What's it gonna take for this to end, people?

[TemplarKormac]

“...the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”
There it is folks. Pure and simple.

Alright then.

This is what I am getting:

Do nothing about gun violence, because "muh rights". And if we do something, let's take it completely too far.

Thank you to those who offered reasonable responses to my thread. And also, thanks to all of you who made the point of my thread.

My conclusion:

There is no solution. Neither side wants one.

 

[Pumpkin Row]

Any kind of behavior can be considered a mental illness, like Oppositional Defiant Disorder.

There's no such thing as a "Good Government", that's an oxymoron.

Mental disorders are defined by being pervasive and a pattern in behavior. If the behavior causes chronic distress to the afflicted or to those around him or her long term, it is considered a disorder. That is how mental disorders are defined.

That's incredibly arbitrary, and Oppositional Defiant Disorder is a perfect example of that. There's no actual basis for normal behavior, since every single individual is different. All that needs to be done is to pick out behavior loosely considered strange, then attach a label to it.

Besides, the mentally ill are only being used as scape goats, they're LESS likely to hurt anyone, and MORE likely to be victims, actually most likely to hurt themselves rather than anyone else.

ODD is based on a pattern of pervasive behavior that causes long term distress for the person and causes distress in the people around them. No one is suggesting that a kid simply throwing a tantrum has ODD. It’s measured by how often it happens and what sort of problems it creates.

Once again, that's completely arbitrary. Any behavior can cause distress in those around a person, or the person themselves. Since there's no basis for normal, as normal doesn't exist, anyone can pick out a pattern of behavior and attach a label for it. A good example is a person laughing when they're nervous; Since a person can get nervous at any time, people around them can find the behavior disturbing, especially when it happens at inappropriate times. Someone can arbitrarily decide that this is a mental disorder.

Disorders are defined as pervasive, long term, and create distress in those afflicted and/or those around them. You can define “normal” however you want beyond that I guess.

Riveting, you've told me the same thing three times. You really should read a person's post instead of repeating yourself over and over.

Regardless of how many times you repeat to me what you've been told, that's STILL completely arbitrary and can be said for any behavior, I even gave you a goddamn example. I swear, if you keep ignoring my posts and repeating yourself, I'll just start screenshotting my messages and reposting them.Nobody likes how you just talk at people instead of to them, it defeats the purpose of talking on a message board. Go start a damn blog or something.

 

[Bush92]

“...the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”
There it is folks. Pure and simple.

Alright then.

This is what I am getting:

Do nothing about gun violence, because "muh rights". And if we do something, let's take it completely too far.

Thank you to those who offered reasonable responses to my thread. And also, thanks to all of you who made the point of my thread.

My conclusion:

There is no solution. Neither side wants one.

We will always have mentally ill people who are fully functioning living within our society. They will also have access to firearms because the right to do so cannot be taken away, no more than can the right to religious freedom. Some of these people will snap. Part of life.

 

[Billy000]

Mental disorders are defined by being pervasive and a pattern in behavior. If the behavior causes chronic distress to the afflicted or to those around him or her long term, it is considered a disorder. That is how mental disorders are defined.

That's incredibly arbitrary, and Oppositional Defiant Disorder is a perfect example of that. There's no actual basis for normal behavior, since every single individual is different. All that needs to be done is to pick out behavior loosely considered strange, then attach a label to it.

Besides, the mentally ill are only being used as scape goats, they're LESS likely to hurt anyone, and MORE likely to be victims, actually most likely to hurt themselves rather than anyone else.

ODD is based on a pattern of pervasive behavior that causes long term distress for the person and causes distress in the people around them. No one is suggesting that a kid simply throwing a tantrum has ODD. It’s measured by how often it happens and what sort of problems it creates.

Once again, that's completely arbitrary. Any behavior can cause distress in those around a person, or the person themselves. Since there's no basis for normal, as normal doesn't exist, anyone can pick out a pattern of behavior and attach a label for it. A good example is a person laughing when they're nervous; Since a person can get nervous at any time, people around them can find the behavior disturbing, especially when it happens at inappropriate times. Someone can arbitrarily decide that this is a mental disorder.

Disorders are defined as pervasive, long term, and create distress in those afflicted and/or those around them. You can define “normal” however you want beyond that I guess.

