If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(AP)   Navy Yard shooter suffered from mental health issues, heard voices. Gee, where have I heard that before?   (hosted.ap.org) divider line 548
    More: Obvious, mental healths  
•       •       •

3603 clicks; posted to Main » on 17 Sep 2013 at 1:46 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



548 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-09-17 05:34:32 PM

sleeps in trees: MJMaloney187: You folks who think this has anything to do with U.S. gun laws are pissing in the wind. If the reports are true, Alexis had a history of gun violence and gun negligence. If the story is being reported correctly, Alexis suffered from PTSD and allegedly "heard voices" (I personally think that report is BS). Furthermore and furtherallegedly, Aaron Alexis was cited for half a dozen conduct violations. If all that is true, then HOW THE HELL DID HE GET A DEFENSE CONTRACTOR JOB?!? ... and in DC of all places.

I'll tell you why. Alexis was hired because he was held up to a lower standard, by law. His behavior was affirmatively interpreted. Do you think Johnny Whiteguy would have gotten a defense contractor job with the same history?

This mass murder isn't about shotgun laws. It's about lowered standards. The human resources department that processed his paperwork should immediately be fired, the background check agency that processed his paperwork should be sued out of business and every person Alexis put on his application as a "personal reference" should be put in prison ... ... ok, that last part is probably crossing a line ... but I'm super pissed about 12 civilians being murdered on a military base.

Um wow... You went there.


It's the bare naked truth, Hoss. Quit the internet if you don't want to see it.
 
2013-09-17 05:36:09 PM

LavenderWolf: There has to be some way to classify people w/o violating HIPAA regulations. Maybe an eyes-on system of evaluation
where people's medical and criminal history is looked at and a notation is put in a database - CANNOT OWN A
FIREARM - without having to go into details that would violate that person's privacy. Sort of like a notation on one's
driver's license that they must drive with corrective lenses.

You... I like you.


 Let's bring in the lawyers.   If your patient kills someone with a gun, can you be sued? What is the consequence of not doing the extra paperwork?  If you can be sued and I tell the therapist the coffee lady got my order wrong and I really wanted to choke her.  Do I get flagged for threat of a suit?  Better safe than sorry. Does your insurance go up and  then   have to charge higher rates and have less people seek help.
 
2013-09-17 05:38:03 PM

Kit Fister: birdmanesq: The hopeless imp: We're not going to solve problems like this by looking at it as a gun problem. It's a mental health problem.

It has to be one problem or the other problem, right? It can't be the interaction of two problems.

Well, see, the gun problem is only a "problem" because of societal factors:

1. Mental Illness that goes untreated/undetected.
2. Violence propagated from generation to generation by abuse and conditioning
3. A society conditioned to behave a certain way by exposure to concepts
4. Social status and economic status that promotes certain behaviors where violence in general is par for the course.

Banning guns reduces the symptoms. It does not cure the disease. Go back and read the analogy of the rotten floor boards given a new face rather than being addressed directly.

We have a society that is broken in some pretty fundamental ways. More guns, less guns, our society will still be broken. But fix the society, we'll fix a vast majority of the so-called "gun problem" and a host of other issues as well.


I'm not one to write off structural issues. And I'm certainly not discounting societal factors.

However, I also quite strongly buy into the instrumental philosophy of guns and the effect that they have of mediating the individual-situational interaction. So, I think a more helpful outlook is not to reduce the issue to a single factor and, instead, look at how things affect each other.

That, though, requires the intellectual honesty to admit that guns themselves contribute to the problem.

/Note: I'm not accusing you of being intellectually dishonest. That was a general statement.
 
d23 [TotalFark]
2013-09-17 05:41:22 PM
Let's see.. on the demonization score chart so far we've pointed fingers at video game players and people with ptsd/mental health issues.  What's next?
 
2013-09-17 05:41:34 PM

ahab: LavenderWolf: Nina_Hartley's_Ass: I doubt you'll get anywhere with health records, mental or otherwise. The Seattle incident should have been a felony and barred him from gun ownership ever after. ALL firearms and ammunition transactions should be subject to background checks, I don't care how well you know your son. You get ONE "accidental discharge" IF you report it yourself. Someone else reports, sorry, you're obviously too stupid to own.

