools to be gunned down is something else entirely.

The Insurance companies ARE part of the problem. YOu see, the thing is, 18% of the population has some kind of mental disease. The Insurance company doesn't want to pay for that like bunch of European Socialists! They'll make you fight every step of the way to get long term treatment, while trying their best to fire you from your job so it becomes someone else's problem.

But we will make it really easy for these guys to get guns.

 

[ShaklesOfBigGov]

Try getting out once in a while from your sheltered world, travel to the Middle East and various parts of Asia, see just how far your free speech and individual rights take you. It appears you can use a little "society shock" to have a greater respect for our nation and our Constitution, you've been comfortably enjoying and living under our provided protection for far too long.

Hey, fuckhead, the fact is the REligious Right wants to make us just like the Middle East. That's why they need to be stopped.

Which has nothing to do with the fact most Americans don't need guns and aren't responsible enough to own them... as 33,000 gun deaths, 78,000 gun injuries and 229 Billion in gun damages prove every year.

Why do you speak as if you are an expert when everyone already knows that you are clueless, Joe?

You are talking to someone who has most likely never set foot overseas, unfortunately has no idea how lucky he is to have the rights he has, takes it for granted, labels those who provide it with gun crazed killers, and makes ridiculed remarks regarding our Founders. I believe everyone should have the opportunity and experience to live under another government who doesn't necessarily believe or live under our values or rights. People will begin to have a greater appreciation for their own system of government and individual rights / freedoms they uphold, they would certainly have a greater respect for those who help guarantee them and their flag.

Joe lives under this belief that we can make our kids safer by simply passing laws to make guns illegal with the same kind of "enforcement" that has brought the government so much success with the drug war. Those laws to keep kids "safe" from addiction, has led to so much overcrowding in our prisons, so much drugs STILL winding up in the possession of our kids, that liberals have been calling lawmakers to loosen the government's position of State and Federal laws. Yet the left are convinced government can keep our kids safe by banning guns in the very same way, as Federal efforts of enforcing the right kind of "behavior" has worked so well already that it's only logical to ban guns on the backs of such previous historical "prohibition" efforts in this country. Hell, liberals in Washington can't even keep illegals from crossing our national borders without undermining THOSE laws with this need to have "a change of heart" in encouraging such lawbreakers to become citizens .... but we can sure be successful at banning guns. This is why Joe gets frustrated and throws out comments like this above to which he can't prove, because "banning with the belief GOVERNMENT can change behavior" and make our kids safe hasn't historically been proven to work in this country. As a result, we are simply called crazy extreme right wing loons, it doesn't matter if we've served this country, we just don't share in his ideological view. This is the extreme ideological position that I often come across in this country, you can't reason with them through common sense and historical fact. Rather, it's like a tunnel vision mindset that we should just simply agree and go along with them, or the left will throw more of these "labels" at us when they don't get their way. It seems that's all they know how to do.

 

[jon_berzerk]

Try getting out once in a while from your sheltered world, travel to the Middle East and various parts of Asia, see just how far your free speech and individual rights take you. It appears you can use a little "society shock" to have a greater respect for our nation and our Constitution, you've been comfortably enjoying and living under our provided protection for far too long.

Hey, fuckhead, the fact is the REligious Right wants to make us just like the Middle East. That's why they need to be stopped.

Which has nothing to do with the fact most Americans don't need guns and aren't responsible enough to own them... as 33,000 gun deaths, 78,000 gun injuries and 229 Billion in gun damages prove every year.

Why do you speak as if you are an expert when everyone already knows that you are clueless, Joe?

You are talking to someone who has most likely never set foot overseas, unfortunately has no idea how lucky he is to have the rights he has, takes it for granted, labels those who provide it with gun crazed killers, and makes ridiculed remarks regarding our Founders. I believe everyone should have the opportunity and experience to live under another government who doesn't necessarily believe or live under our values or rights. People will begin to have a greater appreciation for their own system of government and individual rights / freedoms they uphold, they would certainly have a greater respect for those who help guarantee them and their flag.

Joe lives under this belief that we can make our kids safer by simply passing laws to make guns illegal with the same kind of "enforcement" that has brought the government so much success with the drug war. Those laws to keep kids "safe" from addiction, has led to so much overcrowding in our prisons, so much drugs STILL winding up in the possession of our kids, that liberals have been calling lawmakers to loosen the government's position of State and Federal laws. Yet the left are convinced government can keep our kids safe by banning guns in the very same way, as Federal efforts of enforcing the right kind of "behavior" has worked so well already that it's only logical to ban guns on the backs of such previous historical "prohibition" efforts in this country. Hell, liberals in Washington can't even keep illegals from crossing our national borders without undermining THOSE laws with this need to have "a change of heart" in encouraging such lawbreakers to become citizens .... but we can sure be successful at banning guns. This is why Joe gets frustrated and throws out comments like this above to which he can't prove, because "banning with the belief GOVERNMENT can change behavior" and make our kids safe hasn't historically been proven to work in this country. As a result, we are simply called crazy extreme right wing loons, it doesn't matter if we've served this country, we just don't share in his ideological view. This is the extreme ideological position that I often come across in this country, you can't reason with them through common sense and historical fact. Rather, it's like a tunnel vision mindset that we should just simply agree and go along with them, or the left will throw more of these "labels" at us when they don't get their way. It seems that's all they know how to do.

what joe really wants is to strike away at liberty and freedom

 

[ChrisL]

Joe, try to be realistic sometimes.

