****s won't sell them.

Exactly. Everyone screams about mental health checks but not a single person have identified what would be severe enough to disqualify and whats not. Look at all the meds pushed doctors anymore, causes depression, mood swings, suicidal thoughts, on and on. So if a person is given those meds bam on the ban list for life? Thats probably over half the population. What about mothers with post child birth depression? What about someonw who gets injured at work or anything else and receives counseling as part of recovery process. Hell anyone that goes to a psychiatrist. Have surgery at hospital and they put you in psyc observstion because of the drugs given during surgery? Sure all those examples may be far fetched, but have heard examples of most resulting in gun ownership getting revoked in IL. And afterwards it turns into a costly situation for that person to get it reversed. The same with just making a list of X drugs gets you on list. Well if your taking that drug for six months and get told no longer need them, what's the process of getting off the list. Or is it even possible? Or does that actually mean the person is cured of that illness and is no longer a threat? Well one doctor said so but maybe another wouldn't. So how does that situation get handled?

You can make mental health care availability as easy as you want but until those questions get answered ppl won't get treatment because of it. ACA didn't suddenly make everyone with a illness go get treated, becsuse most are still paying ridiculous premiums because of it or a ridiculous deductible. Even so its not goin to stop most the ability to get thier hands on a gun. Look at Newtown, Parkland, Vegas, nighclub in Orlando just out of the details I can remember having red flags on the person. How many times does the "system" in place haveta fail because its not enforced before ppl realize the problem is not the "system" but want more of it. How often does it already stop the right ppl from buying firearms, probsbly can't find those numbers. You really think the gov isn't gonna screw it up more than they already do? Example mentioned by someone the VA.

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

 

Canada national healthcare has more to do with their lack of mass shootings and gun violence than any of their laws. Perhaps it was unintentional, but the way this statement is worded it implies that the existence of a national health care program is the direct cause for there being less gun violence in Canada than the US. In order to establish a direct casual relationship that must be some form of verifiable data that exists supporting the statement. Otherwise, it is purely speculation. I asked for the data that delivers this conclusion because as someone who has lived in both countries, I am interested in how Canadian polices may model methods for reducing gun violence in the US.

There is no data for this. I freely admit that this point is purely speculation based upon observations after 15 years living and being apart of Canadian culture and 19 years living in and being apart of American culture. While both nations are great places to live, the both have their good and bad points. In the observation I made about cultural differences and respect, Canada does this better based upon my real life experience.

QUOTE=I am talking about mass shootings here, not just gun violence. Again can a mentally ill person get help in Canada easier than USA? Yes or No?[/QUOTE]

In both Canada and the USA, any willing person can walk into a doctor's office, clinic, or hospital and seek medical attention; nothing prevents the person from going unless he or she chooses not to go. Accessibility to quality health is a different conversation from whether it is better to pay for healthcare via a national public health system versus private insurance. Within the last couple of years Canada has been forced to close several rural clinics and hospitals in its public health care system due to a lack of funding. It could be potentially argued that it is harder to access quality health care in Canada due to the closures.

 

Canada national healthcare has more to do with their lack of mass shootings and gun violence than any of their laws.

I was strictly talking about Canada to counter the point it's their restrictive gun laws that help reduce mass shootings.

Get rid of your insurance and then go try and get care here in USA, let me know how that works out. My most conservative friends brother got sick and needed care, no insurance ask him how that worked out? He's now one of the biggest advocates for national healthcare.

 

I can agree with that point. However, that is not what your original statement says.

 

Good points. A medication like wellbutrin is used as an antidepressant and to help people quit smoking. There is a big difference between your garden variety anxiety and depression and serious mental illness. These issues make screening for mental health issues challenging. Mental health issues are likely under treated for a number of reasons. This would no doubt give people another reason not to seek treatment.

 

....sooooo, what you're saying is:




ahhhh, it never gets old.

 

the current "de facto registry" is only for guns purchased through an FFL holder. It does not apply to private gun transfers.
So if you buy a new gun from ****S, the ATF knows that. Forever. If you later sell it to your buddy at work, they don't. Then say 5 years later he gets hard up and sells it to his BiL. 3 years later his BiL gets it stolen from his glove box. Then it is later recovered at a murder scene....you can bet the law is going to be knocking on your door asking where you were that day. Not that you have anything to worry about; I'm just telling you how it works currently.

that's not exactly what I was saying- first of all (as long as we're proposing laws) I would prefer that anyone convicted of any violent misdemeanor gets a 3-5 year ban on the NICS list. You know as well as I do that probably 80%+ of misdemeanor violent offenses started out as felony charges that get plead down.

