Gun Control or Lunatic Control?

Discussion in 'Politics' started by kyzr, Jan 16, 2011.

?

Which, if any "control" is more practical "gun control" or "lunatic control

  1. Gun control, like the assault weapons ban and large clips

    3 vote(s)
    23.1%
  2. Gun control, just ban all guns period

    0 vote(s)
    0.0%
  3. Lunatic control - bring back asylums to protect the public

    6 vote(s)
    46.2%
  4. Lunatic control - close monitoring or its to the asylum and a lobotomy

    4 vote(s)
    30.8%
  1. kyzr
    Offline

    kyzr Gold Member

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2009
    Messages:
    3,447
    Thanks Received:
    450
    Trophy Points:
    130
    Ratings:
    +630
    Listening to the whiny talking heads today on the talk shows, they seem to be advocating "gun control" as opposed to "lunatic control'. Then they cite how powerful the NRA is and that gun control is not going to happen.

    Gun control never worked even when it happens. Just look at DC as an example. Crime rates go down as gun ownership goes up. But that is beside the point.

    What would work more practically.. gun control or lunatic control? Then please describe your rationale' so we can debate it.

    IMHO gun control is impractical, and lunatic control is even more impractical considering "civil liberties".
     
  2. Londoner
    Offline

    Londoner Gold Member

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2010
    Messages:
    3,146
    Thanks Received:
    979
    Trophy Points:
    285
    Ratings:
    +1,711
    Not sure if it's an "either/or".

    What about "both".

    The Tucson Slaughter is more likely in an environment where:

    * Public mental health care programs are cut (because, "goddammit, people are in charge of their own lives!")

    * Tight, highly regulated background checks on gun ownership are seen as tyrannical (because, "goddammit, people are in charge of their own lives!")

    * Increased gun ownership is encouraged (because, "goddammit, the government is evil and you may need to take action")

    * Government imposed limits to the type of firearms and magazine clips are seen as tyrannical (because, "goddammit, the government ain't the boss of you")

    This means that a crazy person is more likely to get a gun, and he's more likely to have access to a 30+ magazine clip, and the government is more likely to be the target of his insane rage.

    Jared Loughner does not seem to have a coherent a political philosophy - and I doubt he's ever heard of Sarah Palin.

    However, his crime becomes inevitable in a world where cutting public mental health services and increasing gun ownership are seen as the noble dictates of freedom, as opposed to the monomaniacal obsessions of a small group of radicals whose anti-government rage is being strategically fueled.
     
    Last edited: Jan 16, 2011
  3. uscitizen
    Offline

    uscitizen Senior Member

    Joined:
    May 6, 2007
    Messages:
    45,941
    Thanks Received:
    4,791
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    My Shack
    Ratings:
    +4,807
    Ahh another Fox news hating thread. ;)
     
  4. westwall
    Online

    westwall USMB Mod Staff Member Gold Supporting Member Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2010
    Messages:
    41,047
    Thanks Received:
    7,991
    Trophy Points:
    1,830
    Location:
    Nevada
    Ratings:
    +19,811



    Even in the UK where gun ownership is extremely difficult for anyone but the wealthy to own weapons gun crime is skyrocketing....so that particular approach doesn't seem to work either.
     
  5. Mr. Peepers
    Offline

    Mr. Peepers Senior Member

    Joined:
    Aug 11, 2009
    Messages:
    3,206
    Thanks Received:
    394
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Brooklyn, NY
    Ratings:
    +394
    How do you expect to control "lunatics" if you advocate cutting and defunding mental health services... or are you under the impression that all mentally ill people are wealthy? Care to know what percentage of our homeless here in NYC are mentally ill? And we HAVE mental health programs for the poor (fewer than needed, as they are the first things cut), unlike many areas of the country. You want a sink or swim societey? Welcome to reality.
     
  6. ABikerSailor
    Offline

    ABikerSailor Platinum Member

    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2008
    Messages:
    31,481
    Thanks Received:
    4,826
    Trophy Points:
    1,140
    Location:
    Amarillo TX
    Ratings:
    +8,517
    You know........I grew up in Montana where everyone had guns and everyone hunted.

    I then joined the military and in certain billets, I was given a 9mm to carry with me.

    I never had to carry more than 2 clips on either occasion, and the clips were not the extended ones.

    Should we enforce gun control or lunatic control? How about neither, and enforce AMMO control. If you need more than 10-15 rounds for shooting, that probably means that you need to spend a lot more time at the shooting range. The only reason that I can think of (as both a hunter and a military man) to have 30 round clips is if you are going into a combat situation.

    Same with automatic weapons. More than 2 bullets and you'll ruin the game if you're hunting.

    And no.......you don't need a 30 round clip for target shooting, because if nobody is shooting at you, you can take the time to reload another clip.

    My vote is for ammo control.
     
  7. Bill Angel
    Offline

    Bill Angel Gold Member

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2010
    Messages:
    1,109
    Thanks Received:
    160
    Trophy Points:
    130
    Location:
    Baltimore Maryland
    Ratings:
    +243
    In Baltimore where I live my impression is that the homeless are more likely to be the victims of violent crime rather than the perpetrators.

    From what I've gleaned from reading the accounts of crimes in Baltimore (and also my personal experience) , society could reduce the number of violent crimes through programs or support groups that help people manage their anger. There is MUCH more anger on display on the streets of Baltimore than "mental illness".
     
  8. kyzr
    Offline

    kyzr Gold Member

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2009
    Messages:
    3,447
    Thanks Received:
    450
    Trophy Points:
    130
    Ratings:
    +630
    I'm surprised no one connected the dots of Loughner's drug abuse to his mental state
    Smoking marijuana ups risk of schizophrenia: study | Reuters

    Could legalizing marijuana increase mass murders or "assassinations" ?

    How about drug tests before buying guns or ammo?

    How about mandatory drug tests period to stay out of "therapy"?

    I'm waiting for Palin to start hammering the Left on Loughner's mental status viz drug use AS VERIFIED BY THE ABOVE STUDY!!

    Guns don't kill people, people on drugs kill people!!
     
  9. California Girl
    Offline

    California Girl BANNED

    Joined:
    Oct 8, 2009
    Messages:
    50,337
    Thanks Received:
    8,960
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Ratings:
    +8,965
    I have, on numerous occasions, talked about the links between drug use and mental illness. Across the world, research shows that MJ can trigger mental illness. Yet, we want to ban guns and legalize drugs. Seems somewhat naive to me.
     
  10. KissMy
    Offline

    KissMy Free Breast Exam

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2009
    Messages:
    12,095
    Thanks Received:
    2,147
    Trophy Points:
    255
    Location:
    In your head
    Ratings:
    +2,933
    Take away their guns & free speech, you will create more of them. Take away their guns & they will use truck bombs, airliners, dirty bombs & anthrax. Arm the citizens & they will take care of the problem before it takes care of you.
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1

Share This Page