Start taking some responsibility, gun owners.

When I was in the reserves during the last part of my training (Infantry qualification) somebody had a negligent discharge, and then they found a live round he was trying to take home, which he left in his (UNLOCKED, wtf!) foot locker. He was immediately taken away by MPs, and I'm pretty sure he went to prison (military prison no less). If he'd have just locked his goddamn foot locker he would have just been discharged from the forces...

...because they wouldn't have searched his foot locker when they were outprocessing him?


Nope. A locked footlocker is the soldier's. An unlocked footlocker is the army's.
 
2013-09-17 05:41:37 PM
Obligatory.
images2.dailykos.com
[Sigh]
 
2013-09-17 05:48:46 PM

DGS: somedude210: DGS: To be fair, a pack of smokes would last me significantly longer than a 6-pack of beer.

To be fair, you smoke?

Nope, but even if I did, no way I could chain smoke 20 before I could knock out the 6.


washington-babylon: DGS: ahab: birdmanesq: dittybopper: One problem: He exploited the Castle Wolfenstein Loophole (ie., he appears to have taken guns off of the guards he killed). What would have stopped him from, say, killing a guard manually with a knife or bludgeon of some sort and then taking the gun and killing others?

Isn't there some useful old saying about bringing a knife to a gun fight that might be applicable here?

But he played a lot of violent video games, so he was probably really good at sneaking up on people with a knife and stabbing them in order to steal their guns.

I know that's how I learned.

/HI NSA GUY

Unfortunately, now you also have a compulsion to violently teabag your victims before stealing their guns.

I never did that even in my CS days. My friday nights are a different story, though, and it has nothing to do with guns. Or is that off topic?


Eeeeh, what you do in your own time is your business.

/Fair warning, I see anybody TangoFrag me in killcam I'll be hunting them next.
//Usually with my patented "Sail from window and knife the tangofragger on the way down" method.
 
2013-09-17 05:49:03 PM
Pretty much every mass shooter has been prescribed drugs whose side effects are violent outbursts and suicide, however the blame is put on guns and video games. I guess big pharma has more lobby power than guns & games.
 
2013-09-17 05:49:25 PM

red230: Mental health issues and hearing voices? Here is my short list.
Noah
Jesus
Moses

None of these guys ever killed anyone with a gun but historical records are a bit suspect for that time period.


Thanks for mentioning that. Many people that have had some type of spiritual revelation can fall under that category, and they aren't necessarily evil all of the time.  I don't consider myself a violent person, and if I heard a voice that told me to kill someone, I'd tell if to fark off.

Can anyone name some disorders from the DSM V that should automatically disqualify a person from owning a gun? Anything like narcissism shouldn't be included, or else our entire nation should be disarmed.
 
2013-09-17 05:50:10 PM

MJMaloney187: We should make it a law that every toilet bowl should have a google camera installed in it.


Fark is not your personal porn site.
 
2013-09-17 05:50:33 PM

JungleBoogie: [randy.house.gov image 320x214]

This fellow didn't seem too well regulated.


He had a secret clearance. Isn't that regulated enough
 
2013-09-17 05:50:58 PM

digitalrain: I'm surprised that our Fark conspiracy theorists and Freepers haven't postulated that this guy was a patsy, armed
and primed by the left wing radicals and then let loose to help further their 'gunz r bad' bannination program. Sort
of like taking the Village 'Tard, sticking a gun in his hand, blindfolding him and spinning him around, then whipping
off the blindfold and saying "Now shoot the pinatas...you won't get any candy if you don't shoot the pinatas!"

This tragic happenstance is going to stir up a whole bunch of derp. I'm mostly conservative and very pro-2nd Am.
(even though I don't own a gun - personal responsibility reasons), and even I think that *something* has to be done
to keep people who have a documented history of gun violence and / or mental illness from owning a gun.

A blanket solution isn't the answer though. You can't say 'OK, if the person has *ever* been diagnosed with a mental
illness, then they can't own a gun." That's wrong.

There has to be some way to classify people w/o violating HIPAA regulations. Maybe an eyes-on system of evaluation
where people's medical and criminal history is looked at and a notation is put in a database - CANNOT OWN A
FIREARM - without having to go into details that would violate that person's privacy. Sort of like a notation on one's
driver's license that they must drive with corrective lenses.