I am realistic.

NO OTHER COUNTRY considers gun ownership an unrestricted right. that would be fucking crazy.
We have 33,000 gun deaths (the most for any industrialized country) a year and you guys shrug your shoulders or try to change the subject to the mental health system or gangs or some other distraction so no one asks the obvious question...

How the Hell did someone like Christopher Harper-Mercer get his hands on not one, but FOURTEEN guns?

Good! That's what makes America so great! We have RIGHTS here. Just because some crazy people abuse their rights does not mean the rest of us have to pay for it. They are CRIMINALS.

 

[ChrisL]

Try getting out once in a while from your sheltered world, travel to the Middle East and various parts of Asia, see just how far your free speech and individual rights take you. It appears you can use a little "society shock" to have a greater respect for our nation and our Constitution, you've been comfortably enjoying and living under our provided protection for far too long.

Hey, fuckhead, the fact is the REligious Right wants to make us just like the Middle East. That's why they need to be stopped.

Which has nothing to do with the fact most Americans don't need guns and aren't responsible enough to own them... as 33,000 gun deaths, 78,000 gun injuries and 229 Billion in gun damages prove every year.

Why do you speak as if you are an expert when everyone already knows that you are clueless, Joe?

You are talking to someone who has most likely never set foot overseas, unfortunately has no idea how lucky he is to have the rights he has, takes it for granted, labels those who provide it with gun crazed killers, and makes ridiculed remarks regarding our Founders. I believe everyone should have the opportunity and experience to live under another government who doesn't necessarily believe or live under our values or rights. People will begin to have a greater appreciation for their own system of government and individual rights / freedoms they uphold, they would certainly have a greater respect for those who help guarantee them and their flag.

Joe lives under this belief that we can make our kids safer by simply passing laws to make guns illegal with the same kind of "enforcement" that has brought the government so much success with the drug war. Those laws to keep kids "safe" from addiction, has led to so much overcrowding in our prisons, so much drugs STILL winding up in the possession of our kids, that liberals have been calling lawmakers to loosen the government's position of State and Federal laws. Yet the left are convinced government can keep our kids safe by banning guns in the very same way, as Federal efforts of enforcing the right kind of "behavior" has worked so well already that it's only logical to ban guns on the backs of such previous historical "prohibition" efforts in this country. Hell, liberals in Washington can't even keep illegals from crossing our national borders without undermining THOSE laws with this need to have "a change of heart" in encouraging such lawbreakers to become citizens .... but we can sure be successful at banning guns. This is why Joe gets frustrated and throws out comments like this above to which he can't prove, because "banning with the belief GOVERNMENT can change behavior" and make our kids safe hasn't historically been proven to work in this country. As a result, we are simply called crazy extreme right wing loons, it doesn't matter if we've served this country, we just don't share in his ideological view. This is the extreme ideological position that I often come across in this country, you can't reason with them through common sense and historical fact. Rather, it's like a tunnel vision mindset that we should just simply agree and go along with them, or the left will throw more of these "labels" at us when they don't get their way. It seems that's all they know how to do.

What's really funny is he will call the police "racists" and accuse them of murder, yet wants THEM and criminals to be the ones who are armed. The rest of us are just left to be victims of either or.

 

[ChrisL]

 

[ChrisL]

 

[ChrisL]

 

[Mertex]

Now, when the morons post on this thread about how much they want to ban guns, just ask them to give their plan and provide details. That, shuts them up every time.

You mean when the moronic gun lovers right-wingers misinterpret "stricter gun laws" for "Obama is trying to take our guns away" or "liberals want to disarm the country"?

Moronic right-wingers who love guns much more than they love other human beings have a hard time comprehending that stricter gun laws does not mean "disarm America" or "ban guns". Nobody gives a shit what plan is used or what the details are, we just need laws that will prevent retards like you owning guns.

 

[Rustic]

Joe, try to be realistic sometimes.

I am realistic.

NO OTHER COUNTRY considers gun ownership an unrestricted right. that would be fucking crazy.
We have 33,000 gun deaths (the most for any industrialized country) a year and you guys shrug your shoulders or try to change the subject to the mental health system or gangs or some other distraction so no one asks the obvious question...

