What other countries do differently than the US to stop mass shootings

I am not progressive and not trying to fool you. You are entitled to your opinion and I am entitled to mine. Its as simple as that. Most gun owners happen to agree with my view.

 

I don't believe that for a minute. Show us some unbiased data.

 

Registration is not a 2nd Amendment issue. It's a 3rd (privacy of the home), 4th (privacy of person and possessions), and 5th Amendment (privacy of information) issue.

LINK: Right to Privacy - US Constitution - LAWS.com

 

It's cool if you don't believe it. As a matter of fact 50% of gun owners say there should be annual validation.

35 mass shootings were studied and it turned out that 28 of the attackers had mental health issues. That's 80%.

Cool beans. I didn't say anything about registration though.

 

Nah, you just responded to a post about registration.

 

Take it up with the person who inserted it into the conversation. The discussion was never about registration.

 

Oh please Big Daddy government strip me of my personal property and my rights and make the world a safe place for me!!!

That's exactly how you gun grabbers sound

 

And yet, you are the only person saying it..............isn't that weird.

 

Well that's pretty weird I guess you can't understand that many people on the left are calling for the government to strip them of their gun rights.

And don't tell me they don't want a ban guns, if they ban assault rifles after there's a few more shootings with handguns, they'll want to ban those too.

The same exact way they did it in every other single country where guns are banned by little increments

 

That's not a reason to further restrict the 2nd amendment, it's a reason to pay more attention to mental health care.

 

Please note that for 2-4 guns did NOTHING to stop this tyranny.

 

So your willing to pay for it right?

 

How much more does it take for the government to do it's job? Another trillion or so?

 

Do you think its worthwhile spending tax money on mental health measures to prevent the mentally ill from getting weapons?

 

Sure, eliminate the energy dept and use that money.

 

Cultural drift and copycat violence plus the availability of such weapons, the lack of mental health care and the mewling attempts to defend the indefensible.
Previous standards in expectations and acceptable behaviour have been eroded and frankly, these are the areas the conservative right claims as their concerns. Instead they seem to concentrate on headline grabbing accusations based on desperate attempts to smear the opposition.
If they care about the country, they would campaign for a complété overhaul of the police and security forces, demand higher standards in backroom behaviour including buying support for their cause, improve éducation across the country without getting people angry about peripheral issues and conspiracy theory, and make efforts to improve and support domestic environments.
You may find you wont lose an élection for years. You will be national héros.

 

I suspect "progressives" would like to see organised and well traînerd police officers acting as the militias described in 2A instead of mentally ill people running around armed with deadly weapons and some insane motivé.

 

The well regulated phrase "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State" is a prefatory phrase only, not an operative phrase. The right to own and bear arms is an individual right not limited by that phrase.

 

But the framers did not want any idiot to get a gun.

 

Like a mental health evaluation for gun buyers? Yes, there seems to be bipartisan support for such measure.

 

It is a conditional, explaining the context of the conclusion.
You can't just dumping phrasrology you dont like.
I find it astonishing that almost every right leasing national political party stands strongly for law and order.
They put policing as a priority in public spending. And the country experts it.
Your right wing, however, stands for increaing violence and rejects attempts to invest in à "well ordered" police force.
Instead your right wing politicians enjoy the largesse of those whose financially vested interest is to increase the potential for lawlessness.
So ISTM you will never hear a political candidate saying " we will spend your tax money protecting you. The eventual quid pro quo is that your right to carry guns will be sevetely cut to avoid the crazies who currently find children à target.
You see you have to WANT to save lives. Not consider them collatéral damage.

 

Unfortunately States like Texas dont require à permit to carry à gun.what would be the use of à certificate of good mental health?

 

They are talking about mental health too. So what do they mean? Emotional support dog for everyone? They say they will brainstorm about different solutions, but any mention of guns is forbidden. Seems obvious they will end up spending another $600 000 only to end up with more mass killings.

 

As I said.
If people don't think there is a problem to be fixed, then it wont get fixed.
The NRA wont let Texas reduce or constrict guns anyway. Cruz has sold his soul to the devil.

 

Nope. He just values Constitutionally protected rights, and gun ownership is a civil right protected by the Constitution.