That's because conspiracy theorists (with the exception of farkhead Alex Jones, who says he is liberation because it shields him from both) are usually Democrats. Farking corporations are putting stuff in our:
Food
Water
Air
Chem trails

Those things are all something a Democrat would worry about. Pubs don't take about that stuff. Blackie McLeft-Wing is just more revenue for them.
 
2013-09-17 05:51:39 PM

red230: Mental health issues and hearing voices? Here is my short list.
Noah
Jesus
Moses

None of these guys ever killed anyone with a gun but historical records are a bit suspect for that time period.


You absolutely left out Mohammed, Joseph Smith, and L. Ron Hubbard.
 
2013-09-17 05:52:10 PM
Do most people NOT hear voices from time to time?
 
2013-09-17 05:52:34 PM

NDP2: Obligatory.

[Sigh]


He killed most of his victims with guns he stole from federal employees.
 
2013-09-17 05:54:30 PM

nekom: cameroncrazy1984: Obviously his legal access to guns isn't the problem. Right?

It's certainly part of the problem.  Better mental health screening and background checks are perfectly sensible, but good luck getting the slightest bit of that passed with the current political climate.

But truth be told, if he was hell bent on it no law would have stopped him.  There are plenty of channels where guns can be illegally acquired, so let's not forget that end of the equation as well.  That too needs to be addressed, even though it wasn't a factor in this particular incident.


Tell Feinstein and the pundits out there who call for total gun bans to STFU and propose these sensible laws and the voters will stop paying as much attention to those who claim that any new law restricting guns is a step towards that goal. The first step to any new restriction will have to be taking any bans off the table, stop submitting such bills to congress and focus on the actual problem which is crazy people running loose when they should clearly be in an institution.
 
2013-09-17 06:00:41 PM

mizchief: Pretty much every mass shooter has been prescribed drugs whose side effects are violent outbursts and suicide, however the blame is put on guns and video games. I guess big pharma has more lobby power than guns & games.


The only time I ever actually took a prescription to treat my depression, it made things worse. So much worse. It turned my life into a nightmare land, a mockery of the mindscape that was and is again. It is a  miracle I survived.
 
2013-09-17 06:02:21 PM

MrHappyRotter: Do most people NOT hear voices from time to time?


That lack an immediately obvious external source and are telling you to burn it, burn it all, yes.
 
2013-09-17 06:03:54 PM

mizchief: nekom: cameroncrazy1984: Obviously his legal access to guns isn't the problem. Right?

It's certainly part of the problem.  Better mental health screening and background checks are perfectly sensible, but good luck getting the slightest bit of that passed with the current political climate.

But truth be told, if he was hell bent on it no law would have stopped him.  There are plenty of channels where guns can be illegally acquired, so let's not forget that end of the equation as well.  That too needs to be addressed, even though it wasn't a factor in this particular incident.

Tell Feinstein and the pundits out there who call for total gun bans to STFU and propose these sensible laws and the voters will stop paying as much attention to those who claim that any new law restricting guns is a step towards that goal. The first step to any new restriction will have to be taking any bans off the table, stop submitting such bills to congress and focus on the actual problem which is crazy people running loose when they should clearly be in an institution.


Maybe the gun grabbers are needed to counterbalance the no gun restrictions anywhere, carry everywhere, and stand your ground folks on the other side. Those folks need to STFU too. And, frankly, they pose a lot bigger threat to meaningful discussion because they actually seem to hold a little political clout.

Or maybe reasonable folks on both sides ought to quit caricaturing the extremes of the other side (or even quit thinking about this in terms of "sides"), and engage in a more meaningful discourse.
 
2013-09-17 06:03:55 PM
I need a good trivia team name from this event.  I'm thinking, Ceiling Shakers? Noisy Upstairs Neighbors? I Knew I Shouldn't Have Taken My Mind Control Microwave on that trip to D.C.?
 
2013-09-17 06:04:57 PM
Someone who hears voices generally sees this as well
▼▼▼▼

i466.photobucket.com
 
2013-09-17 06:06:01 PM
I called it.

