Maybe I missed it, but I have yet to see even ONE liberal - just ONE -

[Barbella]

give specifics on what they envision "common sense gun laws" to be.

Any lefties with some balls out there?

 

[Bugsy McGurk]

give specifics on what they envision "common sense gun laws" to be.

Any lefties with some balls out there?

It's hard to believe you never heard some of my great ideas.

;-)

 

[Barbella]

It's hard to believe you never heard some of my great ideas.

;-)

Not really hard to believe, since I'm pretty sure you haven't stated your "great ideas" yet.

Prove me wrong. I'll wait.

 

[Bugsy McGurk]

Not really hard to believe, since I'm pretty sure you haven't stated your "great ideas" yet.

Prove me wrong. I'll wait.

OK. Here's one to chew on....

Let's pretend that the gun nutz really DO want to take action to prevent mentally unstable people from getting guns. To accomplish that goal, we require truly universal background checks, with those checks requiring that those seeking to buy guns also pass a comprehensive psychiatric exam. Mission accomplished.

You like that one, right?

;-)

 

[Barbella]

OK. Here's one to chew on....

Let's pretend that the gun nutz really DO want to take action to prevent mentally unstable people from getting guns. To accomplish that goal, we require truly universal background checks, with those checks requiring that those seeking to buy guns also pass a comprehensive psychiatric exam. Mission accomplished.

You like that one, right?

;-)

I have nothing whatsoever against denying gun ownership to mentally ill people. Then again, who would decide who is mentally ill? The same psychiatrists who prescribe adderall or ritalin to NINE PERCENT of our kids, MAKING THEM MENTALLY UNSTABLE in the first place?

 

[Bugsy McGurk]

I have nothing whatsoever against denying gun ownership to mentally ill people. Then again, who would decide who is mentally ill? The same psychiatrists who prescribe adderall or ritalin to NINE PERCENT of our kids, MAKING THEM MENTALLY UNSTABLE in the first place?

You "forgot" to say whether you favor or oppose my proposal.

 

[Craig]

I have nothing whatsoever against denying gun ownership to mentally ill people. Then again, who would decide who is mentally ill? The same psychiatrists who prescribe adderall or ritalin to NINE PERCENT of our kids, MAKING THEM MENTALLY UNSTABLE in the first place?

OK...Let's work on the agreement aspect...

You say...you have nothing against denying gun ownership to mentally ill people. Max has said the same. Bugs says the same. I say the same. Happiness...non partisan agreement across the board. We all agree.

Now...without any capital letters, how do we accomplish that goal? What do we do, as a society, to deny ownership of firearms to the mentally ill?

 

[Barbella]

You "forgot" to say whether you favor or oppose my proposal.

I thought my reply made that perfectly clear. Craig seems to think so.

 

[middleview]

give specifics on what they envision "common sense gun laws" to be.

Any lefties with some balls out there?

Why not open the conversation up to anyone with ideas? Any republicans out there who would like to step forward? Did you already give up on finding any of them with balls?

 

[middleview]

I have nothing whatsoever against denying gun ownership to mentally ill people. Then again, who would decide who is mentally ill? The same psychiatrists who prescribe adderall or ritalin to NINE PERCENT of our kids, MAKING THEM MENTALLY UNSTABLE in the first place?

The current law is that someone who has been ordered by a court to undergo psychiatric care. The problem is that so many states did not require courts to report such orders. Cho would have been unable to buy the guns he used if the current Virginia laws had been in effect.

 

[Craig]

I thought my reply made that perfectly clear. Craig seems to think so.

A little bit. I'm unsure. You seem apprehensive regarding psychiatric testing...but certain you want to do...well...something.

 

[Barbella]

Now...without any capital letters, how do we accomplish that goal? What do we do, as a society, to deny ownership of firearms to the mentally ill?

Good question, of course. I would think that a kid that's been constantly in trouble in school, at work, or has prior run ins with the law would be a good candidate for either a denial or at least a lengthy waiting period coupled with a thorough background check. Same with, say, someone who's been charged with making irrational threats to others, someone who has had the police called to his house for domestic violence or spousal abuse incidents, or anyone who has acted or is acting like a deranged nutjob.

