Trump ended the rule blocking mentally ill people from getting guns.

Discussion in 'Gun Control' started by JakeStarkey, Aug 6, 2019.

  1. Natty Bumpo

    Natty Bumpo Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 28, 2012
    Messages:
    41,206
    Likes Received:
    14,700
    Trophy Points:
    113
    The US Supreme Court has affirmed the obvious, that rights recognized under the Second Amendment - as regarding those under any other Amendment - are not absolute, and that all are subject to regulation. No Amendment confers unrestrained permissiveness.
    None, if one takes the position that, e.g., a troubled 14-year-old should have ready access to a gun in his home if he happens to have a bad day.
    That may be your claim.

    The extraordinarily high level of firearm fatalities in the US among all advanced nations comports with the extraordinarily high level of firearms in the US among all advanced nations.
    Either that is a coincidence, or there is a pertinent relationship in the parallel data.
    Constitutional compliance is required in the democratic will being implemented - as is the case with firearm regulation. Pretending that all sensible restrictions of firearms that are in force or being considered are unconstitutional is a rejection of reality.
     
  2. Xenamnes

    Xenamnes Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2015
    Messages:
    23,895
    Likes Received:
    7,537
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Pray tell, where in the Heller ruling did the united state supreme court affirm that government had the authority to declare certain legal, privately owned firearms illegal in an ex post facto manner, and leaving their legal owners with no legal recourse to being deprived of their private property?

    As opposed to any other, readily available, readily utilized methods of committing suicide, which have proven to be just as effective when it comes to one ending their own existence?

    Because no actual claim, either one way or the other, is being made on the part of yourself. All that is being presented is directionless blather and irrelevancies.

    Such has always been the case. The united states has always had higher levels of firearm-related violence than all other nations, even at points in their history when firearms were not as restricted as they are presently. Such is a constant of the real world, and it is something that simply cannot be changed. No matter what level of firearm-related restrictions the united states might attempt, it will always have higher levels than all other nations it is compared to.

    And yet it was yourself who stated that nothing is irrevocable, suggesting everything is up for grabs at some point. If the united states constitution does not protect the legal owners of private property from having that property forcefully taken away from them after the fact, then it does not protect the legal status of the individuals. If rifles such as the AR-15 can be confiscated because they are declared illegal, then the legal protections afforded to blacks and homosexuals can be rescinded in the same manner, as can the protections on illegal aliens.
     
  3. Natty Bumpo

    Natty Bumpo Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 28, 2012
    Messages:
    41,206
    Likes Received:
    14,700
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I said nothing of the Heller ruling in that regard. I cited Scalia's declaration that "longstanding laws that prohibit possession of firearms by felons and the mentally ill; that forbid guns in sensitive places such as schools and government buildings; that impose conditions and qualifications on the commercial sale of arms; and that restrict the right to carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose, are still valid and enforceable..."
    I referenced studies that confirm that ready availability of firearms increases the likelihood of suicidal attempts and their success. If you believe that other methods are as effective - e.g., beating oneself to death with a frozen squirrel - you have not offered and such studies.
    You can opine that Americans are inherently more inclined to shoot one another than are other nationalities, but please document your opinion with credible sources.
    I disagree with your deduction that, if sensible regulation is legislated, that means that "everything is up for grabs at some point."

    Further, I insist that all sensible firearm regulation, as demanded by the democratic will, be scrupulously in compliance with the US Constitution, and in strict conformity with the legal restrictions that Scalia enumerated.
     
    Last edited: Sep 1, 2019
  4. Xenamnes

    Xenamnes Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2015
    Messages:
    23,895
    Likes Received:
    7,537
    Trophy Points:
    113
    None of which pertains to the legal ownership and use of firearms, however.

    What was referenced on the part of yourself is confirmation bias, no different than studies claiming private swimming pools increase the chance of death by drowning. It is stating a concept of thought, but it does not prove the ownership of firearms can or otherwise does cause an individual to commit suicide if they are not already predisposed to suicide thoughts and/or tendencies on their own.

    The nation of Japan is all the citation that is needed. They possess a suicide rate greatly in excess of the united states, but next to no legal firearms ownership.

    The credible sources are the citations on the part of yourself. They demonstrate conclusively, beyond reasonable doubt, that the united states has always had higher levels of firearm-related deaths than any other nation that is held up for the sake of comparison.

    And yet the discussion is relating to the confiscation of legally owned, privately owned firearms, thus depriving their owners of their legal property, without legal recourse, and all in an ex post facto manner. Explain, under exactly what circumstances, would such a course of action actually qualify as being regarded as a sensible firearm-related regulation?
     
  5. Natty Bumpo

    Natty Bumpo Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 28, 2012
    Messages:
    41,206
    Likes Received:
    14,700
    Trophy Points:
    113
    As Scalia affirmed, "longstanding laws that prohibit possession of firearms by felons and the mentally ill; that forbid guns in sensitive places such as schools and government buildings; that impose conditions and qualifications on the commercial sale of arms; and that restrict the right to carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose, are still valid and enforceable..."

