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.
I was listening to the governor of Texas giving his speech, and all I can think about is what can you possibly do under our restraints. I see the physical security angle, sure but unless you invest in the infrastructure to turn the school to a literal jail meaning fence off all approaches to entries and exits, because you can lock the doors but fire regs would stop you from preventing them to open from the inside so unless you have a physical presence at every exit it would be very hard to control. You could possibly do something at elementary to middle school level but then how do you deal with high schools, students leaving for lunch, split classes, its very complex. I dont think disarming people is the answer for a variety of reasons, but I also dont subscribe to the "shall not infringed" rhetoric, i dont think higher requirements (such as training, background checks,etc) for guns equals disarming anyone.
The Constitution doesn't say disarmed, it says infringed. I think the laws are already unconstitutional. The question isn't about the Constitution, it is about what will or will not work. Gun laws don't work.
A nut will figure out how to do crazy things, and there is nothing a sane person can do to stop them. As long as there is access to gasoline, kerosene, acids, poisons, automobiles, knives, blunt objects and bare hands crazy people will be a threat. The kinder, gentler and more rehabilitative justice system is a failure. Whether capital punishment stops criminals or not, it 100% stops repeat offenders. In the history of mankind, not one murderer executed ever killed again. That is a statistical fact!
Until we can figure out how to eliminate all criminal behavior, I want my last resort to be me. I don't want to die cowering to an armed lunatic while waiting for a cop. Heroes always show up in time on TV and in the movies, but not so much in real life. Killers love gun free zones, and this latest one was once again in a place where there we no good guys armed, only a bad guy.
I am sick of the debates. The first national gun control law was passed June 6, 1934. There are over 3200 enacted gun laws on the books in the United States now. Gun laws don't work. Gun laws, like restraining orders, rely on people following the rules. Murderers don't follow the law.
most guns, I would say 85% never come out of the gun safe for years. so the guns in question are very few, less than 1%. so why not control the crazies that doing the crime instead of trying to take away those that have no dog in this fight
Who closed the mental hospitals? Was that Reagan? Okay, they were barbaric and never helped anyone, but there were supposed to be replacements that would help people. However, the government never got around to building any such facilities or hiring people to help the mentally ill.
So we have wayward people sleeping in the streets, teenagers with mental health problems--and no one helps them. Prevention by identifying and helping them would be a good step. And a place to keep them while they are getting the much needed help. Rehab centers or counseling centers where they can live and get round the clock help, not be out on the street doing crazy things.
In response to Mr. Robert Kahn’s June 27 letter on homelessness in the Conejo Valley, I would like to correct one glaring error that he made. Mr. Kahn states: “The Reagan administration closed all mental institutions.”
I’ve heard this myth stated by some politically motivated individuals before. However, this statement is patently false...
I completed a sentence for you (and bolded it) to make it more accurate.
It’s interesting to see the freedom-loving right suddenly in favor of having people “committed” indefinitely for mental health issues that can now be treated with medication. That’s unconstitutional.
Let’s take a look at your example of the typical troublesome mental health patient, would-be shooter:
“The police have had several encounters with him but he keeps getting put back out the streets after each arrest. He has no friends or family so there is no one making sure he takes his meds.” That’s what happens when you commit a misdemeanor - you get out after a short stay in jail. Hell, that’s the whole basis of the criminal justice system - we don’t incarcerate people for what they could do. Besides, jails and prisons have very little means to care for people with serious mental health issues, so they just get worse behind bars and cause problems for staff and other inmates. What do you expect them to do? Either way, have you ever looked at the statistics for the % of inmates with mental health issues? Commitment never really went away - it’s just called incarceration now. Also, are you suggesting that people who lack a support network should be held in custody longer as a result? It’s amazing the amount of rights you seem willing to violate in order to protect your favorite one.
It seems like you want to arrest and commit everyone with mental health issues who lack the means to get treatment or a support network rather than admit that all the other countries have mentally unwell people too. We all have them. What we don’t have is a system that makes it so easy for them to get their hands on a gun. Look at Stephen Paddock. His money and family and lack of obvious mental health issues didn’t prevent him from being the most deadly mass shooter in US history. His ability to buy dozens of semi-auto rifles and thousands of rounds of ammunition for them are why that massacre happened. You can say it as many times as you want, but reality doesn’t seem to agree that a gun is just like any other tool. I don’t see a lot of mass hammerings in the news and mass stabbings are rare and much less lethal when they do occur.
It’s also amusing to see the right so invested in costly care for mental health. Who’s going to pay for that care? Who’s going to judge which people are dangerous and which are not? How are you going to circumvent the Constitution to deprive people of their liberty based on what they might do? I know you guys loathe taxes, so who’s going to pay the bill for all this?
It should also be noted that the main reason why people aren’t “committed” for longer than a few weeks is because there now exists medication that allows people with serious psychiatric disorders to live normal lives. The thing is, once you get that script, the duty of care ends. No one can force someone to take medication, except in extreme circumstances where a judge has ordered it. Mass shooters historically commit the act long before they have any real entanglements with the legal system on account of their mental illness. There are also a sizable number who aren’t mentally ill. They’re just anti-social or angry, with lots of deadly weapons at their disposal. Dylan Roof and the guy in Buffalo last week are just two examples.
It’s amazing how much some of you are willing to trample on the Constitutional rights of the mentally ill as long as you don’t have to inconvenience gun owners. The one question no one here seems to be asking is how all these shooters managed to get guns so easily and if that really is the price you’re willing to pay for freedom.
Regardless, I doubt more than a couple people on this board have been touched directly by indiscriminate gun violence committed by a mass shooter. Makes it a lot easier to be a Second Amendment absolutist while still wanting to “commit” people with mental illness.
I was simply making the point that there is no longer a place for people who are seriously mentally ill. And all of a sudden, lefties are so committed to the Constitution? lol
I highly recommend you learn some things about mental health.
It’s well documented that stress affects neurotransmitter production and can worsen mental health conditions
You could begin by addressing the failings in the market to provide stable jobs that can provide for basic needs, food shelter transportation healthcare, too many people scrambling all the time to make ends meet. This is a root problem for mental health. How about latchkey kids ignored because mom and dad are at work all the time.
So now they are mentally ill because they aren't getting enough government support?
They also don't have problems with mass stabbings or mass vehicular homicide, both of which have tools that are easier to aquire than firearms.
Why is that?
Which country suffers from years of weekly mass stabbings and mass vehicular homicides?
None. People who carry out these acts almost always use guns. It’s part of the script now. There have been a few vehicular mass killings, mostly inspired by ISIS, and also that incel piece of garbage in my hometown. Otherwise, it doesn’t happen much. And mass stabbings…really? They’re pretty rare for obvious reasons. Not very fast or deadly, no guaranteed suicide after, easy to be subdued by bystanders.
Everybody and their pet hamster is a "legitimate" gun owner in Texas and a few other states.
A. Not true.
B. Fewer Texans than you think own guns, although the great majority believe in having the right to own guns.
C. Fewer Texans than you think legally carry guns.
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.
