June 14, 201610 yr Worst Mass Shooting in US History...according to report I just saw. Not to take away from the tragedy, but apparently people are saying that this is incorrect and not the WORST. 1890, Wounded Knee, over 150 shot, mostly women and children.
June 14, 201610 yr So since it's bad we should make it legal. Maybe sell it at Wal-Mart. Claritin D is legal. You cited the regs on pseudoephedrine as an example of a government intervention that worked. I don't think it has done anything other then make it more difficult and expensive for legal users of a legal product to obtain that product. The weak individuals that succumb to drug addiction have found another path.
June 14, 201610 yr Not to take away from the tragedy, but apparently people are saying that this is incorrect and not the WORST. 1890, Wounded Knee, over 150 shot, mostly women and children. Ummm, I'm pretty sure that was the 7th Cav....so let us remember that in the future if the US Government asks us native people's to disarm....we should strongly consider the reasons. Those people that are suggesting that are m-o-r-o-n-s....we are not even in the same realm
June 14, 201610 yr 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.
June 14, 201610 yr Not to take away from the tragedy, but apparently people are saying that this is incorrect and not the WORST. 1890, Wounded Knee, over 150 shot, mostly women and children. Since we're clarifying details, how about we just say that this was the worst mass shooting by 1 shooter?
June 14, 201610 yr Claritin D is legal. You cited the regs on pseudoephedrine as an example of a government intervention that worked. I don't think it has done anything other then make it more difficult and expensive for legal users of a legal product to obtain that product. The weak individuals that succumb to drug addiction have found another path. I was talking meth. The amount of meth that be concocted at one time has definitely been affected. LE's method of reporting meth seizures reports every lab so if it's Walter White size or a pop bottle it counts as one. Logic that criminals will find another way doesn't support making it easier for them. [ATTACH=CONFIG]56441[/ATTACH] Never built a bomb but I would imagine it's more difficult than the method used by recent mass shooters. And again the argument these idiots will do something else doesn't support doing nothing. Some people will drink and drive despite laws and consequence so let's just get rid of those laws.
June 14, 201610 yr 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. Never built a bomb but I would imagine it's more difficult than the method used by recent mass shooters. And again the argument these idiots will do something else doesn't support doing nothing. Some people will drink and drive despite laws and consequence so let's just get rid of those laws. Not really, actually much easier because all the ingredients needed have no wait time....I don't disagree we should do something.... It's the "something" that comes into question.... Totally a fan of a waiting period for purchasing a pressure cooker...
June 14, 201610 yr 1. What percentage of mentally ill people end up killing someone and (I'm not referring to suicide)? 2. What percentage of mentally ill people have committed an act of mass shooting? I don't know the actual answers, but the answer to #1 would be a very small percentage and the answer to #2 would be much, much smaller than #1. We are proposing stigmatizing a whole class of people (the mentally ill) and taking away their HIPPA rights and their constitutional rights, treating them as second class citizens, because a very tiny percentage of them have committed a mass shooting. This is discrimination of an entire class of people based on fear and not on fact. This reaction may be explained as a psychological reaction to trauma and crisis. Whenever someone experiences a traumatic event or goes through a crisis, one of the things they do is look back and think if this had only been in place that would not have happened. In this case, we are saying, if only the mentally ill were screened better this Orlando mass shooting would not have happened. This is merely a predictable psychological reaction based on fear and emotion. The truth is that we cannot eliminate the risks inherent in living and in living in a free society. Taking away people's freedoms in order to make us "feel" like we are doing something to eliminate the risks is a fools errand. It makes us feel better but in the end it will make us less free and less safe. Especially, when we blame a class of people who largely do not commit such acts.
June 14, 201610 yr Author 1. What percentage of mentally ill people end up killing someone and (I'm not referring to suicide)? 2. What percentage of mentally ill people have committed an act of mass shooting? I don't know the actual answers, but the answer to #1 would be a very small percentage and the answer to #2 would be much, much smaller than #1. We are proposing stigmatizing a whole class of people (the mentally ill) and taking away their HIPPA rights and their constitutional rights, treating them as second class citizens, because a very tiny percentage of them have committed a mass shooting. This is discrimination of an entire class of people based on fear and not on fact. This reaction may be explained as a psychological reaction to trauma and crisis. Whenever someone experiences a traumatic event or goes through a crisis, one of the things they do is look back and think if this had only been in place that would not have happened. In this case, we are saying, if only the mentally ill were screened better this Orlando mass shooting would not have happened. This is merely a predictable psychological reaction based on fear and emotion. The truth is that we cannot eliminate the risks inherent in living and in living in a free society. Taking away people's freedoms in order to make us "feel" like we are doing something to eliminate the risks is a fools errand. It makes us feel better but in the end it will make us less free and less safe. Especially, when we blame a class of people who largely do not commit such acts. But we do not preach that universally. We talk that when it's something that benefits us or our beliefs.
June 14, 201610 yr Author The wife of the shooter knew he was planning this and tried to talk him out of it.
June 14, 201610 yr @oldgrappler What % of people who commit mass murders are mentally ill? Don't know the answer but I'm guessing it is very high.
June 14, 201610 yr The wife of the shooter knew he was planning this and tried to talk him out of it. She needs to be held accountable.
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.