Riveting, you've told me the same thing three times. You really should read a person's post instead of repeating yourself over and over.

Regardless of how many times you repeat to me what you've been told, that's STILL completely arbitrary and can be said for any behavior, I even gave you a goddamn example. I swear, if you keep ignoring my posts and repeating yourself, I'll just start screenshotting my messages and reposting them.Nobody likes how you just talk at people instead of to them, it defeats the purpose of talking on a message board. Go start a damn blog or something.

See, you’re rambling on about “normal” being arbitrary. I’m not talking about “normal”. Normal is arbitrary of course, but a mental disorder has a specific definition and criteria. It doesn’t get simpler than that.

 

[Pumpkin Row]

That's incredibly arbitrary, and Oppositional Defiant Disorder is a perfect example of that. There's no actual basis for normal behavior, since every single individual is different. All that needs to be done is to pick out behavior loosely considered strange, then attach a label to it.

Besides, the mentally ill are only being used as scape goats, they're LESS likely to hurt anyone, and MORE likely to be victims, actually most likely to hurt themselves rather than anyone else.

ODD is based on a pattern of pervasive behavior that causes long term distress for the person and causes distress in the people around them. No one is suggesting that a kid simply throwing a tantrum has ODD. It’s measured by how often it happens and what sort of problems it creates.

Once again, that's completely arbitrary. Any behavior can cause distress in those around a person, or the person themselves. Since there's no basis for normal, as normal doesn't exist, anyone can pick out a pattern of behavior and attach a label for it. A good example is a person laughing when they're nervous; Since a person can get nervous at any time, people around them can find the behavior disturbing, especially when it happens at inappropriate times. Someone can arbitrarily decide that this is a mental disorder.

Disorders are defined as pervasive, long term, and create distress in those afflicted and/or those around them. You can define “normal” however you want beyond that I guess.

Riveting, you've told me the same thing three times. You really should read a person's post instead of repeating yourself over and over.

Regardless of how many times you repeat to me what you've been told, that's STILL completely arbitrary and can be said for any behavior, I even gave you a goddamn example. I swear, if you keep ignoring my posts and repeating yourself, I'll just start screenshotting my messages and reposting them.Nobody likes how you just talk at people instead of to them, it defeats the purpose of talking on a message board. Go start a damn blog or something.

See, you’re rambling on about “normal” being arbitrary. I’m not talking about “normal”. Normal is arbitrary of course, but a mental disorder has a specific definition and criteria. It doesn’t get simpler than that.

Good God. No, I'm saying that PERVASIVE and LONG-TERM are completely arbitrary, because anyone can call any behavior both of those things. Of course, this isn't unexpected, since you seem to think calling something "Common Sense" isn't arbitrary, just because politicians keep saying it.

 

[TemplarKormac]

I'm going to pretend that you didn't just cut out the vast majority of my response, choosing not to respond to it. Usually when someone does that, it gives me the feeling that they're not actually interested in honest discussion.

I focus directly on cogent points. I saw the quoted as such. Sorry for being offensive. If you would reference my posts to Billy, I quoted his entire post.

Because mental illness is completely arbitrary, as I've been explaining to Billy. Being depressed is a mental illness, not wanting to follow the directions of an "authority figure" is considered a mental illness, etc.

If one is careless, yes, it can be arbitrary. But what if it is a proven fact that one has a mental disorder that causes them to be a risk to others around them? In this case, are they to be allowed to present such a risk with a firearm in their hands?

Besides that, when anything is covered in the state-run media, it's to push the agenda of the Government, so in many cases it'll either be a false flag, or misinformation will be attached.

You'll be pleased to know I don't watch cable news for opinion. I just want news. IE, Hurricane Dorian killed 20 people in the Bahamas. That's news.

"I love guns" or "I hate guns" is not.

A good example is the recent Walmart shooting, where the guy apparently changed clothes before being caught, and managed to shoot 30 people, with a 30 round gun, with no spare ammo on him.

Hm. And how does him changing clothes prove this was a false flag by the US Government? And if he were close to being caught how was he not stopped beforehand? Surely our law enforcement isn't that inept? If he changes clothes and doesn't conceal his face, he gets caught. If he changes clothes and does cover his face, that automatically raises suspicion, and he will be detained.

