* BREAKING: Reporter and camera man murdered on live TV ! (video)

There is no magic bullet, pun intended.

The only way to effect change is over the long term, with concerted effort at a grass roots level, to revisit the spirit and intent of our founding fathers. To stop the illegal attempts of our federal government becoming all-invasive and therefore everyone becomes dependant on.

We continue to give up ounces of freedom for pounds of security, and in a not so distant future we will have no freedom left.

This is already happening in the UK, Spain, and other parts of Europe where censorship is rampant and disagreement with the ruling elite is hammered down. The world is in unrecoverable debt to the worlds banks.

No one cares as long as they have the latest NFL game or get to read about "Kaitlyn" Jenner though.

Everyone is looking for a quick fix, hence all the discussions about additional laws to pile onto the rest of the useless laws, all in an attempt to fill better about themselves without actually fixing anything. You pretty much said exactly that in your previous statement.

What is needed is a country wide, and perhaps world-wide, paradigm shift, and I'm not sure that human beings are capable of it.

 

like, allowing duals to the death?

 

Yes, that's a paradigm shift targeted at you.

You still haven't explained to me how it is anyone else's business what two adults agree to. And yes, they would ensure no one else got hurt.

My point being that you don't see how ensuring their freedom of personal choice, regardless of how much you disagree with it, should be something you fight for with every fiber of your being.

 

Because blacks are privileged social class.

 

I saw that, but I asked for specifics, numerous times, but you keep editing my posts. So lets break it down. Your proposal has three enumerated components.:

1: background checks
2: annual safety compliance
3: mental health screening

Lets start with #1; background checks.

Specifically, how would you implement and enforce universal background checks without infringing on your own rights? Please elaborate along the way with how your proposed changes will deter criminals from obtaining illegal weapons.

I'll fill in the blanks with how I think it would have to be implemented. Feel free to modify where I get it wrong:

1) Seal off the borders and ports so that no foreign guns could make it into the country (securing the border not really a left-wing stance, but is necessary for this to work)
2) Create a database to contain every gun in the country, and their current owners.
3) Require that every gun owner report every gun they own, enter data into database.
4) Legislate harsh penalties for non compliance.
5) Send the government stormtroopers out to conduct door-to-door searches to round up all unregistered weapons.
6) Prosecute those who did not willingly comply.
7) Legislate that documentation of ownership must accompany a transfer of a weapon, and any purchase of ammo for that weapon.

At this point, you theoretically have an accurate database of every remaining gun in the country, and a prison full of bad guys.

As time goes along, any guns used in crimes can be traced back to their last legal owner, and that owner held partially or fully responsible for the crime.
Any stolen guns would be reported immediately and _______(?... I dunno)

Now, you can finally begin requiring ALL transfers of ownership undergo a background check and be recorded in the database. Documentation of that transfer must accompany the gun, like an automobile title, and also be presented when buying ammo. Perhaps record number of rounds purchased, and serialize the casings and bullets, and record those serial numbers with the gun in the database. Make home reloading illegal, perhaps?

How's this sound so far? Close to your vision?

Please modify where I got it wrong, then go ahead and explain the remaining two components.

 

Let's not forget human error.

What do you do when you're a full-fledged government kool-aid drinker, and the authorities show up insisting they have a record of you owning a gun you never had?

Off to the gulag with you.

 

And they vote democrat

 

You forgot number 8. How to pay for all of this?

 

Ryriena, let us look at the fact that people kill people not guns. Logically then, effective mental health care must exist or any screening at all for anything is just cutting people off permanently from living their lives with what they want or need.

The murderer was a patient of the SB county mental health dept. on medications, of and on. No guns used.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2001_Isla_Vista_killings

The murderer was a patient of the SB county mental health dept. on medications, of and on. Gun used.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Goleta_postal_facility_shootings

The murderer was in the care of two different private psychologists and was able to hide his intentions completely. Knives and gun used.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2014_Isla_Vista_killings

The murderer had psychological issues which were known to a degree but never investigated to any degree. No guns used.
http://www.independent.com/news/2014/aug/21/court-records-shed-light-holzer-murders/

Okay, that covers 22 people killed, at least, 11 killed with knives and cars, 11 with guns. Are you suggesting that a mental screening be applied to knife use and driving?

Consider that the same mental health dept. in 1999 basically wanted to administer an experimental treatment direct to the unconscious mind, which I was proposing. The unconscious mind, amongst psychologists that are open and honest, is known to fairly well completely control human behaviors.


Image not displaying for some reason.
http://algoxy.com/law/nojustice2/images/103confirmsbcomh.jpg

That letter provides a de facto approval of said proposed treatment by the fact that the Ph.D Director was going to "carry it forward". Ph.Ds do not carry things forward they do not approve of.

In 2000 I sought the "response in writing" with a FOIA upon the supervisors, but it was ignored and the file stamp of the clerk of the board shows it entered April 18, 2000. It was gone from the clerks file by 2003. The image here shows it re filed with the clerk of the board on September 17, 2013.



NOTE: Some images might display 8/27/15 because of server work going on.

My point is that how can we screen for mental health issues if we cannot treat them? Its implied that because we cannot treat issues, we really cannot properly detect them.

Further, are we not much better off assuring that courts and government serve the doctors that are operating under the Hippocratic oath? If we create effective mental health care, people that are suffering can find true relief. Now, they do not even bother because they know the drugs suppress their enjoyment of life and have serious side effects.