    S
    o be it.

    Such laws are "valid and enforceable."

    The studies that you are unable to refute confirm that the easy availability of firearms results in so many suicide attempts using firearms and a higher rate of successful suicide than when other methods are used.

    Were Japan to have permissive firearm laws as does the US, it is reasonable to expect that rate of firearm attempts and rate of successful suicide to be higher than they are.

    You still have offered no evidence that American have always been more disposed to inflict firearm fatalities than other nationalities as you claim, rather than the much higher level of firearm fatalities in the US resulting from the much higher availability of firearms in the US.

    Please link to your sources.

    I have never advocated confiscation of legally-owned firearms. I have affirmed the right of the People to protect their interests by sensible regulation and I have affirmed the constitutionality of their doing so.
     
  6. Toggle Almendro

    Toggle Almendro Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 17, 2016
    Messages:
    2,928
    Likes Received:
    721
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    It is true that with guns being more available, our murderers choose to commit their crimes using guns instead of choosing to use other weapons.

    I question why this matters though. The victims would be just as dead if they were murdered using a different kind of weapon.
     
  7. chris155au

    chris155au Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2017
    Messages:
    41,176
    Likes Received:
    4,365
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Very minor stress - should that prevent someone from owning a gun? Maybe you can make this very easy - is there a mental illness that you would say shouldn't stop someone from owning a gun? Or do they ALL qualify for stopping someone from owning a gun?

    You mean just like women have the right to abortion until they reconsider Roe v Wade?
     
    Last edited: Sep 2, 2019
  8. Aleksander Ulyanov

    Aleksander Ulyanov Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2013
    Messages:
    41,184
    Likes Received:
    16,180
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    I said before, if you go to a doctor and get a prescription.OR you're referred to one.

    Again, is it really that much of a life-crippling thing to be told you can't have a gun?

    If they overturn roe v wade then we'll finally get to repeal the 2nd amendment
     
    Last edited: Sep 2, 2019
  9. chris155au

    chris155au Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2017
    Messages:
    41,176
    Likes Received:
    4,365
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Get a prescription for what?

    Why, what's the connection between the two?
     
  10. Natty Bumpo

    Natty Bumpo Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 28, 2012
    Messages:
    41,206
    Likes Received:
    14,700
    Trophy Points:
    113
    If you believe that s firearm is no more efficient a means of killing than is a stick, a rock, or a frozen squirrel, why do gun-dependent blokes insist they need firearms to protect themselves rather than strutting around with a stick, a rock, or a frozen squirrel?
    "The only thing that can stop a bad guy with a gun
    is a good guy with a frozen squirrel."

    https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/squirrel-trouble/
     
    Last edited: Sep 2, 2019
  11. Xenamnes

    Xenamnes Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2015
    Messages:
    23,895
    Likes Received:
    7,537
    Trophy Points:
    113
    One pertains to self defense, the other pertains to murder. Murdering someone with any random object is quite easy, as the perpetrator is making the decision of who they will assault, where the assault will be committed, and how the assault will be carried out. The victim is denied the benefit of knowing such details, and as such needs access to the superior defensive tool.
     
  12. Natty Bumpo

    Natty Bumpo Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 28, 2012
    Messages:
    41,206
    Likes Received:
    14,700
    Trophy Points:
    113
    The US has the most gun-dependent characters mincing around with their shooties and, by far, the highest rate of firearm fatalities.

    Were the proliferation of guns to serve to reduce the number of firearm casualties in the US, it would not far exceed all other advanced nations in that department.

    More guns = more killed with guns.

    [​IMG]
    [​IMG]
     
  13. Xenamnes

    Xenamnes Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2015
    Messages:
    23,895
    Likes Received:
    7,537
    Trophy Points:
    113
    And if firearms were significantly restricted in the united states, the illegal misuse of firearms would continue unabated, and the number of deaths attributed to weapons other than firearms would simply increase.

    What is not comprehended on the part of yourself is the public of the united states. They are a violent people, far more violent than in any other nation in the world. They would not enjoy peace, they would continue killing and murdering for whatever reason, just as they are presently.
     
  14. FoxHastings

    FoxHastings Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2014
    Messages:
    56,891
    Likes Received:
    21,024
    Trophy Points:
    113

    Yes, he just said again, "It's a mental issue"......which he should easily relate to ;)
     
  15. Aleksander Ulyanov

    Aleksander Ulyanov Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2013
    Messages:
    41,184
    Likes Received:
    16,180
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Antidepressants.

    If they overturn Roe v Wade there will be a considerable furor and the 70% of the country who supports the right to choose will force a Constitutional Amendment legalizing abortion. This nearly happened before with the ERA, which was nearly passed. RW has been criticized since its inception as poorly written law
     
    JakeStarkey likes this.
  16. Aleksander Ulyanov

    Aleksander Ulyanov Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2013
    Messages:
    41,184
    Likes Received:
    16,180
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    With all due respect that's insane and you're nerts
     
  17. chris155au

    chris155au Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2017
    Messages:
    41,176
    Likes Received:
    4,365
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    I was asking you about ALL mental illness, whether you think that any mental illness should prevent someone from getting a gun. So I don't know why you're talking about antidepressants.

