How about psychiatric exams before being able to buy a gun?

[Bugsy McGurk]

The NRA and other gun nuts tell us that guns are not the problem - that we must keep guns away from the mentally disturbed.

Alright then, let's take them at their word, as absurd as that is, and do our best to address what they say is the problem. The solution...

Anyone who wants to buy a gun must pass a thorough psychiatric exam. And that gets coupled with a REAL background check, including all official records and interviews with applicants' family members, co-workers, etc.

That would sure go a long way toward screening out the mentally unstable people who can presently walk into gun shops, gun shows, etc. and buy Glocks or what have you.

Can I hear an Amen?

 

[RickWA]

The NRA and other gun nuts tell us that guns are not the problem - that we must keep guns away from the mentally disturbed.

Alright then, let's take them at their word, as absurd as that is, and do our best to address what they say is the problem. The solution...

Anyone who wants to buy a gun must pass a thorough psychiatric exam. And that gets coupled with a REAL background check, including all official records and interviews with applicants' family members, co-workers, etc.

That would sure go a long way toward screening out the mentally unstable people who can presently walk into gun shops, gun shows, etc. and buy Glocks or what have you.

Can I hear an Amen?

No.

pre-screening for elibility of the exercise of a right is nothing a "liberal" should support. Perhaps we should demand a fluency/competency test before allowing citizens to speak, write, assemble?

Restricting the exercise itself is the wrong place to focus, because:

1) It presumes "guilt" or non-eligibility until proven otherwise

2) It forms a barrier unique to only the exercise of Second Anendment rights - and in so doing, uniquely relegates that right to lesser protection, lesser valuation constitutionally.

I understand that control freak collectivist lefties can never just mind their own business and must always seek to restrict/control others...I just won't abide it. Get a hobby.

 

[Charcat]

And you object to a picture ID to vote????? LOL

 

[worldlymrb]

The NRA and other gun nuts tell us that guns are not the problem - that we must keep guns away from the mentally disturbed.

Alright then, let's take them at their word, as absurd as that is, and do our best to address what they say is the problem. The solution...

Anyone who wants to buy a gun must pass a thorough psychiatric exam. And that gets coupled with a REAL background check, including all official records and interviews with applicants' family members, co-workers, etc.

That would sure go a long way toward screening out the mentally unstable people who can presently walk into gun shops, gun shows, etc. and buy Glocks or what have you.

Can I hear an Amen?

Only if we can have psychological exams and background checks before being elligible to vote or run for public office and re-election.

 

[Max R.]

Only if we can have psychological exams and background checks before being elligible to vote or run for public office and re-election.

And, as @RickWA already mentioned, all other Constitutional rights. Let's see how many Über Left Wingers begin squealing when they have to pass a psych exam to exercise their 1st, 3rd through 10th and all other Constitutional rights along with the 2nd.

 

[Dawg]

or to buy a automobile, hammer, 2x4, ball bat and what else _____________

 

[Bugsy McGurk]

No.

pre-screening for elibility of the exercise of a right is nothing a "liberal" should support. Perhaps we should demand a fluency/competency test before allowing citizens to speak, write, assemble?

Restricting the exercise itself is the wrong place to focus, because:

1) It presumes "guilt" or non-eligibility until proven otherwise

2) It forms a barrier unique to only the exercise of Second Anendment rights - and in so doing, uniquely relegates that right to lesser protection, lesser valuation constitutionally.

I understand that control freak collectivist lefties can never just mind their own business and must always seek to restrict/control others...I just won't abide it. Get a hobby.

You must know this, but handguns kill people; words don't.

And what I propose is the opposite of "presuming guilt" - it allows one to demonstrate that one is not "guilty" of mental instability.

But the bottom line is that you have no real interest in weeding out the mentally unstable, despite all the empty talk about focusing on mental illness as opposed to guns themselves.

 

[Max R.]

or to buy a automobile, hammer, 2x4, ball bat and what else _____________

Protest signs. Those things are really dangerous! They could hurt someone or cause someone to lose an eye.

 

[Bugsy McGurk]

And you object to a picture ID to vote????? LOL

Sure. I have voted my entire life without picture ID. I have never even heard of voter impersonation where I live. The signature exemplar system is the best way to prevent fraud. The GOP goal is actually skewing the eligible voters, not preventing fraud. And votes don't kill people; handguns do.

But you digress, as wingers are wont to do. What do you think of my proposal?

 

[Bugsy McGurk]

Only if we can have psychological exams and background checks before being elligible to vote or run for public office and re-election.

Jeez, you better rethink that. The GOP would be doomed under your proposal.

;-)

 

[Max R.]

You must know this, but handguns kill people; words don't....

So you don't have a problem with cyberbullying? Little teenage girls who commit suicide need to tighten the f**k up?

http://nobullying.com/six-unforgettable-cyber-bullying-cases/

 

[Bugsy McGurk]

And, as @RickWA already mentioned, all other Constitutional rights. Let's see how many Über Left Wingers begin squealing when they have to pass a psych exam to exercise their 1st, 3rd through 10th and all other Constitutional rights along with the 2nd.

Any chance you can focus on the question posed?

No?

;-)

 

[Bugsy McGurk]

So you don't have a problem with cyberbullying? Little teenage girls who commit suicide need to tighten the f**k up?

http://nobullying.com/six-unforgettable-cyber-bullying-cases/

Let's stipulate that cyber bullying should be illegal for purposes of this discussion.

NOW will you address the proposal I made?

 

[Dawg]

Protest signs. Those things are really dangerous! They could hurt someone or cause someone to lose an eye.

I forgot Knives, there was a time more people had scars from knife fights than for GUNS.......your point is exactly correct, to day it's GUNS tomorrow something freaking else.

"when they came for the Jews I said nothing, I wasn't a Jew"..........is what it reminds me of.

 

[Max R.]

Let's stipulate that cyber bullying should be illegal for purposes of this discussion...

Lame. Admit you were wrong that "words can't" kill and we can move forward.

NOW will you address the proposal I made?

I've done so. As usual, you just keep nagging until you either get the answer you want or drive people away so you can declare victory.

 

[Dawg]

The Θ Plan to stop murders, release 193 convicted murderers:

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2014/05/14/immigration-releases-convicted-felons/9090557/

 

[Charcat]

Sure. I have voted my entire life without picture ID. I have never even heard of voter impersonation where I live. The signature exemplar system is the best way to prevent fraud. The GOP goal is actually skewing the eligible voters, not preventing fraud. And votes don't kill people; handguns do.

But you digress, as wingers are wont to do. What do you think of my proposal?

Guns have been bought for hundreds of years without a psychiatric test, and 99.9% of them have not killed anyone. So, I think your idea stinks.

 

[Bugsy McGurk]

Lame. Admit you were wrong that "words can't" kill and we can move forward.


I've done so. As usual, you just keep nagging until you either get the answer you want or drive people away so you can declare victory.

I missed your alleged response.

Do you support my proposal, or not?

 

[Max R.]

Guns have been bought for hundreds of years without a psychiatric test, and 99.9% of them have not killed anyone. So, I think your idea stinks.

Oops. Don't bring logic into this thread or use Bugsy's own words against him. He'll just start ranting, name-calling and then derail his own thread to avoid admitting you are correct.

 

[Bugsy McGurk]

Guns have been bought for hundreds of years without a psychiatric test, and 99.9% of them have not killed anyone. So, I think your idea stinks.

Fair enough. You do not agree with the phony gun nut hooey about keeping guns away from the deranged.