Drunk driving should have nothing to do with gun laws unless they're felonious.

I'm not talking about minor side effects- I mean people with major mental/emotional issues. And yes, that might include vets w/ PTSD depending on the severity. (Remember the Chris Kyle killer?) People who without meds should be committed to a facility; but with meds are generally OK - sorry, but they should not be able to buy a gun. Wayyyy too many people like that neglect to take their meds and go off their rocker; either intentionally or due to forgetfulness. And I know you have probably seen that personally.

It would not be a fail safe but just like people who habitually get caught drunk driving lose their licenses for long periods of time (or forever) so should people on that end of the mental/emotional disturbance spectrum. Who decides that level? I don't know. I'm not a doctor.

 

kid was from a town I used to live in and his dad was a cop....

 

Kid went to the hospital last night, I am assuming the parents showed up at some point and the dad had his sidearm? Seems odd this kid would be packing in a dorm.

 

There are 2 components to gun violence:

guns and violent people. If you banned the sale of guns today, there would still be 300 millions guns privately owned in America. So I don't think you can remove that part of the equation (at least not yet)

As for violent people, there needs to be much stricter punishment for committing a crime with or while in possession of a gun. 50 years ago drinking and driving was commonplace. Today I'm terrified of having a glass of wine at dinner bc of the potential punishment of blowing dirty.

But it's not actually about stopping violence. It's about politicians getting votes and ****s keeping revenue. God bless the stores (chickfila) who actually stand by their morals.


Sent from my iPhone using Bowhunting.com Forums

 

Amen, sister.
Here in Chicago repeat offender thugs regularly get no or low bond, and hit the streets looking for their next victim before their last is laid to rest. I read in the Tribune last year that something like 80-90% of the homicides in Chicago are committed by repeat shooters (per CPD.)

 

That’s exactly what I posted before, lol. Same line you quoted

 

Wait...so a bakery cannot deny services to a gay couple based on religious grounds but ****s can refuse to sell a legal firearm to someone of legal age? Where's the lawsuit for age discrimination?

 

I worked at ****'s for four years while in college. Ammo out sold every other department in the store by a very large amount. Then the hunting/fishing section was second.

 

NRA will have one soon

 

Sometimes the Justice system makes mistakes. Bad cops, bad prosecutors, bad judges. I don't think a misdemeanor assault and battery conviction should disqualify someone in owning a gun.

Does the federal government have the right to violate current HIPAA laws in regards to your health maladies and or medication? I think not. In fact if it did, I would be really worried about this country. The means to the end is every bit important as the end itself.

By the way Gary Im not a gun toting in your face fun owner. I'd be happy to own one handgun for personal protection and be done with it. However, this gun thing is a bit bigger than just guns themselves....the means.....

 

The baker recently won that case, if I read correctly.

 

I read that too but it's been years since it started and it'll probably be appealed again and again. The point ws it took all of about two seconds for the lawsuit to start originally.

 

I was at a bar one night years ago. One guy who was known for starting trouble was being super obnoxious all night long. As everyone was leaving when the bar closed I was waiting for my ride and this guy comes out looking for trouble. Long story short a bunch of people were telling him to calm down and the cops were going to be called if he didn’t leave. He turned to me who was standing the closest to him and threatened me saying he’d kill me while coming at me. I took that as a threat and defended myself. When he fell he hit his head and suffered serious injury. I left the scene not knowing the severity of his injuries at the time. When I heard the news and that a detective wanted to talk to me I contacted my atty who advised me to not talk to the police. As a result the detective became infuriated and charged me with 2 felonies. When it all came out in the wash I ended up with misdemeanor battery and no probation. Only non traffic conviction I’ve ever had. So by this logic I shouldn’t be able to own a firearm. For merely defending myself. I’ll add that my attorney said because of the severity of the mans injuries is why a misdemeanor even stuck. Should I be able to own a firearm?


Sent from my iPhone using Bowhunting.com Forums

 

We can have an appeal process correct? Mistakes will be made, but they also can be correct. As for HIPAA one does not have to release medical records at all, sorry if you are on some types of mood altering drugs you don't get a until you are cleared.

I am worried about a country that lets kids get slaughtered in schools and a lot of people just go, "Evil is evil".

Without banning one gun we CAN make a difference, it will just take some guts.