    And what does this have to do with repealing the Second Amendment?
     
  18. Natty Bumpo

    Natty Bumpo Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 28, 2012
    Messages:
    41,206
    Likes Received:
    14,700
    Trophy Points:
    113
    You claim, without any documentation that Americans are "a violent people, far more violent than in any other nation in the world."

    Were that true, it would mean that extraordinary measures should be taken to reduce the ease with which so many of those "far more violent people" are able to acquire, possess, weied, and discharge such lethal devices.

    As the empirical data confirms, more guns = more killed with guns.
     
  19. Aleksander Ulyanov

    Aleksander Ulyanov Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2013
    Messages:
    41,184
    Likes Received:
    16,180
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    You were asking about Roe vs Wade, I was replying in that context.

    OK, you're right. I think that ANY mental illness you're being treated for should keep you from getting a gun. Any mental illness where you've gone to a doctor about it

    And I have to ask again, why do you seem to think that not being able to get a gun is such a terrible life-crippling restriction, and doesn't that in itself say something important about whether you should be allowed to have one?

    I'd love to be able to fly an airplane. I've done it on the Microsoft Simulator which I've been told is as good as any in the world, and it was easy and fun. But they say I still have to spend about 3 grand in instruction before they'll let me, and this is because I MIGHT fly it into a building by accident and kill a bunch of people. Most likely IF if crashed it would be into the ground and hurt no one but me and I don't WANT to crash it anyway, but better safe than sorry, right?

    Meanwhile, if I want a device where I can INTENTIONALLY, SURVIVABLY and EASILY go and kill 10 to god-knows-how-many people THAT is my god-given RIGHT, and CANNOT be infringed.

    Madness. Pure madness.
     
    FoxHastings likes this.
  20. DentalFloss

    DentalFloss Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2013
    Messages:
    11,445
    Likes Received:
    3,263
    Trophy Points:
    113
    And yet, over the past 30 years or so, during a time period where gun ownership has proliferated, gun violence has been reduced by 2/3rds. Things that make you go hmmm...
     
  21. Natty Bumpo

    Natty Bumpo Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 28, 2012
    Messages:
    41,206
    Likes Received:
    14,700
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Why do you claim that "gun ownership has proliferated" over the past 30 years?

    Why do you claim that "gun violence has been reduced by 2/3rds" over the past 30 years?


    Please document your claims by citing pertinent, credible sources.
     
  22. XploreR

    XploreR Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2014
    Messages:
    7,785
    Likes Received:
    2,704
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Trump ended the rule blocking mentally ill people from getting guns.
    And thus we've had three mass shootings in the past month, with two of them in Texas, where gun laws were relaxed again--substantially--starting yesterday, Sept 1. I can think of nothing more infantile or idiotic than electing politicians who dedicate their lives of public service to supporting & working for the NRA, with their sick, distorted, extreme views on 2nd Amendment rights. For them, it is the duty of all the rest of us who don't own guns & don't care, to continue risking our very lives as the necessary cost for protecting & preserving their right to own & enjoy automatic weapons that have no use whatever other than killing other humans. We have become the prey.
     
  23. RP12

    RP12 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 11, 2011
    Messages:
    48,878
    Likes Received:
    11,755
    Trophy Points:
    113
    2nd amendment existed long before the NRA existed.
    SCOTUS rulings are just that..

    What automatic weapons?
     
  24. XploreR

    XploreR Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2014
    Messages:
    7,785
    Likes Received:
    2,704
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Yes, the 2nd Amendment did exist long before the NRA, but when it was written, guns--all guns--were single shot, & required at least 30 seconds to 1 minute time to reload that single shot. Automatic guns didn't exist & weren't yet even dreamed of. Even individual cartridges weren't invented. Today's gun market is far, far different from that of our founding fathers. And that technology has made, & is making, a tremendous impact on our lives in America, which is now the most dangerous society in the free world in terms of personal safety. Automatic weapons need to be outlawed in America, & possibly even semi-automatic ones. Much stricter gun laws need to be passed & rigidly enforced. Large capacity magazines need to be outlawed, along with armor piercing ammunition. And, every gun sale must be required to have a background check, whether in a store or a private sale. Semi automatic handguns should be included in these new restrictions. Too many innocents have already died extending gun owner rights. It's time to stop the killing.
     
  25. notme

    notme Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 16, 2013
    Messages:
    42,019
    Likes Received:
    5,395
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Negative. The reason is that those freedoms causes massacres. And it would not be any more of a violation as the tough rules on having full auto weapons.

    On AR15 kind of weapons with massive magazines. People all have a problem with how easy it is to guy that.

    Says you. And like, why should your opinion as an anonymous poster matter more than my source?

    source it

    The laws about full auto are constitutionally. Dunno what gives.
     

Share This Page