Guns and Assault Rifles are not the Problem, mentally ill people with Guns and assault rifles are the problem.

[progressive hunter]

You're a dick.

how so??

I told you last night that making a threat is against the law and they should be arrested which is when due process starts,,

do you have more than one person using your account or are you just a moron that cant keep up with a discussion??

 

[Failzero]

how so??

I told you last night that making a threat is against the law and they should be arrested which is when due process starts,,

do you have more than one person using your account or are you just a moron that cant keep up with a discussion??

I’m interested in if ( Both left & Right leaning posters think ending HIPPA firewall and adding a mandatory Drug Screening to every 4473 Form & BGC for a firearm purchase that focuses on SSRIs and Illegal Drugs is doable ????

 

[progressive hunter]

I’m interested in if ( Both left & Right leaning posters think ending HIPPA firewall and adding a mandatory Drug Screening to ever 4473 Form & BGC for a firearm purchase the focuses on SSRIs and Illegal Drugs ????

I think all back ground checks should end,,,

we dont use them here in missouri other than at an FFL and other than the usual criminals that wont follow the law anyway it works fine

my medical records are none of your business,,

 

[Rigby5]

I can not understand how the news media fails to see the real problem in America today. There are millions of Gun and assault rifles owners that live in America today. And they are not mass killers. The real problem is mentally ill people with guns and or assault rifles. It seems that the news media networks have this agenda to demonize assault rifles and guns in America. These two items are not active until a person picks them up. Wake up America, and see what is really going on.!? There should be a psychological test to screen purchasers of all weapons before they can be sold, to weed out the nut cases. Your thoughts.?

It takes more than just "a psychological test to screen".
We need long term public health care, to prevent and treat mental illness, since our modern society is more and more prone to creating highly dangerous psychotics.

 

[progressive hunter]

It takes more than just "a psychological test to screen".
We need long term public health care, to prevent and treat mental illness, since our modern society is more and more prone to creating highly dangerous psychotics.

sounds like a great idea you can get started in your state,, the feds shouldnt be involved,,

 

[Rigby5]

The sane person plan is to use Red Flag Laws.
Identify the crazy, and take away their guns.

Yet, you think this in an "Infringement" and you support the crazy keeping their weapons, then you blame others by saying those others want to kill children and teachers, when in FACT it's you that demands that the crazy are allowed to keep their guns. Crazy huh!

Your simple mind allowed you to stray from anything sane to the crazy.

The red flag laws are insane.
First of all they are illegal because the defendant is not allowed to defend themselves in court.
Second is that if a person really is unstable, the very LAST thing anyone should want to do is put them over the edge by smashing down their door and taking their most valuable possessions.
Third is that by not putting the person in custody instead, they allow the now really pissed off person to simply go out and illegally get all the weapons, explosive, toxins, flammables, etc., they want.
That is a really good plan, NOT!

Its not complicated at all.
When a person is suspect, you put that PERSON in custody, have them present at an evaluation trial, and you leave their possessions alone.

Again, red flag laws are totally and completely contrary to all principles of law and order.

 

[Rigby5]

I think you are MI and shouldn't have a weapon.

Since there is no way to prevent anyone free to the public, from obtaining all the explosives, toxins, flammables, and other weapons they might want, then clearly the mentally unstable have to be institutionalized, not their belongings.

 

[Rigby5]

What part of "shall not be infringed" do you not understand?

States and municipalities are the ones who are supposed to define what is infringement or not.
For example, restricting guns from 5 year olds is not an infringement.

 

[Rigby5]

Nuts have existed since humans first roamed around hiding in bushes from saber-toothed cats. Semi-automatic rifles with large magazines.. not so much.

They have been around since WWI.
In fact, the Thompson Machinegun is a WW1 gun, even though full auto.
The change is NOT the weapons.
It is the people and climate of instability, fear, hate, stress, etc. that is changing.

 

[Winco]

Its not complicated at all.
When a person is suspect, you put that PERSON in custody, have them present at an evaluation trial, and you leave their possessions alone.

That is pretty much exactly what I said, READ Below.

None at all, IF it is done in an immediate timeline.
I support this 'due process' , just don't give the crazy time to go stalk and kill his next victim(s).

