Screening is necessary to prevent foreign terrorism, but doesn't hinder citizens from walking in churches, theaters, schools, businesess or clubs and murdering people.

I just don't see screening as relevant to this issue at this time.

 

 

 

Depends...when Sudafed was more regulated meth creation and use lowered significantly in Kentucky.

 

 

And heroin use increased. Traded one drug for another. We didn't lower drug use.

Shooters Dad aired video blogs on the net espousing God's wrath on homosexuals...apple didn't fall too far from the tree!

 

Former marine bouncer reportedly saved 30+ patrons by unlocking a latched door and leading them to safety after being log jammed in a hallway!

Doctors are reporting that of the 53 injured 34 are still hospitalized and are expected to survive!

Last week according to reports.

 

Bigger concern is that he was able to do this after having been interviewed by the FBI twice...and yet, no concern when he purchased.

 

I'm not a fan of the government getting involved in my gun purchasing, but I have to believe this was a good trial case. If the FBI interviews you once, ok, no problem, but twice and you still can buy over the counter....not sure we got it right on this one. In particular in light of the circumstances surrounding this guy and his family.

 

Absolutely. It baffles me that this guy was able to purchase a gun after being strong enough of a threat that the FBI was watching him and talked to him. Twice?! How do you stop watching a guy like this let alone allow him to buy a gun.

How is that blaming the victim?

 

If someone is in an abusive relationship, don't you think they may need to re-evaluate things a little?

 

That doesn't mean they are at fault when/if they are victims of continued abuse. Far from it.

 

Do you really think that women who are in an abusive relationship don't realize that they need to re-evaluate some things? If they didn't, that first blow to the cheek might. A woman who is constantly abused both physically and mentally is not capable to think for herself. At least she better not. 2 weeks is a long time when having that gun today means life and death. That's reality for some women.

You can never prevent 100% of everything. However, you can take measures with proper screening. Also, you are getting away from my point with "Using this logic". The logic i'm using is we need is being careful with who we let in. Nothing more and nothing less. I'm not saying search their kids. If someone wants to immigrate to the United States, where they come from matters. The answer hellcats to questioning those that immigrate here can't also be with what about us? Like I said we have problems to deal with here so why bring more in?

 

As to James Holmes, upgrading the health care and educating the populace on hand guns would help. Holmes avoided certain places because he knew they were packing. Dylan Roof is a hateful person. Teaching your family about love instead of hate is all I can come up with.

 

This is nothing personnel Hellcats, I enjoy our back and forth debate but the whole "but we do this too" argument gets old very quick. I don't make excuses for those that commit crimes that are christian or whatever background, I will not for those that wish to come here and hate our way of life. If lowering the amount of people that come from the middle east into the United States is for the better, than so be it. We got enough problems on our own.

 

It's all good.

We are both looking for the same thing: the safety of our nation. I believe it starts with who we allow to purchase weapons no matter their beliefs or race.

 

In all honesty this guy and Roof seem to be very similar in their motives: hate.

It's all good.

We are both looking for the same thing: the safety of our nation. I believe it starts with who we allow to purchase weapons no matter their beliefs or race.

 

In all honesty this guy and Roof seem to be very similar in their motives: hate.

 

This was an act of terror by a radical Islamist. Period. Oh, he definitely hates. Hates America.

Screening is necessary to prevent foreign terrorism, but doesn't hinder citizens from walking in churches, theaters, schools, businesess or clubs and murdering people.

I just don't see screening as relevant to this issue at this time.

 

 

 

Depends...when Sudafed was more regulated meth creation and use lowered significantly in Kentucky.

 

And Heroin took off. As far as I can tell the drug problems is as bad as ever and I have to jump through hoops to get Claritin D.

Anyone hearing a report that the shooter had help securing doors inside?

And Heroin took off. As far as I can tell the drug problems is as bad as ever and I have to jump through hoops to get Claritin D.

 

So since it's bad we should make it legal. Maybe sell it at Wal-Mart.

Figured this one was coming. No one is saying anything about banning. Didn't Justice Scalia once say that the 2nd Amendment comes with checks?

 

I'll ask you specifically. Should a mentally ill person deemed to be dangerous be allowed to purchase a gun?

 

Should a person whose actions have put them on a terrorist watch list be allowed to buy a gun?