How the Hell did someone like Christopher Harper-Mercer get his hands on not one, but FOURTEEN guns?

Who cares what other countries do??
Name the laws that would solve these so called problems??

All anyone has heard from you is that your pussy hurts...

 

[Rustic]

Now, when the morons post on this thread about how much they want to ban guns, just ask them to give their plan and provide details. That, shuts them up every time.

You mean when the moronic gun lovers right-wingers misinterpret "stricter gun laws" for "Obama is trying to take our guns away" or "liberals want to disarm the country"?

Moronic right-wingers who love guns much more than they love other human beings have a hard time comprehending that stricter gun laws does not mean "disarm America" or "ban guns". Nobody gives a shit what plan is used or what the details are, we just need laws that will prevent retards like you owning guns.

More Laws will help nothing...

 

[Cecilie1200]

Now, when the morons post on this thread about how much they want to ban guns, just ask them to give their plan and provide details. That, shuts them up every time.

You mean when the moronic gun lovers right-wingers misinterpret "stricter gun laws" for "Obama is trying to take our guns away" or "liberals want to disarm the country"?

Moronic right-wingers who love guns much more than they love other human beings have a hard time comprehending that stricter gun laws does not mean "disarm America" or "ban guns". Nobody gives a shit what plan is used or what the details are, we just need laws that will prevent retards like you owning guns.

No one's "misinterpreting" anything. We're just not being as willfully blind and imperceptive as you are.

 

[Mertex]

Now, when the morons post on this thread about how much they want to ban guns, just ask them to give their plan and provide details. That, shuts them up every time.

You mean when the moronic gun lovers right-wingers misinterpret "stricter gun laws" for "Obama is trying to take our guns away" or "liberals want to disarm the country"?

Moronic right-wingers who love guns much more than they love other human beings have a hard time comprehending that stricter gun laws does not mean "disarm America" or "ban guns". Nobody gives a shit what plan is used or what the details are, we just need laws that will prevent retards like you owning guns.

No one's "misinterpreting" anything. We're just not being as willfully blind and imperceptive as you are.

The only ones blind and imperceptive are the Republican/conservatives who love guns more than they love human beings.

Idiots like this one, shouldn't have been able to buy a gun, but thanks to the gun lovers, they can buy them without background checks and without registering....and they definitely aren't sensible at all.

Chicago boy, 6, accidentally shoots, kills brother, 3: police

What is it going to take to get through to the ignorant...that stricter gun laws will at least cut back on senseless deaths. Probably not much, because they are unable to think sensibly.
Guns in the home proving deadly for kids

 

[Rustic]

Now, when the morons post on this thread about how much they want to ban guns, just ask them to give their plan and provide details. That, shuts them up every time.

You mean when the moronic gun lovers right-wingers misinterpret "stricter gun laws" for "Obama is trying to take our guns away" or "liberals want to disarm the country"?

Moronic right-wingers who love guns much more than they love other human beings have a hard time comprehending that stricter gun laws does not mean "disarm America" or "ban guns". Nobody gives a shit what plan is used or what the details are, we just need laws that will prevent retards like you owning guns.

No one's "misinterpreting" anything. We're just not being as willfully blind and imperceptive as you are.

The only ones blind and imperceptive are the Republican/conservatives who love guns more than they love human beings.

Idiots like this one, shouldn't have been able to buy a gun, but thanks to the gun lovers, they can buy them without background checks and without registering....and they definitely aren't sensible at all.

Chicago boy, 6, accidentally shoots, kills brother, 3: police

What is it going to take to get through to the ignorant...that stricter gun laws will at least cut back on senseless deaths. Probably not much, because they are unable to think sensibly.
Guns in the home proving deadly for kids

It has nothing to do with guns, people kill people.

Sh!t happens

Embrace the suck

 

[Mertex]

Now, when the morons post on this thread about how much they want to ban guns, just ask them to give their plan and provide details. That, shuts them up every time.

You mean when the moronic gun lovers right-wingers misinterpret "stricter gun laws" for "Obama is trying to take our guns away" or "liberals want to disarm the country"?

Moronic right-wingers who love guns much more than they love other human beings have a hard time comprehending that stricter gun laws does not mean "disarm America" or "ban guns". Nobody gives a shit what plan is used or what the details are, we just need laws that will prevent retards like you owning guns.

More Laws will help nothing...

You can't say that. More laws in other countries have cut down on shootings.


I’ve been researching gun violence—and what can be done to prevent it—in the U.S. for 25 years. The fact is that if NRA claims about the efficacy of guns in reducing crime were true, the U.S. would have the lowest homicide rate among industrialized nations instead of the highest homicide rate (by a wide margin).

