I'd make background checks include mental health evaluations for starters. Everyone that interacted with this kid knew this was coming. No way he would've been cleared to purchase a weapon if that were part of the process.

I agree that we have to figure out a way to include mental health red flags but with this kids specifically, and I'm asking because I don't know, was there any? Or I guess a better way of asking what exactly was there that you could make sure was included in a back ground check?

Well if we only did things based on what EVERYONE agreed on, we would literally get nothing done.

 

Compromise in action. Nobody is 100 percent satisfied.

I agree that we have to figure out a way to include mental health red flags but with this kids specifically, and I'm asking because I don't know, was there any? Or I guess a better way of asking what exactly was there that you could make sure was included in a back ground check?

 

Police reports filed against him? I mean the sheriff's office was called multiple times about this kid.

I don't know. If so, why change background checks? They didn't fail, the Sheriff and FBI did.

 

Why are you opposed to them changing??

Police reports filed against him? I mean the sheriff's office was called multiple times about this kid.

 

You think a conviction should be involved? Anyone can report anybody for anything...it doesnt mean much without charges and a conviction, right?

Why are you opposed to them changing??

 

Because changing something just for the sake of changing it is stupid.

 

***i should say I'm not opposed to changing something if someone presented something i thought was smart..

What does this even mean? Are you taking a dig at Dick's Sporting Goods for selling sporting goods? :lol2:

 

It’s more of a dig at their stock falling from $60 to $30 since 2016 since after all we were talking about how it will impact their business. I know you don’t follow the market but that doesn’t appeal to investors and when they drive off a few more customers, that isn’t good. Also, if they were any good at selling sporting supplies their stock wouldn’t be at $30. But that doesn’t account for HC purchasing a football yesterday.

Edited March 1, 20188 yr by John Anthony

You think a conviction should be involved? Anyone can report anybody for anything...it doesnt mean much without charges and a conviction, right?

 

Nope. I don't think a conviction should be necessary. If anything, including that stuff on a background check will allow them to more strongly vet the person who's attempting to buy a gun.

Because changing something just for the sake of changing it is stupid.

 

***i should say I'm not opposed to changing something if someone presented something i thought was smart..

 

So you don't think including something about an individual's mental health would be smart? Please explain.

Nope. I don't think a conviction should be necessary. If anything, including that stuff on a background check will allow them to more strongly vet the person who's attempting to buy a gun.

I'm torn a bit on this one. Putting some type of hold or flag on someone that has been accused of something makes sense on the surface but it does fly in the face of "innocent until proven guilty".

I'm torn a bit on this one. Putting some type of hold or flag on someone that has been accused of something makes sense on the surface but it does fly in the face of "innocent until proven guilty".

 

I get that, but the way I see it is the background check would see there's been a police report filed. That would automatically put a hold on the application and immediately request a copy of the report be sent from the police for review.

I'm torn a bit on this one. Putting some type of hold or flag on someone that has been accused of something makes sense on the surface but it does fly in the face of "innocent until proven guilty".

 

I hear you.. But if a person has several domestic violence issues, or terroristic threatening issues, that should matter regardless of conviction, IMO.

Nope. I don't think a conviction should be necessary. If anything, including that stuff on a background check will allow them to more strongly vet the person who's attempting to buy a gun.

 

Well, that is insane.

So you don't think including something about an individual's mental health would be smart? Please explain.

 

I haven't seen anything reasonable yet. Id be open to something reasonable.

Well, that is insane.

 

So someone calls the police and says I'm afraid Joe Schmo is going to try to shoot up a school. There's not going to be a conviction there.

 

You don't think that's something that may be pertinent information to have when doing a background check on Joe Schmo when he tries to buy a gun?