Media needs to share that such treatment exists after it is developed. Currently they violate the public trust to hide that citizens are trying to see such effective treatments developed. Here is proof that when I shared a lawsuit with a reporter, two weeks later firings and resignations ensued then a gag order stopped the reporters and editors from sharing WHY it was all happening.

http://algoxy.com/law/no_free_press/sbsecretsofmedia.html

The public defender who was a necessary defendant in the suit also resigned 3 days after being served my opposition to the county councils motion to dismiss.

This injustice impacts the entire nation every day, but without media sharing these facts, people cannot get involved to any effective degree.

 

So let the left pick and choose when IDs are required or not. Got it.

Whatever happened to:

...like 4 or 5 of your posts ago.

 

I didn't make that assertion. Why the difficulty here?

Does having to show an ID interfere with someone's or deny some theirs rights or not?

 

So if someone slams their fist down on the desk the employer should report them as mentally ill? I've had to call the police in when firing an employee, they weren't mentally ill they were just p****d. The manager of the TV station said they did not refer him the the HR to seek mental health but to help him as far as working with other people. And no the courts said it was unconstitutional to infirm them against their will.

And believe me I don't believe seriously mentally ill people psychotic enough to kill someone should have guns. But how do you do it unless the person has been in-firmed and under the treatment of doctors who will certify it. An employer call some database and report them? That ain't gonna happen because first they are not mental health experts and second they will get their business sued out from under them. I remember 20 years ago when we got the memo from HR and Legal that no more employment references. No matter how bad the employee or the offense that caused their firing. Refer to HR which would only confirm dates of employment and last salary paid. PERIOD. Because you say something bad about them they will sue.

And how much mental illness is considered too much. I have bad dreams at night. I lost my girlfriend and feel a little depressed. Everyone diagnosed bi-polar has to turn in their guns? ADHD?

Will people be LESS inclined to seek help if they are going to be put on a list?

I'm open to suggestions, how do you do it and protect people from unlawful restraint and denying them their constitutional right to keep and bear arms?

 

With respect to solely purchasing a gun, no. You drew the comparison to using an ID with voting, not me.

 

You insist on being disingenuous. I'm not sure why. I'm saying that if a mental health was given more resources and taken as a serious issue, perhaps we'd see less violence. I agreed with you when I said that no law would have prevented him from buying that glock. Our culture of violence and 'sucking it up' creates powder kegs like this dbag who felt that a very public display of his anger was his only recourse. The very candid nature in which he performed his crime makes me think that he felt ignored. Perhaps if there was someone he could have spoken to, and not such a stigma on mental health, this may not have happened.

Then you and I can keep our guns.

 

Not a problem. Jack up those evil 1%ers for the bill, or borrow it from China.

 

Whats the difference then? If showing it to vote violates your rights and denies you exercising that right how can it not do the same when exercising your right to buy a gun? The issue is not one is your right to vote and the other your right to buy a gun, the issue is the requirement to show an ID, if it denies one right it denies the other and I bet you can't explain why not.

 

We have Obamacare that pays for and I see no evidence there is a slacking in resources. But again let's say it is fully funded all the resources we need, so if someone slams their fist down on the desk the employer should report them as mentally ill? I've had to call the police in when firing an employee, they weren't mentally ill they were just p****d. The manager of the TV station said they did not refer him the the HR to seek mental health but to help him as far as working with other people. You know a hot temper is not a mental illness, he we institutionalize every who gets mad we are going to need a LOT more resources.

But I don't think this is about mental illness or at least that is not the main cause of what occurred here. It's the race baiting and blaming whitey for all the ills that affects the black community, that any thing wrong in your life if you are black is to be blamed on white racism and with the Tryvon Martin incident, the Michael Brown incident the Black Lives Matter lie this is the result. People who may be upset but not mentally ill strike out. They are going to end their lives and take those racist with them. The converse was the church shooting. What are we going to do about the race baiters inciting a race war in this country?

 

recently you had a guy in NYC pull a "postal" revenge act where he shot and killed an armed security guard. No, we can't ban all guns...but I bet if we treated them with the same bureaucratic registration and tracking that we do automobiles, you'd reduce incidents like this as well as mass shootings.

 

I don't know how.... since people set on murder will find a way to murder.
Even if it means using an automobile.

 

UMMM no they don't. Oh wait, you exclude the Taliban and ISIS/ISIL and all of the Islamic terror groups associated with Al Quaida.
Neat trick.
Doesn't fly though.

 

there you go excluding those nasty Taliban and Isis and Al Quaida creeps again. They murder on a daily basis, as do the Crips and Bloods. But you just keep buying what the ******* press keeps feeding you. Don't forget to wipe.

 

Reducing violence is a worthy goal....but some logic should be used regarding the best ways to do that.

First of all we should understand where most of the violence in this nation comes from..............newsflash--for those who have not a clue.........over half of the violence in this nation emanates from a minority group--aka..........young black men who committ over half of all of the violent crimes in America.

That is thus a good place to start in reducing violence....so the question is: what can be done to curb the violence and hate emanating from this minority?

 

The libs believe in "do as I say, not as I do".

 

Yes.

The only gun control should be to keep the dangerous felons behind bars for life. REALLY life, not some wigglly liberal version of a life sentence. Leftists let the dangerous back on the streets to make arguments in favor of gun control.
Neat trick but it don't fly.

 

MOD EDIT - Rule 3 If a person is purchasing a gun with honest intentions, and understands the responsibility of gun ownership, presenting an ID shouldn't feel as if you are repressed. MOD EDIT - Rule 3