Discussing guns in this topic for the sake of discussing guns is pretty played out at this point. He could have hacked the two of them to death with a machete on live TV and this sort of discussion wouldn't happen. He wanted them dead and was probably crazy enough that he would have done it whether or not he'd have located a firearm.
[QUOTE=Sonador;48556663]Discussing guns in this topic for the sake of discussing guns is pretty played out at this point. He could have hacked the two of them to death with a machete on live TV and this sort of discussion wouldn't happen. He wanted them dead and was probably crazy enough that he would have done it whether or not he'd have located a firearm.[/QUOTE]
Honestly him using an axe or whatever while recording it and it being on live TV would be more disgusting. And he would have done it if "gun control" stopped him.
[QUOTE=proboardslol;48552332]
I think we should ban guns that are superfluous because they're not necessary for self defense or hunting, like a .50 cal Desert Eagle or an AR-15. A 9mm and a shotgun should be enough for both of those purposes.
[/QUOTE]
The Desert Eagle was SPECIFICALLY created for hunting. It's great for deer or hogs, but horrible for any other use other than bragging rights. It just turns out that Hollywood has hard-ons for ludicrously impractical guns for combat just because it looks imposing or badass.
[QUOTE=Lone_Star94;48557937]The Desert Eagle was SPECIFICALLY created for hunting. It's great for deer or hogs, but horrible for any other use other than bragging rights. It just turns out that Hollywood has hard-ons for ludicrously impractical guns for combat just because it looks imposing or badass.[/QUOTE]
Yeah pistol hunting isn't common but it works. I've heard of people hunting with 457 mag too. Not the most practical thing though.. Never fired a Desert Eagle before but they look pretty badass.
[QUOTE=agentfazexx;48556394]
Mental health issues, not gun issues.
People called me stupid for saying he was a lunatic, but, ta-da, he was. Yet again. Another case of someone sick in the head. He would have killed another way if he didn't have a gun. All cases like this will end up with a different story of how they killed the person/people.[/QUOTE]
As a British person, I don't understand the approach of tackling every shooting like this as a gun issue and not a mental health issue.
We have a fair share of knife crime in England, especially in the ends I used to live in, but other than age restriction on buying knives which was already there, and a limit to the length of a blade you can be carrying, there's not really anything anyone's trying to do about it in a legal sense, because you could outright ban the sale of hunting knives but that wouldn't matter when someone's just going to grab a paring knife from their mum's kitchen.
A far better approach surely would be to tackle the reasons gun/knife crime occurs, which in most cases, is either gang activity in economically deprived areas, or mental health issues
[QUOTE=strayebyrd;48559690]As a British person, I don't understand the approach of tackling every shooting like this as a gun issue and not a mental health issue.
We have a fair share of knife crime in England, especially in the ends I used to live in, but other than age restriction on buying knives which was already there, and a limit to the length of a blade you can be carrying, there's not really anything anyone's trying to do about it in a legal sense, because you could outright ban the sale of hunting knives but that wouldn't matter when someone's just going to grab a paring knife from their mum's kitchen.
A far better approach surely would be to tackle the reasons gun/knife crime occurs, which in most cases, is either gang activity in economically deprived areas, or mental health issues[/QUOTE]
Well clearly he was mental given all the stuff that has been written about him. I mean for fuck's sake, he said Jehovah told him to kill those people. That sounds like paranoid schizophrenia to me.
I think that this is the type of guy who would have slipped through the cracks in any system. In hindsight there were red flags like being fired from multiple jobs because of his behavior and then claiming racism each time, along with his social media posts, but you can't put someone on a list or straight into therapy because of something like that.
It just turned out that he actually was unstable and aggressive. If he had a gun or not wouldn't matter, he was out for self perceived revenge and he made his mind up to kill.
Just putting that out there, it's kind of sad that the reporter at least was destined to die and not much could have helped it.
[QUOTE=JCDentonUNATCO;48559802]I think that this is the type of guy who would have slipped through the cracks in any system. In hindsight there were red flags like being fired from multiple jobs because of his behavior and then claiming racism each time, along with his social media posts, but you can't put someone on a list or straight into therapy because of something like that.
It just turned out that he actually was unstable and aggressive. If he had a gun or not wouldn't matter, he was out for self perceived revenge and he made his mind up to kill.
Just putting that out there, it's kind of sad that the reporter at least was destined to die and not much could have helped it.[/QUOTE]
The flags he threw up wouldn't have stopped him from buying a gun.
These rare instances where people slip thru the cracks will just happen. There really is no system the US can institute that will prevent this.
I do still think that a law needs to be passed where when the FFL process asks for mental health history, it MUST be provided.