Shooter's best friend admits shooter was a liberal and obama supporter


So much for the total farkers that were blaming the right while mods quickly deleting posts showing almost all spree killers to be liberals.
 
2013-09-17 06:07:57 PM

DubtodaIll: I need a good trivia team name from this event.  I'm thinking, Ceiling Shakers? Noisy Upstairs Neighbors? I Knew I Shouldn't Have Taken My Mind Control Microwave on that trip to D.C.?


The Experts.
 
2013-09-17 06:10:14 PM

OnlyM3: I called it.

Shooter's best friend admits shooter was a liberal and obama supporter


So much for the total farkers that were blaming the right while mods quickly deleting posts showing almost all spree killers to be liberals.


"he wasn't happy with the former [Bush] administration. He was more happy with this [the Obama] administration"

Just like most Americans. How about that.
 
2013-09-17 06:10:17 PM

OnlyM3: I called it.

Shooter's best friend admits shooter was a liberal and obama supporter


So much for the total farkers that were blaming the right while mods quickly deleting posts showing almost all spree killers to be liberals.


When did posts get deleted?
 
2013-09-17 06:11:45 PM

Nina_Hartley's_Ass: DubtodaIll: I need a good trivia team name from this event.  I'm thinking, Ceiling Shakers? Noisy Upstairs Neighbors? I Knew I Shouldn't Have Taken My Mind Control Microwave on that trip to D.C.?

The Experts.


I don't get the reference.
 
2013-09-17 06:14:15 PM

birdmanesq: But there are all sorts of little ways that we can work to reduce the overall impact of gun violence. Hopefully without inconveniencing Responsible Gun Ownerstm.


Black males cannot possess handguns.

50% of potential gun violence disappears by inconveniencing 6% of the population.

There's your reasonable solution.
 
2013-09-17 06:15:12 PM
SSRIs claim more victims.
 
2013-09-17 06:16:16 PM

birdmanesq: Two things: (1) It's pretty established at this point that the government is allowed to place taxes and fees on firearms and firearm licensing.


1. Once upon a time, poll taxes were legal and common. Then it became a right incorporated against the states.
2. The second amendment received that bump on June 28, 2010.
3. Whether firearm license fees are legal hasn't been challenged yet.
 
2013-09-17 06:19:49 PM
Yes, this will happen so long as the US remains a Free nation. Removing Freedom entirely will solve the issue.

Other than that, you're stuck with stop-gaps and half-measures.
 
2013-09-17 06:21:14 PM

MJMaloney187: sleeps in trees: MJMaloney187: You folks who think this has anything to do with U.S. gun laws are pissing in the wind. If the reports are true, Alexis had a history of gun violence and gun negligence. If the story is being reported correctly, Alexis suffered from PTSD and allegedly "heard voices" (I personally think that report is BS). Furthermore and furtherallegedly, Aaron Alexis was cited for half a dozen conduct violations. If all that is true, then HOW THE HELL DID HE GET A DEFENSE CONTRACTOR JOB?!? ... and in DC of all places.

I'll tell you why. Alexis was hired because he was held up to a lower standard, by law. His behavior was affirmatively interpreted. Do you think Johnny Whiteguy would have gotten a defense contractor job with the same history?

This mass murder isn't about shotgun laws. It's about lowered standards. The human resources department that processed his paperwork should immediately be fired, the background check agency that processed his paperwork should be sued out of business and every person Alexis put on his application as a "personal reference" should be put in prison ... ... ok, that last part is probably crossing a line ... but I'm super pissed about 12 civilians being murdered on a military base.

Um wow... You went there.

It's the bare naked truth, Hoss. Quit the internet if you don't want to see it.


Aaand you went there again. I said squat about my opinions. Personally it takes balls to go there, regardless of how I lean.

As for you very original comment about "quitting the Internet". Don't be a farking canoe douche twatwaffle licking candy ass. I appreciate creativity.
 
2013-09-17 06:21:30 PM

OnlyM3: I called it.

Shooter's best friend admits shooter was a liberal and obama supporter


So much for the total farkers that were blaming the right while mods quickly deleting posts showing almost all spree killers to be liberals.


Let's be totally fair.