The U.S. is by far the world leader in the number of guns in civilian hands. The stricter gun laws of other “advanced countries” have restrained homicidal violence, suicides and gun accidents—even when, in some cases, laws were introduced over massive protests from their armed citizens.


Most other advanced nations apparently think so, since they make it far harder for someone like the Charleston killer to get his hands on a Glock semiautomatic handgun or any other kind of firearm (universal background checks are common features of gun regulation in other developed countries).

• Germany: To buy a gun, anyone under the age of 25 has to pass a psychiatric evaluation (presumably 21-year-old Dylann Roof would have failed).
• Finland: Handgun license applicants are only allowed to purchase firearms if they can prove they are active members of regulated shooting clubs. Before they can get a gun, applicants must pass an aptitude test, submit to a police interview, and show they have a proper gun storage unit.
• Italy: To secure a gun permit, one must establish a genuine reason to possess a firearm and pass a background check considering both criminal and mental health records (again, presumably Dylann Roof would have failed).
• France: Firearms applicants must have no criminal record and pass a background check that considers the reason for the gun purchase and evaluates the criminal, mental, and health records of the applicant. (Dylann Roof would presumably have failed in this process).
• United Kingdom and Japan: Handguns are illegal for private citizens.

http://www.newsweek.com/gun-control-what-we-can-learn-other-advanced-countries-379105

 

[Mertex]

Now, when the morons post on this thread about how much they want to ban guns, just ask them to give their plan and provide details. That, shuts them up every time.

You mean when the moronic gun lovers right-wingers misinterpret "stricter gun laws" for "Obama is trying to take our guns away" or "liberals want to disarm the country"?

Moronic right-wingers who love guns much more than they love other human beings have a hard time comprehending that stricter gun laws does not mean "disarm America" or "ban guns". Nobody gives a shit what plan is used or what the details are, we just need laws that will prevent retards like you owning guns.

No one's "misinterpreting" anything. We're just not being as willfully blind and imperceptive as you are.

The only ones blind and imperceptive are the Republican/conservatives who love guns more than they love human beings.

Idiots like this one, shouldn't have been able to buy a gun, but thanks to the gun lovers, they can buy them without background checks and without registering....and they definitely aren't sensible at all.

Chicago boy, 6, accidentally shoots, kills brother, 3: police

What is it going to take to get through to the ignorant...that stricter gun laws will at least cut back on senseless deaths. Probably not much, because they are unable to think sensibly.
Guns in the home proving deadly for kids

It has nothing to do with guns, people kill people.

Sh!t happens

Embrace the suck

People without guns cannot shoot people.

 

[Rustic]

Now, when the morons post on this thread about how much they want to ban guns, just ask them to give their plan and provide details. That, shuts them up every time.

You mean when the moronic gun lovers right-wingers misinterpret "stricter gun laws" for "Obama is trying to take our guns away" or "liberals want to disarm the country"?

Moronic right-wingers who love guns much more than they love other human beings have a hard time comprehending that stricter gun laws does not mean "disarm America" or "ban guns". Nobody gives a shit what plan is used or what the details are, we just need laws that will prevent retards like you owning guns.

More Laws will help nothing...

You can't say that. More laws in other countries have cut down on shootings.


I’ve been researching gun violence—and what can be done to prevent it—in the U.S. for 25 years. The fact is that if NRA claims about the efficacy of guns in reducing crime were true, the U.S. would have the lowest homicide rate among industrialized nations instead of the highest homicide rate (by a wide margin).

The U.S. is by far the world leader in the number of guns in civilian hands. The stricter gun laws of other “advanced countries” have restrained homicidal violence, suicides and gun accidents—even when, in some cases, laws were introduced over massive protests from their armed citizens.


Most other advanced nations apparently think so, since they make it far harder for someone like the Charleston killer to get his hands on a Glock semiautomatic handgun or any other kind of firearm (universal background checks are common features of gun regulation in other developed countries).

• Germany: To buy a gun, anyone under the age of 25 has to pass a psychiatric evaluation (presumably 21-year-old Dylann Roof would have failed).
• Finland: Handgun license applicants are only allowed to purchase firearms if they can prove they are active members of regulated shooting clubs. Before they can get a gun, applicants must pass an aptitude test, submit to a police interview, and show they have a proper gun storage unit.
• Italy: To secure a gun permit, one must establish a genuine reason to possess a firearm and pass a background check considering both criminal and mental health records (again, presumably Dylann Roof would have failed).
• France: Firearms applicants must have no criminal record and pass a background check that considers the reason for the gun purchase and evaluates the criminal, mental, and health records of the applicant. (Dylann Roof would presumably have failed in this process).
• United Kingdom and Japan: Handguns are illegal for private citizens.

http://www.newsweek.com/gun-control-what-we-can-learn-other-advanced-countries-379105

That's there not here, live with it.
A nonissue