 

How has it been determined that the person is mentally ill and dangerous? Has there been a previous run-in with the law and in that investigation/hospitalization it was deemed this person was a danger to himself or another? If so, by all means, don't sell this person a gun. If said person was determined to be a sociopath or a paranoid who is truly dangerous then I don't think this person's right to bear arms should be protected.

 

But I do not support forcing doctors to reveal medical info to the government. If you do that no one will ever voluntarily get treatment again. So few "mentally ill" people commit these kinds of crimes that it doesn't warrant a witch hunt. This is similar to banning all Muslims from buying guns. Should Muslims go through a different, more stringent process to purchase a gun than other American citizens because some Muslims have declared war on America and vow to destroy our way of life and encourage terrorist acts inside America and have people in America doing their dirty work? No, that is discriminatory. Should mentally ill people be subject to a sanctioned violation of their HIPPA rights for the sake of a background check? No, that is discrimination and has an even worse effect on their willingness to get treatment in the future.

 

How do you gather the information about a mentally ill person? In the quote you provided regarding Scalia, he said mentally ill people do not have an absolute right to bear arms. Agreed. Under what circumstance does the law NOW take away a person's right to bear arms due to mental illness? THere must be a mechanism that triggers this. What is it? Why change it if there is already one in place? You will open the door to a witch hunt and you will undermine the efforts of mental health workers who seek to help the mentally ill.

 

OG,

Which mass shooter would have been stopped by tougher immigration? So far we are dealing with our own who are being influenced by outside hate groups or mental instability.

 

Any mass shooter whose parents immigrated to America, opposed America's values and taught their own values to their children and then that child gets older and radicalizes. Though an American citizen, this adult child kills his fellow Americans based on the culture and worldview that his parents brought to the US when they immigrated. It prevents any immigrant who might come here in the future with mischief in mind. We know those people are here now. Dept. of Homeland Security, FBI, etc are always on the lookout for these types. They exist here now. San Bernadino... Why add to the number? If we can prevent one American from being killed in this way, isn't it worth the violation of the rights of people to immigrate?

 

Remember, I oppose this sort of thing. I am merely pointing out that the argument being made concerning gun control that would allow the government to violate its citizen's 2nd Amendment rights for the sake of saving just one person can be similar to the argument Trump is using to keep ALL Muslims from immigrating. If it saves one life...

 

I disagree with both because it is a violation of human rights. The 2nd amendment doesn't need fixing. Human hearts and souls do.

So since it's bad we should make it legal. Maybe sell it at Wal-Mart.

 

Guns aren't bad. The terrorist that used it was bad.

 

The gun is just a tool. Like any other tool. It is an inanimate object that does nothing by itself. Until those wanting to pass more gun control can understand that, it is useless to have the discussion.

 

In this instance, until those wanting pass more gun control can understand this was an act of radical Islamic terrorism, there is really no point in having a discussion.

This was an act of terror by a radical Islamist. Period. Oh, he definitely hates. Hates America.

 

FBI said he wasn't tied to terror plot. He sounds more homophobic to me.

FBI said he wasn't tied to terror plot. He sounds more homophobic to me.

 

Guess his own words aren't enough proof.

 

http://www.palmbeachpost.com/news/news/report-port-st-lucie-man-identified-as-orlando-nig/nrfDh/

 

Any mass shooter whose parents immigrated to America, opposed America's values and taught their own values to their children and then that child gets older and radicalizes. Though an American citizen, this adult child kills his fellow Americans based on the culture and worldview that his parents brought to the US when they immigrated. It prevents any immigrant who might come here in the future with mischief in mind. We know those people are here now. Dept. of Homeland Security, FBI, etc are always on the lookout for these types. They exist here now. San Bernadino... Why add to the number? If we can prevent one American from being killed in this way, isn't it worth the violation of the rights of people to immigrate?

 

Remember, I oppose this sort of thing. I am merely pointing out that the argument being made concerning gun control that would allow the government to violate its citizen's 2nd Amendment rights for the sake of saving just one person can be similar to the argument Trump is using to keep ALL Muslims from immigrating. If it saves one life...

 

I disagree with both because it is a violation of human rights. The 2nd amendment doesn't need fixing. Human hearts and souls do.

 

So will this immigration screening stop the the boy from Indiana who just got caught before shooting up the parade in Los Angeles?