Most spree killers are bug-fark nuts.  They're not left or right (except orthogonally to their being nuts), they're just nuts.  Nuts is their political affiliation.

Sometimes, we get lucky and notice that they're nuts before they do something stupid.
Sometimes, they're just that "kind of quiet" kid (And since kind of quiet describes every single introverted person EVER, that's not good enough if only due to the massive false positive rate) until they do something stupid.
 
2013-09-17 06:21:31 PM

DubtodaIll: Nina_Hartley's_Ass: DubtodaIll: I need a good trivia team name from this event.  I'm thinking, Ceiling Shakers? Noisy Upstairs Neighbors? I Knew I Shouldn't Have Taken My Mind Control Microwave on that trip to D.C.?

The Experts.

I don't get the reference.


Alexis' employer.

/trivial
 
2013-09-17 06:21:42 PM

somedude210: you understand that you don't necessarily need a "secret" level of clearance to make it onto the naval yard.


The intersection of people who can pass the background check that enables secret clearance but cannot pass the background check for a gun is vanishingly small.

And considering it consists almost solely of politicians with felony background -- they can just change the law anyway.
 
2013-09-17 06:24:57 PM

Nina_Hartley's_Ass: DubtodaIll: Nina_Hartley's_Ass: DubtodaIll: I need a good trivia team name from this event.  I'm thinking, Ceiling Shakers? Noisy Upstairs Neighbors? I Knew I Shouldn't Have Taken My Mind Control Microwave on that trip to D.C.?

The Experts.

I don't get the reference.

Alexis' employer.

/trivial


I like it, but I need something that will make a bar full of moderately informed people laugh for points.
 
2013-09-17 06:25:30 PM

Theaetetus: Witness99: I'm probably paranoid from watching to much Investigation Discovery, but I pity the fool that breaks into my house looking to hurt me.

Statistically, the most likely person to injure you in your house is already in your house.


100% chance, I'd think.

Unless you're standing right next to a window or something, and they just punch through it from the outside.
 
2013-09-17 06:27:19 PM

sleeps in trees: As for you very original comment about "quitting the Internet". Don't be a farking canoe douche twatwaffle licking candy ass. I appreciate creativity.


Apparently.
 
2013-09-17 06:28:22 PM
What prescriptions was he on, or formerly on?  That often seems to be a factor in these cases, although I sense that the valiant media doesn't want to antagonize pharma companies by putting knowledge of prescription drug use front and center.
 
2013-09-17 06:28:32 PM

wolfpaq777: sleeps in trees: As for you very original comment about "quitting the Internet". Don't be a farking canoe douche twatwaffle licking candy ass. I appreciate creativity.

Apparently.


Eh, I'm bored and making dinner. I need an outlet.
 
2013-09-17 06:28:40 PM

velvetrevolution00: SSRIs claim more victims.


^^THIS^^
 
2013-09-17 06:29:51 PM

Nina_Hartley's_Ass: Start taking some responsibility, gun owners.


Maybe this grabber troll is on to something.  Perhaps gun owners should start shooting everyone that seems crazy.
 
2013-09-17 06:29:54 PM

birdmanesq: This text is now purple: birdmanesq: Isn't there some useful old saying about bringing a knife to a gun fight that might be applicable here?

It's less of a problem if you have the element of surprise, and you're both determined and within 20-ft or so.

Nothing can stop a bad guy with a knife. Even a good guy with a gun.

Maybe a good guy with some sort of spiked pike. That maybe has spikes on the spikes for good measure. And then maybe a couple of more spikes on those spikes because you can never be too safe.


I didn't say it was impossible. I was merely pointing out that some situations favor the man with a knife involved in a gun fight.
 
2013-09-17 06:31:00 PM

This text is now purple: birdmanesq: Two things: (1) It's pretty established at this point that the government is allowed to place taxes and fees on firearms and firearm licensing.

1. Once upon a time, poll taxes were legal and common. Then it became a right incorporated against the states.
2. The second amendment received that bump on June 28, 2010.
3. Whether firearm license fees are legal hasn't been challenged yet.


Except that the Heller and Washington opinions (incorporating the Second Amendment) expressly acknowledged permissible regulations, including taxes and fees. They're constitutional. Poll taxes are not analogous.