I mean this with all due sincerity: I am totally willing to listen to any more evidence you may have to make your case. I need more than he simply "changed clothes before he was caught".

A soldier must change clothes before he goes to battle. A law enforcement officer must change clothes before he goes on the beat. A murderer with adequate skill and knowledge of firearms and tactical gear will change clothes before he goes out and murders innocent people. Good law enforcement will ensure he doesn't get the gun in the first place and won't get that far. Closing any loopholes in gun ownership laws will do the same (eh, and FYI, the gun show loophole isn't a valid excuse either, what is government gonna do? Take the guns away from everyone in there? Ha, good luck).

I am looking at both sides here. One was hoping that one or the other would at least suggest a solution.

But I asked for the impossible. A solution to this issue is impossible.

I give up.

 

[SmokeALib]

Again you’re missing the point.

How? What was the point, aside from your visible and clearly stated hatred of Republicans?

I’m not saying guns should be outlawed. The point is that republicans are so goddamn obsessed with the amendment. If they weren’t, maybe we would have common sense gun control by now

So, if we aren't outlawing guns, what are we doing? What do you define as "common sense"? What policies are "common sense"? Serious question.

Honduras? Please. Barely is it developed.

Lets not parse words, Billy.

According to the United Nations Statistics Division:

There is no established convention for the designation of "developed" and "developing" countries or areas in the United Nations system.[9]

And it notes that:

The designations "developed" and "developing" are intended for statistical convenience and do not necessarily express a judgement about the stage reached by a particular country or area in the development process.[10]

Developed country - Wikipedia

Oh please. Honduras is politically unstable. The point is, Australia, Japan, England, France, and Scandinavian countries etc do not even come close to our gun violence.

Maybe they don't force-feed their kids Ridalin and Zoloft for interrupting 7th grade history by blowing spitballs behind the teachers back.

 

[Billy000]

ODD is based on a pattern of pervasive behavior that causes long term distress for the person and causes distress in the people around them. No one is suggesting that a kid simply throwing a tantrum has ODD. It’s measured by how often it happens and what sort of problems it creates.

Once again, that's completely arbitrary. Any behavior can cause distress in those around a person, or the person themselves. Since there's no basis for normal, as normal doesn't exist, anyone can pick out a pattern of behavior and attach a label for it. A good example is a person laughing when they're nervous; Since a person can get nervous at any time, people around them can find the behavior disturbing, especially when it happens at inappropriate times. Someone can arbitrarily decide that this is a mental disorder.

Disorders are defined as pervasive, long term, and create distress in those afflicted and/or those around them. You can define “normal” however you want beyond that I guess.

Riveting, you've told me the same thing three times. You really should read a person's post instead of repeating yourself over and over.

Regardless of how many times you repeat to me what you've been told, that's STILL completely arbitrary and can be said for any behavior, I even gave you a goddamn example. I swear, if you keep ignoring my posts and repeating yourself, I'll just start screenshotting my messages and reposting them.Nobody likes how you just talk at people instead of to them, it defeats the purpose of talking on a message board. Go start a damn blog or something.

See, you’re rambling on about “normal” being arbitrary. I’m not talking about “normal”. Normal is arbitrary of course, but a mental disorder has a specific definition and criteria. It doesn’t get simpler than that.

Good God. No, I'm saying that PERVASIVE and LONG-TERM are completely arbitrary, because anyone can call any behavior both of those things. Of course, this isn't unexpected, since you seem to think calling something "Common Sense" isn't arbitrary, just because politicians keep saying it.

Christ this isn’t hard to figure out. Pervasive and long term have pretty clear cut definitions. I gave you a specific definition and you want to pretend everything thing I am saying is arbitrary. You’re arguing for the sake of arguing. Timeframe matters. The criteria is defined with a timeframe. It just depends on the disorder. For instance, in order to be diagnosed as clinically depressed, one feels the symptoms every day for two weeks. If such a person remains chronically depressed with the defined symptoms, they are depressed LONG TERM with no foreseeable end. A person without clinical depression does not have this behavior. Lol you’re just arguing for the sake of arguing.