Yes, bring in immediately for an evaluation, and hold him until the due process.
Why do you have a problem with this ^^^^^.
progressive hunter

That is pretty much exactly what I said, READ Below.

I want Due Process to happen immediately.
Arrest person or take person to an evaluation ASAP, like within an hour.
How can I make this any clearer?

Don't take person's guns away immediately, but DO take the person away from the guns, and give them their Due Process.
You got a problem with this ^^^^^?

 

[Rigby5]

100% of mass shootings have one thing in common.
Guns.

Nonsense.

There are so few mass shootings that we have almost no statistic on them, and we have no idea if any mass shooting has ever been prevented by preventing them from getting guns.
Since it is impossible to prevent people from getting guns, since guns come from the same sources as drugs, then it would not matter anyway.
It still produces no viable strategy for doing any good.

Since there are fewer than a dozen mass shooting a year in the US, and they represent less than 5% of the people killed by guns each year, they are totally irrelevant.
Clearly the single biggest cause of deaths are from the War on Drugs, so ending that should be our primary focus.

 

[Rigby5]

Every 4473 Form should include a Drug Screening ( That focuses on SSRIs and Illegal Drugs .

It does:
{...
21.c.: “Do you intend to sell or otherwise dispose of any firearm listed on this form and any continuation sheet(s) or ammunition in furtherance of any felony or other offense punishable by imprisonment for a term of more than one year, a Federal crime of terrorism, or a drug trafficking offense?”
...}
A simple form can not really screen for drug use, but it does screen for "drug trafficking".

 

[Rigby5]

You guys want to solve the mental health issues, so you say.
But support nothing to stop the mentally ill from having weapons, all because of............

Infringement
and
Not willing to use Red Flag Laws, because, you know, infringement.

Wrong.
Infringement of the 2nd amendment has nothing at all to do with it.
The point is that red flag laws to not allow the person to be present to defend themselves, so is a clear violation of the 4th and 5th amendment.

4th Amendment
{... The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
...}
5th Amendment
{...No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a grand jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the militia, when in actual service in time of war or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.
...}

That is so basic as to be a total deal breaker.
It is impossible to be any more of an autocratic dictatorship than that, unless the government simply guns them down in public.

 

[Rigby5]

I’m interested in if ( Both left & Right leaning posters think ending HIPPA firewall and adding a mandatory Drug Screening to every 4473 Form & BGC for a firearm purchase that focuses on SSRIs and Illegal Drugs is doable ????

First of all, it is HIPAA, not HIPPA, and second is there is no such firewall.
Third is that form 4473 has 2 drug questions already.
Forth is that it would not only be trivial for a mass shooter to switch methods like Tim McVeigh did, and that taking the person into custody is the only way to reduce risk and make any sort of assessment.

 

[Rigby5]

sounds like a great idea you can get started in your state,, the feds shouldnt be involved,,

Agreed.
Feds have no authority and totally unskilled.

 

[Rigby5]

That is pretty much exactly what I said, READ Below.

That is pretty much exactly what I said, READ Below.

Then we agree.
I did not see those posts.
I only saw the one claiming "infringement" was the problem.

 

[Desperado]

States and municipalities are the ones who are supposed to define what is infringement or not.
For example, restricting guns from 5 year olds is not an infringement.

No that is one of the few common sense gun laws we can agree on

 

[Blues Man]

NO, shit.

"Semi-automatic, military-style, large capacity magazine weapons".
"The weapons the military uses for close proximity use, that were "upgraded" for civilian use".


So, you just repeated the words you like.

Military weapons are NOT available to civilians , Idiot.

 

[Smokin' OP]

are NOT available to civilians , Idiot.

You're FOS.
WTF do you think an AR-15 or AK-47 is, Dumbass?

 

[Blues Man]

Has that man with a penis been identified to the authorities that he made a rape threat against one of your family members, or even you.

Question Remains:

Don't you want people that have been identified by actual verbal or written threats to be stopped.
Or are you sticking with, can't infringe on his Rights Bullshit?
Other people have Rights too.

So now you're changing the rules and you just want people who make threats to have to be licensed to own guns?

You are falling for the illogical assumption that people who own firearms are nothing but mass murderers in waiting and will all eventually murder someone.

We don't punish people if they haven't committed a crime and just because some people commit crimes in no way means everyone will.