Edited my post to be more clear, but you shouldn't assume I was making a statement like that either way.
[QUOTE=JCDentonUNATCO;48559815]Edited my post to be more clear, but you shouldn't assume I was making a statement like that either way.[/QUOTE]
I was just agreeing, changed mine a bit too.
People say things like this are a mental healthcare problem, but even if the U.S. adopted the best mental healthcare system in the world, how would it prevent cases like this from happening? If mental healthcare was free, would this man have self-diagnosed himself despite mentally ill people possibly being unaware that they are ill in the first place? Could he be forcibly taken in by the state to be placed in care, without due process?
Like it's easy to fall back on the 'but it's a mental health issue' scapegoat, but what exactly is the issue? [b]What exactly needs to change in mental healthcare[/b]? And what can actually be changed within the scope of law and the constitution? Mental illness isn't exclusive to the U.S., it's prevalent in all societies, surely it can't simply be a 'mental health issue' that's responsibly for the hugely disproportionate amount of these cases happening in the U.S.?
[QUOTE=Antdawg;48559841]People say things like this are a mental healthcare problem, but even if the U.S. adopted the best mental healthcare system in the world, how would it prevent cases like this from happening? If mental healthcare was free, would this man have self-diagnosed himself despite mentally ill people possibly being unaware that they are ill in the first place? Could he be forcibly taken in by the state to be placed in care, without due process?
Like it's easy to fall back on the 'but it's a mental health issue' scapegoat, but what exactly is the issue? [b]What exactly needs to change in mental healthcare[/b]? And what can actually be changed within the scope of law and the constitution? Mental illness isn't exclusive to the U.S., it's prevalent in all societies, surely it can't simply be a 'mental health issue' that's responsibly for the hugely disproportionate amount of these cases happening in the U.S.?[/QUOTE]
Maybe people like this need to be forcibly institutionalized.
[QUOTE=Antdawg;48559841]People say things like this are a mental healthcare problem, but even if the U.S. adopted the best mental healthcare system in the world, how would it prevent cases like this from happening? If mental healthcare was free, would this man have self-diagnosed himself despite mentally ill people possibly being unaware that they are ill in the first place? Could he be forcibly taken in by the state to be placed in care, without due process?
Like it's easy to fall back on the 'but it's a mental health issue' scapegoat, but what exactly is the issue? What exactly needs to change in mental healthcare? And what can actually be changed within the scope of law and the constitution? Mental illness isn't exclusive to the U.S., it's prevalent in all societies, surely it can't simply be a 'mental health issue' that's responsibly for the hugely disproportionate amount of these cases happening in the U.S.?[/QUOTE]
This is a special case where, it looks like mental healthcare wouldn't have stopped this guy. But neither would not having a gun. This is a passion crime, he must have really hated this reporter in particular and he was dead set to kill her.
Mental healthcare and education reforms would totally help a lot of cases such as school shootings, where it's obvious the students have a lot of problems but they don't have anyone to go to, or their parents can't afford to send them to a psychiatrist or something.
Mental healthcare and education improvements would stop a lot of crimes at the start. But people like this guy, who are just troubled enough to snap suddenly, but not enough to show up on anyones radar as an actual danger, would end up killing someone no matter where he lived or what weapon he had.
It would stop a lot of our issues, anyway.
[QUOTE=Antdawg;48559841]People say things like this are a mental healthcare problem, but even if the U.S. adopted the best mental healthcare system in the world, how would it prevent cases like this from happening? If mental healthcare was free, would this man have self-diagnosed himself despite mentally ill people possibly being unaware that they are ill in the first place? Could he be forcibly taken in by the state to be placed in care, without due process?
Like it's easy to fall back on the 'but it's a mental health issue' scapegoat, but what exactly is the issue? [b]What exactly needs to change in mental healthcare[/b]? And what can actually be changed within the scope of law and the constitution? Mental illness isn't exclusive to the U.S., it's prevalent in all societies, surely it can't simply be a 'mental health issue' that's responsibly for the hugely disproportionate amount of these cases happening in the U.S.?[/QUOTE]
There's more than a lack of good mental health care, there's also a stigma against getting yourself looked at. Whether that would have helped this guy, who can say for sure?
[QUOTE=agentfazexx;48559849]Maybe people like this need to be forcibly institutionalized.[/QUOTE]
I think the fifth amendment would disagree.
I still can't believe how many people defend gun rights after an incident like this take place. Unbelievable.
[QUOTE=Badballer;48559879]I still can't believe how many people defend gun rights after an incident like this take place. Unbelievable.[/QUOTE]
I can't believe how many people blame the inanimate object the guy chose to kill with rather than the guy who chose to kill.