 

[Pumpkin Row]

I focus directly on cogent points. I saw the quoted as such. Sorry for being offensive. If you would reference my posts to Billy, I quoted his entire post.

The action didn't offend me, it met my expectations, since nobody here is here for honest discussion. It does annoy me, though.

If one is careless, yes, it can be arbitrary. But what if it is a proven fact that one has a mental disorder that causes them to be a risk to others around them? In this case, are they to be allowed to present such a risk with a firearm in their hands?

Not necessarily careless. People act in their own interests, and it's in the interest of the Government for people to rely on it. If everyone is disarmed, they are left to rely in centralized security for protection. One easy way to accomplish said disarming is, just for an example, to convince everyone that people with a mental illness are dangerous, then make it really easy to assign mental illness labels to people, then to pass Red Flag Laws at the state level, just like what has been happening while everyone was distracted by the Epstein reports.

Yes, they are, because one person with a firearm is less dangerous when everyone else has firearms, and obtaining one on the black market or building it is easier than making drugs, something everyone has been shown to do. Besides, what you're suggesting is infringing on someone's property rights because they're a danger, while literally anyone is capable of hurting someone else, making them all just as dangerous.

Hm. And how does him changing clothes prove this was a false flag by the US Government? And if he were close to being caught how was he not stopped beforehand? Surely our law enforcement isn't that inept? If he changes clothes and doesn't conceal his face, he gets caught. If he changes clothes and does cover his face, that automatically raises suspicion, and he will be detained.

It was a joke in reference to the fact that he entered in BDUs, then a man in kakies was arrested.

It's not that the road pirates are incompetent, it's that they're for raising funding, and tend to be violent sociopaths.

I mean this with all due sincerity: I am totally willing to listen to any more evidence you may have to make your case. I need more than he simply "changed clothes before he was caught".

A soldier must change clothes before he goes to battle. A law enforcement officer must change clothes before he goes on the beat. A murderer with adequate skill and knowledge of firearms and tactical gear will change clothes before he goes out and murders innocent people. Good law enforcement will ensure he doesn't get the gun in the first place and won't get that far. Closing any loopholes in gun ownership laws will do the same (eh, and FYI, the gun show loophole isn't a valid excuse either, what is government gonna do? Take the guns away from everyone in there? Ha, good luck).

I am looking at both sides here. One was hoping that one or the other would at least suggest a solution.

But I asked for the impossible. A solution to this issue is impossible.

I give up.

The fact that he injured or killed thirty people with thirty shots and no spare ammo, the fact that the man that was arrested was wearing different clothes, despite not having a chance to change, and the fact that he looked almost exactly like two previous shooters should rouse suspicion, especially after the Borderline and Church Christ false flags.

In response to the red text:


Also, guns can be built and 3D printed partly, there's literally no way to prevent people from obtaining them. It's easier to make them than drugs, and the Government not only can't stop people from doing drugs, but actually has a hand in distributing them, the Government has ties to all of the biggest drug cartels in Mexico. Making them illegal increased their value on the black market through artificial scarcity.

 

[Pumpkin Row]

Once again, that's completely arbitrary. Any behavior can cause distress in those around a person, or the person themselves. Since there's no basis for normal, as normal doesn't exist, anyone can pick out a pattern of behavior and attach a label for it. A good example is a person laughing when they're nervous; Since a person can get nervous at any time, people around them can find the behavior disturbing, especially when it happens at inappropriate times. Someone can arbitrarily decide that this is a mental disorder.

Disorders are defined as pervasive, long term, and create distress in those afflicted and/or those around them. You can define “normal” however you want beyond that I guess.

Riveting, you've told me the same thing three times. You really should read a person's post instead of repeating yourself over and over.

Regardless of how many times you repeat to me what you've been told, that's STILL completely arbitrary and can be said for any behavior, I even gave you a goddamn example. I swear, if you keep ignoring my posts and repeating yourself, I'll just start screenshotting my messages and reposting them.Nobody likes how you just talk at people instead of to them, it defeats the purpose of talking on a message board. Go start a damn blog or something.

See, you’re rambling on about “normal” being arbitrary. I’m not talking about “normal”. Normal is arbitrary of course, but a mental disorder has a specific definition and criteria. It doesn’t get simpler than that.

