Gun Control or Lunatic Control?

[kyzr]

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".

 

[Londoner]

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.

 

[uscitizen]

Ahh another Fox news hating thread.

 

[westwall]

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.

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.

 

[Mr. Peepers]

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.

 

[ABikerSailor]

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.

 

[Bill Angel]

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.

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".

 

[kyzr]

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!!

 

[California Girl]

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!!

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.

 

[KissMy]

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.

 

[Blagger]

ABikerSailor, as good a concept as ammo control seems, my guess is that it would be too difficult to police, especially in the US. The demand for more ammounition would almost certainly be supplied by unscrupulous sources in Mexico or other parts of South America.

Overall, I'm all for regulating the ownership of firearms, but heavy handed legislation does more harm than good. Look what happened almost immediately after the UK banned the ownership of all self-loading handguns - gun crime exploded overnight, and the demand for weapons was met by the surplus of weapons from the civil war in the former Yugoslavia, and still is.

I've always maintained that automatic weapons and equally overwhelming ordnance should be in the sole possession of the military, law enforcement and the security services. Apart from wanting to experience the buzz of ripping through a magazine in 2-3 seconds, the only other reason someone would want an automatic weapon is to tip the odds of an armed confrontation (usually with the authorities) in their favour.

Don't ban the private ownership of firearms, just strive to ensure, through reasonable channels, that those in possession of firearms aren't going to use them on their community.

 

[JBeukema]

 

[Ravi]

I'd guess that most people that are mentally ill are not going to shoot someone, ever.

Why take away their rights?

 

[ABikerSailor]

Like I said.......if you need more than 10 rounds at a clip, you're either a piss poor shot and should spend more time at the shooting range, or you're mentally unbalanced and looking to kill someone, or you're in a war zone.

 

[FA_Q2]

How about neither. I am sick and tired of people running out and demanding new legislation every damn time something happens. You are NOT going to prevent this kind of tragedy from happening 100% of the time and acting like there needs to be a fix every time it happens is plain stupid. It happened, period. there were things that should have been done to prevent it. That does not mean there needs to be some asinine law that will have zero impact on future events of this nature needs to be enacted.

 

[Wingsofwind]

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!!

Marijuana is NOT a drug, it is a plant. And no one has wanted to 'kill' because of using Marijuana. It calms people more than anything. In fact, marijuana has been proven to improve mental health. Though you will not see the government admitting this because it would mean they were wrong and they will never admit to being wrong.

Please do some research before you go and say something you know nothing about.

 

[Wingsofwind]

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!!

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.

Wrong, this is just what the government wants you to think.

 

[Wingsofwind]

On the Left is a 'Clip' and on the Right is a 'Magazine'.

I have seen 3 people in this thread use the word 'clip' when refering to a 'magazine'. Now that you know the difference please use the correct term for what you are refering to. If you are going to talk about firearms, please learn about them so you can debate intelligently.

 

[JBeukema]

Like I said.......if you need more than 10 rounds at a clip, you're either a piss poor shot and should spend more time at the shooting range, or you're mentally unbalanced and looking to kill someone, or you're in a war zone.

Makes sense

 

[JBeukema]

On the Left is a 'Clip' and on the Right is a 'Magazine'.

I have seen 3 people in this thread use the word 'clip' when refering to a 'magazine'. Now that you know the difference please use the correct term for what you are refering to. If you are going to talk about firearms, please learn about them so you can debate intelligently.

You can't even spell and you want to argue meaningless semantics that have nothing to do with the validity of the points being made?