[QUOTE=Antdawg;48559876]I think the fifth amendment would disagree.[/QUOTE]
Well, clearly he was a danger to society.
[editline]28th August 2015[/editline]
[QUOTE=Badballer;48559879]I still can't believe how many people defend gun rights after an incident like this take place. Unbelievable.[/QUOTE]
I can't believe how you blame inanimate objects for the disgusting things that mentally sick people do.
He would have done this gun or no gun.
[QUOTE=Badballer;48559879]I still can't believe how many people defend gun rights after an incident like this take place. Unbelievable.[/QUOTE]
They're brainwashed a bit by the NRA, the biggest special interest group in America, at least the ones who refuse to change any laws ever for any reason. Many of them also listen to vitriol from crazy conservative radio hosts like Mark Levin. Most of us are reasonable and are looking to compromise.
[QUOTE=agentfazexx;48559892]Well, clearly he was a danger to society.[/QUOTE]
Fifth amendment prevents the deprivation of life or liberty without due process. You can't just go around forcibly institutionalising mentally ill people based on the perception that they're mentally ill.
[QUOTE=Antdawg;48559923]Fifth amendment prevents the deprivation of life or liberty without due process. You can't just go around forcibly institutionalising mentally ill people.[/QUOTE]
So prove he's a threat and then do something.
[QUOTE=agentfazexx;48559927]So prove he's a threat and then do something.[/QUOTE]
Well he did prove he was a threat and by the time he did he shot and killed two people. The answer to these problems isn't simply 'reform mental healthcare', that's insufficient.
[QUOTE=agentfazexx;48559892]Well, clearly he was a danger to society.
[/QUOTE]
I don't think it was that clear that he was, until of course after the fact when they dug through all of his personal belongings and methodically searched through his past history to determine that, to write him off that he was an obvious foaming at the mouth lunatic to stop from shooting people is just disingenuous. Hindsight is 20/20
Your suggestion of just throwing every mental health person the government suspects into institutions is also a bit ridiculous as Antdawg had the sense to point out.
edit:
The point was that until he did this horrible action, there wasn't immediate reason to believe he would do so, that's the problem with the mentally ill, when they already commit the action it's too late. Our mental health network is in shambles, we have no money spent on it, it is horribly underfunded, even more so than physical healthcare, which we barely have a handle on as it is. The thing we need is to start taking healthcare more seriously in our country and to start actually funding programs to help people instead of constantly profiting from them. This is where democracy breaks down when we can't even keep the welfare of the poor and mentally ill in check because all we care about are our profits.
[QUOTE=WarriorWounds;48559954]I don't think it was that clear that he was, until of course after the fact when they dug through all of his personal belongings and methodically searched through his past history to determine that, to write him off that he was a foaming at the mouth lunatic is just disingenuous.
Your suggestion of just throwing every mental health person the government suspects into institutions is also a bit ridiculous as Antdawg had the sense to point out.
edit:
The point was that until he did this horrible action, there wasn't immediate reason to believe he would do so, that's the problem with the mentally ill, when they already commit the action it's too late.[/QUOTE]
He threw cat shit at his neighbors and had road rage incidents and was generally angry at [B]everyone.[/B] I could have seen that power keg from a mile away.
[QUOTE=agentfazexx;48559968]He threw cat shit at his neighbors and had road rage incidents and was generally angry at [B]everyone.[/B] I could have seen that power keg from a mile away.[/QUOTE]
Ok, lets make agentfazexx the new prosecutor in charge of determining who gets to go to mental jail and who doesn't, good luck holding that position man, save the world with your psychologically uneducated opinions on what is and isn't sane, you're gonna half to be watchful though, you're going to have to violate the personal privacy freedoms of everyone you keep tabs on, which is potentially every single American, to make sure they are not insane, maybe the NSA can help you out.
[QUOTE=Grenadiac;48559889]I can't believe how many people blame the inanimate object the guy chose to kill with rather than the guy who chose to kill.[/QUOTE]
Obviously there is a range of factors, having easy access to something as deadly as a hand gun is an important one you shouldn't be ignoring.
[QUOTE=Badballer;48560016]Obviously there is a range of factors, having easy access to something as deadly as a hand gun is an important one you shouldn't be ignoring.[/QUOTE]
He would have killed them, gun or no gun.
[QUOTE=agentfazexx;48560029]He would have killed them, gun or no gun.[/QUOTE]
A gun makes it a fuck of a lot easier.
[QUOTE=Kylel999;48560070]A gun makes it a fuck of a lot easier.[/QUOTE]
So? He would have done it regardless.
[QUOTE=agentfazexx;48560029]He would have killed them, gun or no gun.[/QUOTE]
But the reporters would have been fine if they carried guns too, right?
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.