Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Yes he was not declared mentally unfit so therefore they could not take away his second amendment rights, what a country. If this was a normal world his gun would not be returned and his license would have been revoked, god forbid.
Once again you are missing the cause. "A normal world" would have declared the person mentally unfit, thus his gun would not have been returned regardless of (and in spite of) the 2nd amendment rights. You can't put the cart before the horse. Ironically, part of the reasons for this conflict (mental illness and guns) is two conflicting regulations:
1.) Per federal law (18 U.S.C. § 922(d)), the mentally ill cannot be given a firearm.
2.) Per federal law (HIPAA, etc), you cannot easily report a person as mentally ill.
To make it political, on #1 you have liberal organizations complaining that mentally ill have access to guns, on #2 you have liberal organization complaining about the civil rights and privacy of the mentally ill. That's why it's so hard to solve. Both are in conflict.
And then you have the terrorist connection, and we haven't heard the full story yet except to say this shooter was somehow influenced by terrorist rhetoric. So why focus on the tool used in the crime when the guy could have just as easily plowed into a group of people on the street with a truck?
Once again you are missing the cause. "A normal world" would have declared the person mentally unfit, thus his gun would not have been returned. You can't put the cart before the horse. Ironically, part of the reasons for this conflict (mental illness and guns) is two conflicting regulations:
1.) Per federal law (18 U.S.C. § 922(d)), the mentally ill cannot be given a firearm.
2.) Per federal law (HIPAA, etc), you cannot easily report a person as mentally ill.
To make it political, on #1 you have liberal organizations complaining that mentally ill have access to guns, on #2 you have liberal organization complaining about the civil rights and privacy of the mentally ill. That's why it's so hard to solve. Both are in conflict.
And then you have the terrorist connection, and we haven't heard the full story yet except to say this shooter was somehow influenced by terrorist rhetoric. So why focus on the tool used in the crime when the guy could have just as easily plowed into a group of people on the street with a truck?
Once again you are missing the cause. "A normal world" would have declared the person mentally unfit, thus his gun would not have been returned regardless of (and in spite of) the 2nd amendment rights. You can't put the cart before the horse. Ironically, part of the reasons for this conflict (mental illness and guns) is two conflicting regulations:
1.) Per federal law (18 U.S.C. § 922(d)), the mentally ill cannot be given a firearm.
2.) Per federal law (HIPAA, etc), you cannot easily report a person as mentally ill.
To make it political, on #1 you have liberal organizations complaining that mentally ill have access to guns, on #2 you have liberal organization complaining about the civil rights and privacy of the mentally ill. That's why it's so hard to solve. Both are in conflict.
And then you have the terrorist connection, and we haven't heard the full story yet except to say this shooter was somehow influenced by terrorist rhetoric. So why focus on the tool used in the crime when the guy could have just as easily plowed into a group of people on the street with a truck?
Tackle the root cause.
We might be agreeing, he was not adjudicated as mentally ill and he could manage his own affairs.
To make it political the NRA has argued broadly that those defined as having PTSD and other issues should be allowed to retain possession of their weapon. Per federal laws even family members cannot easily take action on someone they believe is mentally ill.
Yes in a normal world someone that is hallucinating, hearing voices and claims he is being guided to join ISIS by the CIA should have his gun removed from his possession. I know the law prohibits that, your aren't not telling me anything new. Yes he could have done a lot of things instead of jumping on a plane with a legally registered weapon, lacking that maybe it turns out differently.
Quote:
According to federal regulations, a person has been “adjudicated as a mental defective” if a court, board, commission or other lawful authority has determined that he or she, as a result of marked subnormal intelligence, or mental illness, incompetency, condition, or disease: 1) is a danger to himself, herself, or others; or 2) lacks the mental capacity to contract or manage his or her own affairs. The term “adjudicated as a mental defective” explicitly includes a finding of not guilty by reason of insanity or incompetence to stand trial.
It appears that Esteban Santiago-Ruiz first started calling himself Aashiq Hammad 9 years ago, conspiracy theorists dug this up hours after the shooting, while ABC News first mentioned it late last night.
So, if the following IS true, then why is the MSM completely silent about it (so far as I have been able to discover, anyway)? When I Googled "Is Santiago a Muslim", all that came up were "alternative" news sites.
We might be agreeing, he was not adjudicated as mentally ill and he could manage his own affairs.
To make it political the NRA has argued broadly that those defined as having PTSD and other issues should be allowed to retain possession of their weapon. Per federal laws even family members cannot easily take action on someone they believe is mentally ill.
Yes in a normal world someone that is hallucinating, hearing voices and claims he is being guided to join ISIS by the CIA should have his gun removed from his possession. I know the law prohibits that, your aren't not telling me anything new. Yes he could have done a lot of things instead of jumping on a plane with a legally registered weapon, lacking that maybe it turns out differently.
I am not part of NRA but actually that organization has come down pretty hard on mental illness and guns, to the extant of endorsing a national database on mentally ill and endorsing a bill requiring reporting to the national instant check database. That was back in 2013 I think.
In response to this various professional medical organizations came down hard on the NRA, with a claim that only 5% of the mentally ill are dangerous (and that is true) and even criticizing the NRA for calling the Sandy Hill murderer a "lunatic"...seriously. It was politically incorrect I guess. Then the democrats (in spite of the bill being sponsored by 2 DEM senators) said that it would in fact make it easier for the mentally ill to purchase and possess guns, as if having nothing at all is better than having something with some provisions in place. I suspect that they didn't want to be on record as signing off anything that the NRA was associated with, even if it was for the better. And then the privacy issues and potential of government misuse of this information...etc. which to be frank I am concerned with as well.
Yes he was not declared mentally unfit so therefore they could not take away his second amendment rights, what a country. If this was a normal world his gun would not be returned and his license would have been revoked, god forbid.