Good God. No, I'm saying that PERVASIVE and LONG-TERM are completely arbitrary, because anyone can call any behavior both of those things. Of course, this isn't unexpected, since you seem to think calling something "Common Sense" isn't arbitrary, just because politicians keep saying it.

Christ this isn’t hard to figure out. Pervasive and long term have pretty clear cut definitions. I gave you a specific definition and you want to pretend everything thing I am saying is arbitrary. You’re arguing for the sake of arguing. Timeframe matters. The criteria is defined with a timeframe. It just depends on the disorder. For instance, in order to be diagnosed as clinically depressed, one feels the symptoms every day for two weeks. If such a person remains chronically depressed with the defined symptoms, they are depressed LONG TERM with no foreseeable end. A person without clinical depression does not have this behavior. Lol you’re just arguing for the sake of arguing.

Apparently it IS difficult for you to figure out. Any behavior can be long term and pervasive, I gave examples. Whether or not such behavior is a disorder is completely up to "authorities", and they can just decide this as it fits a narrative.

What kids aren't resistant to "authority"? It's just a description of how a child acts, just like ADD, ADHD, and the like. Disorders can't be cured, yet these "Disorders" aren't present for HALF the people diagnosed with these when they reach adulthood. That goes to show just how arbitrary mental illness is, it's just used to suit a narrative.

 

[OKTexas]

Any takers? Or are we all too dug in with our respective positions to do anything about this?

Yeah, enforce the laws we already have. The Odessa shooter didn't know he was going to be fired that morning. He tried to buy a gun and was turned down by NICS, he should have had a knock on his door that same day. There should be no pass when a prohibited person lies on the NICS form, they should be arrested and prosecuted.

BTW, this is the first high profile shooter that purchased a weapon from an individual out of millions of private sales that happens every year. Statistics don't support further background checks, it's just another way to push for federal registration of all firearms. No more compromise, period.

.

 

[TemplarKormac]

OKTexas Like I said, there seems to be no clear cut solution to this problem. Even with preferred elected officials in our government we still cannot get the solutions we want to pass, nor are there any willing to enforce existing law.

So, what are we left with? An impasse that nobody is willing to breach.

 

[cnm]

I could give you a lot of solutions, but folks that stand with the state don't want to hear it, they just want government to have the right to take freedom away, they don't want to hear anything else.

Ah, cliched talking points. What would we do without them?

 

[cnm]

My conclusion:

There is no solution. Neither side wants one.

Yet other economically advanced countries demonstrate the solution everyday. 'No solution'!

 

[cnm]

Mass Shootings and Public Support for Gun Control

Abstract

The recent spate of mass public shootings in the United States raises important questions about how these tragic events might impact mass opinion and public policy. Integrating research on focusing events, contextual effects and perceived threat, this article stipulates that residing near a mass shooting should increase support for gun control by making the threat of gun violence more salient. Drawing upon multiple data sources on mass public shootings paired with large-N survey data, it demonstrates that increased proximity to a mass shooting is associated with heightened public support for stricter gun control. Importantly, the results show that this effect does not vary by partisanship, but does vary as a function of salience-related event factors, such as repetition, magnitude and recency. Critically, the core result is replicated using panel data. Together, these results suggest a process of context-driven policy feedback between existing gun laws, egregious gun violence and demand for policy change.
​

According to this study, solutions will be found when enough people have been exposed to a mass shooting. Don't hold your breath if you're American.

​

 

[OKTexas]

I really don’t care that law-abiding citizens own guns because it has gotten to the point where people need guns.

That is a surprising bit of honesty from you, Billy. This is actually true.

What are you planning to do, in earnest, to stop it?

Too goddamn many wind up in the hands of criminals. If the country didn’t become so gun crazy to begin with, maybe the invention of guns would have been so much more limited to simple home protection and nothing else.

And how many of the current gun laws we have already passed stopped criminals from getting these guns? Do me a favor, name them for me.

There are 100 million+ gun owners in the US. If they were all the problem, you wouldn't alive to talk about it. Simple logic, not a threat on you.

Instead, this country has 11,000 deaths per year from guns - a rate that per capita far exceeds any other developed nation.