Someone who, in short, doesn't act like a sane human being who can be trusted with a gun. Common sense.

There is, of course, no foolproof 100% way to avoid idiots from murdering others, be it by gun, car, bomb, knife, baseball bat, arson, poison, or Lizzie Borden style axe.

 

[Jen]

It's hard to believe you never heard some of my great ideas.

;-)

Then spit em out right here, Bugsy.
Bullet form.

 

[Barbella]

The current law is that someone who has been ordered by a court to undergo psychiatric care. The problem is that so many states did not require courts to report such orders. Cho would have been unable to buy the guns he used if the current Virginia laws had been in effect.

Then change the law to require courts to report such orders.

Again... don't you see that laws are no good if they aren't enforced. We HAVE the laws.... we're just not seeing them through. What good are MORE laws???

 

[Craig]

Good question, of course. I would think that a kid that's been constantly in trouble in school, at work, or has prior run ins with the law would be a good candidate for either a denial or at least a lengthy waiting period coupled with a thorough background check. Same with, say, someone who's been charged with making irrational threats to others, someone who has had the police called to his house for domestic violence or spousal abuse incidents, or anyone who has acted or is acting like a deranged nutjob.

Someone who, in short, doesn't act like a sane human being who can be trusted with a gun.

There is, of course, no foolproof 100% way to avoid idiots from murdering others, be it by gun, car, bomb, knife, baseball bat, arson, poison, or Lizzie Borden style axe.

Charged with making threats? I'm not behind that. You know...because I heard...

Much of the rest is criminal behavior...not mental illness. And of course...a friend of mine is an Annapolis City Cop, a Detective, which he managed in near record time...Guess what? He was a foster kid who was in trouble...

 

[middleview]

Then change the law to require courts to report such orders.

Again... don't you see that laws are no good if they aren't enforced. We HAVE the laws.... we're just not seeing them through. What good are MORE laws???

It was up to the states to implement that requirement. Virginia did after the UVA massacre.

 

[Barbella]

Charged with making threats? I'm not behind that. You know...because I heard...

Much of the rest is criminal behavior...not mental illness. And of course...a friend of mine is an Annapolis City Cop, a Detective, which he managed in near record time...Guess what? He was a foster kid who was in trouble...

Well most times when people are CHARGED with making threats, they DID. Otherwise they'd simply be ACCUSED, but NOT charged, right? Big difference, I believe....

The rest isn't simply criminal behavior. If some guy beats the shit out of his wife, for instance, he's clearly mentally unstable, right?

 

[middleview]

Good question, of course. I would think that a kid that's been constantly in trouble in school, at work, or has prior run ins with the law would be a good candidate for either a denial or at least a lengthy waiting period coupled with a thorough background check. Same with, say, someone who's been charged with making irrational threats to others, someone who has had the police called to his house for domestic violence or spousal abuse incidents, or anyone who has acted or is acting like a deranged nutjob.

Someone who, in short, doesn't act like a sane human being who can be trusted with a gun. Common sense.

There is, of course, no foolproof 100% way to avoid idiots from murdering others, be it by gun, car, bomb, knife, baseball bat, arson, poison, or Lizzie Borden style axe.

It is up to the person threatened to go for a restraining order. My fiancee did exactly that. Her ex threatened her, vandalized my car when he realized we were dating...She got a restraining order...he violated it by calling in more threats (with a cop listening on the other phone)....They picked him up that night and with the info that he owned a handgun got a search order and confiscated it. He served six months because his threats were very specific (and he called the cop a C*NT!).....even now that he has been released from jail he cannot buy a gun unless he goes down to the wrong side of town and roams around asking the gangbangers for a gun....good luck with that.

No, there is no 100% fool proof way. So? The perfect is not the enemy of the good.

 

[Bugsy McGurk]

I thought my reply made that perfectly clear. Craig seems to think so.

No he doesn't. He asks you how to do it. If you agreed with me, there would be no reason to ask you.

You're not very good at logical thinking.

;-)

 

[Bugsy McGurk]

Then spit em out right here, Bugsy.
Bullet form.

I did above.

Do you like my idea?