You live in NY, well Long Island... Guess you didn't get the news down there about a man who's rights were revoked for being prescribed Chantix because Chantix is used to not only ween you off cigarettes it's also used as an anti depressant per the safe act lost his rights? Why? Because the medication deemed as an anti depressant...
So it's real inviting in NY to admit you have a problem or seek treatment for an ailment if you feed your family with the game you bag, or have invested heavily in a hobby...
I am not part of NRA but actually that organization has come down pretty hard on mental illness and guns, to the extant of endorsing a national database on mentally ill and endorsing a bill requiring reporting to the national instant check database. That was back in 2013 I think.
In response to this various professional medical organizations came down hard on the NRA, with a claim that only 5% of the mentally ill are dangerous (and that is true) and even criticizing the NRA for calling the Sandy Hill murderer a "lunatic"...seriously. It was politically incorrect I guess. Then the democrats (in spite of the bill being sponsored by 2 DEM senators) said that it would in fact make it easier for the mentally ill to purchase and possess guns, as if having nothing at all is better than having something with some provisions in place. I suspect that they didn't want to be on record as signing off anything that the NRA was associated with, even if it was for the better. And then the privacy issues and potential of government misuse of this information...etc. which to be frank I am concerned with as well.
Now we can all say "what a country"...
Let's not forget the "online purchases" and "gun show loophole"
When is the last time you could purchase a rifle shot gun or handgun On-line and have it shipped directly to your house?
Gun show loophole? Most gun show vendors are just stores and pawn shops (from what I've seen down here) that sell new/used arms and perform the same background checks that they would do in their stores...They all have computers hooked up to the internet and for credit card purchases. Some vendors don't sell guns, they sell reload ammo, military surplus like sleeping bags and fatigues stuff you'd find in an Army/Navy store, knives, etc. Where the uneducated and indoctrinated fail is they assume it's like the black market and military grade weapons can be had without any question... Couldn't be further from the truth.
Straw purchases can be made both through a gun store, a sporting goods retailer, a gunshow, etc. "Hey man wana make 100 bucks? Buy me a gun please! Here's the cash for the gun, here's 100 for your time" nope. No thanks. Don't care what the reasoning is, how good of a friend or relative you are. Won't do it. Not for all the tea in china or any price. Could be for a 150 dollar pistol or 22 rifle and offer me $1000 in cash, nope.
Had a friend who wanted to take one of my rifles to go hunting. Nope. Knew him since middle school. No way. For all I knew he could have wanted to go postal or had a problem with someone. Not going to happen. Wasn't going to risk it even if he sincerely wanted to go hunting. Nobody handles my guns but me. Go to a range MAYBE and that's a BIG maybe more than likely NO.
Private purchases, made 3 so far.
It's Common sense to only deal with a CCW Holder and exchange driver license info. For if that gun was stolen, or has been used in crime, weeds the chances out of buying a hot gun and dealing with a criminal. And if the serial numbers have been damaged/missing walk and report it to the police ASAP.
Just out of curiosity, may I ask your general age?
I've wondered about personal experiences with private sales across different sects of society, such as age or location.
Growing up rural, before the internet private sales were pretty much all we knew, because granddad's trip to Sears or Montgomery wards to pick up a new rifle was something that happened less than a handful of times.
I never kept any kind of count, but I've probably been involved in over one hundred private sales or trades in my lifetime and never thought much of it until the politics of the matter became a hot topic, more recently.
Let's not forget the "online purchases" and "gun show loophole"
When is the last time you could purchase a rifle shot gun or handgun On-line and have it shipped directly to your house?
Gun show loophole? Most gun show vendors are just stores and pawn shops (from what I've seen down here) that sell new/used arms and perform the same background checks that they would do in their stores...They all have computers hooked up to the internet and for credit card purchases. Some vendors don't sell guns, they sell reload ammo, military surplus like sleeping bags and fatigues stuff you'd find in an Army/Navy store, knives, etc. Where the uneducated and indoctrinated fail is they assume it's like the black market and military grade weapons can be had without any question... Couldn't be further from the truth.
Straw purchases can be made both through a gun store, a sporting goods retailer, a gunshow, etc. "Hey man wana make 100 bucks? Buy me a gun please! Here's the cash for the gun, here's 100 for your time" nope. No thanks. Don't care what the reasoning is, how good of a friend or relative you are. Won't do it. Not for all the tea in china or any price. Could be for a 150 dollar pistol or 22 rifle and offer me $1000 in cash, nope.
Had a friend who wanted to take one of my rifles to go hunting. Nope. Knew him since middle school. No way. For all I knew he could have wanted to go postal or had a problem with someone. Not going to happen. Wasn't going to risk it even if he sincerely wanted to go hunting. Nobody handles my guns but me. Go to a range MAYBE and that's a BIG maybe more than likely NO.
Private purchases, made 3 so far.
It's Common sense to only deal with a CCW Holder and exchange driver license info. For if that gun was stolen, or has been used in crime, weeds the chances out of buying a hot gun and dealing with a criminal. And if the serial numbers have been damaged/missing walk and report it to the police ASAP.
Yeah, exactly. "Gun show loophole" is just noise. There is no loophole. I've purchased 3 weapons from gun shows and had to go through NICS background check each and every time, just as you say everyone that has a stall at these shows are professional FFL dealers and follow the law. I could call it "disinformation" but lets be diplomatic and call it lack of information. And deliver a firearm to my house without going through an FFL dealer? I wish. Don't even get my started on the "assault weapon/rifle" definition that gets thrown like crazy for anything able to shoot a projectile.
Noise is why we can't solve the complex issue of violence, gun violence or otherwise, in the US.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
you nailed it!