Using your "developed nation" criteria, the Honduras is a developed nation. Their per capita gun death rate is 60 per 100,000. Ours is 12 per 100,000. That exceeds ours by a factor of FIVE TIMES. And they are significantly smaller country than we are.

In fact, more gun deaths in the US occur via suicide than homicide. Nearly double the homicide rate. DOUBLE, Billy.

Republicans love guns simply because it gives them a false sense of manliness and toughness.

Actually, that's not true and you know it. Simply untrue.

So, would you say that to any woman who owns firearms for the sake of defending herself or her family? Or is it because she wants to be tough and manly?

That is erm... incredibly sexist.

Gun laws barley ever get passed. The ones that do are feeble. Republicans can’t even handle a universal background check. Gun control works fine in other countries.

Honduras? Please. Barely is it developed.

Again you’re missing the point. I’m not saying guns should be outlawed. The point is that republicans are so goddamn obsessed with the amendment. If they weren’t, maybe we would have common sense gun control by now. Maybe assault rifles wouldn’t have been made for civilians to begin with. We are way past that now.

I guess you're too stupid to know that the AR platform was licensed for sale to civilians a full 4 years before the military widely adopted it.

.

 

[cnm]

‘No Way To Prevent This,’ Says Only Nation Where This Regularly Happens
PARKLAND, FL—In the hours following a violent rampage in Florida in which a lone attacker killed 17 individuals and seriously injured over a dozen others, citizens living in the only country where this kind of mass killing routinely occurs reportedly concluded Wednesday that there was no way to prevent the massacre from taking place. “This was a terrible tragedy, but sometimes these things just happen and there’s nothing anyone can do to stop them,” said Indiana resident Harold Turner, echoing sentiments expressed by tens of millions of individuals who reside in a nation where over half of the world’s deadliest mass shootings have occurred in the past 50 years and whose citizens are 20 times more likely to die of gun violence than those of other developed nations. “It’s a shame, but what can we do? There really wasn’t anything that was going to keep this individual from snapping and killing a lot of people if that’s what they really wanted.” At press time, residents of the only economically advanced nation in the world where roughly two mass shootings have occurred every month for the past eight years were referring to themselves and their situation as “helpless.”​

 

[cnm]

I guess you're too stupid to know that the AR platform was licensed for sale to civilians a full 4 years before the military widely adopted it.

Pretend an arcane point has relevance to mass shootings with assault style rifles.

 

[easyt65]

1. There is no such thing as an 'assault weapon'. The term is one coined by the Left as part if its own assault against the 2nd Amendment. In truth, a butter knife, when used to attack someone, is an 'assault weapon'.

2. Taking away weapons from law-abiding citizens will NEVER prevent crimes / mass shootings from happening. Bill Clinton signed an 'assault weapons ban' that lasted for 10 years - it made no impact.

3. Calling the NRA a 'terrorist organization' does nothing except make the person doing it look like an insane Leftist Extremist. The NRA provides / is responsible for thousands of hours of gun safety, hunting safety, etc... training. It does more to legitimately prevent gun violence than liberal politicians do.

4. There are more shootings / people wounded and murdered in Chicago and Baltimore alone on any given weekend than there are / have been in mass shootings across the US....and liberals do not bat an eye about that gun violence...yet liberals claim they want to save lives while ignoring this violence.

 

[Bush92]

Again you’re missing the point.

How? What was the point, aside from your visible and clearly stated hatred of Republicans?

I’m not saying guns should be outlawed. The point is that republicans are so goddamn obsessed with the amendment. If they weren’t, maybe we would have common sense gun control by now

So, if we aren't outlawing guns, what are we doing? What do you define as "common sense"? What policies are "common sense"? Serious question.

Honduras? Please. Barely is it developed.

Lets not parse words, Billy.

According to the United Nations Statistics Division:

There is no established convention for the designation of "developed" and "developing" countries or areas in the United Nations system.[9]

And it notes that:

The designations "developed" and "developing" are intended for statistical convenience and do not necessarily express a judgement about the stage reached by a particular country or area in the development process.[10]

Developed country - Wikipedia

Oh please. Honduras is politically unstable. The point is, Australia, Japan, England, France, and Scandinavian countries etc do not even come close to our gun violence.

If some of these women in Europe had concealed carry they wouldn’t be getting raped by immigrants.