Tax and fee-free gun ownership is a wet dream.
 
2013-09-17 06:31:07 PM

netweavr: Yes, this will happen so long as the US remains a Free nation. Removing Freedom entirely will solve the issue.

Other than that, you're stuck with stop-gaps and half-measures.


Exactly!  If we lock down this nation like a prison, everyone will live in a safe, drug-free, weapon-free, orderly society, just like our prisons.
 
2013-09-17 06:31:34 PM

Nutsac_Jim: birdmanesq: Nutsac_Jim: Rattle me off this giant list that has nothing to do with you being a lawbreaker......

See above in my post to WhyteRaven74 for several examples, with applicable citations.

yeah, but those are people that do wrong, or cant differentiate.

the only case is where some house frau might allege some charge and get their husbands rights taken away in
some kind of end run on alimony or child support.    Other than that, you need to prove someone did a bad deed.


Restraining orders, another broken system. It's almost standard to get them during a divorce, regardless of harm potential (so I've heard, never been married or divorced). Both men and women use them vindictively or simply to make the person you used for sex stop calling you. These things seem to be rarely applied to an actual dangerous situation, and judges grant them with little thought.

HOWEVER...once you have a restraining order against you...gun rights taken away. And it's like being sued...anyone can sue you and anyone can get a frivolous restraining order against you.
 
2013-09-17 06:31:50 PM

birdmanesq: This text is now purple: birdmanesq: Two things: (1) It's pretty established at this point that the government is allowed to place taxes and fees on firearms and firearm licensing.

1. Once upon a time, poll taxes were legal and common. Then it became a right incorporated against the states.
2. The second amendment received that bump on June 28, 2010.
3. Whether firearm license fees are legal hasn't been challenged yet.

Except that the Heller and Washington opinions (incorporating the Second Amendment) expressly acknowledged permissible regulations, including taxes and fees. They're constitutional. Poll taxes are not analogous.

Tax and fee-free gun ownership is a wet dream.


Give me my Obamagun.
 
2013-09-17 06:32:48 PM

sleeps in trees: Eh, I'm bored and making dinner. I need an outlet.


I appreciated the unconventional insult.
 
2013-09-17 06:32:55 PM

mizchief: nekom: cameroncrazy1984: Obviously his legal access to guns isn't the problem. Right?

It's certainly part of the problem.  Better mental health screening and background checks are perfectly sensible, but good luck getting the slightest bit of that passed with the current political climate.

But truth be told, if he was hell bent on it no law would have stopped him.  There are plenty of channels where guns can be illegally acquired, so let's not forget that end of the equation as well.  That too needs to be addressed, even though it wasn't a factor in this particular incident.

Tell Feinstein and the pundits out there who call for total gun bans to STFU and propose these sensible laws and the voters will stop paying as much attention to those who claim that any new law restricting guns is a step towards that goal. The first step to any new restriction will have to be taking any bans off the table, stop submitting such bills to congress and focus on the actual problem which is crazy people running loose when they should clearly be in an institution.


He illegally acquired him. What farking part of that do either of you two sides not understand. The farker bypassed the "we need to enforce the laws we have" folks and stole his guns from the "only people who should have guns folks" to commit MOST of his murders.

Gawd Damn, you tards wonder why no one likes you.
 
2013-09-17 06:33:56 PM

birdmanesq: I'm not one to write off structural issues. And I'm certainly not discounting societal factors.

However, I also quite strongly buy into the instrumental philosophy of guns and the effect that they have of mediating the individual-situational interaction. So, I think a more helpful outlook is not to reduce the issue to a single factor and, instead, look at how things affect each other.

That, though, requires the intellectual honesty to admit that guns themselves contribute to the problem.

/Note: I'm not accusing you of being intellectually dishonest. That was a general statement.


Sure. but if a guy sees a gun as a hunting tool and is conditioned to see it only that way, it changes whether he'll use it as a tool to solve his problems, or not.

Here's an example that comes to mind, not directly appropriate, but speaks to behavioral conditioning:

In the old west, one of the most sacred things you *didn't* do was rape a woman. You didn't hurt a woman, you didn't mistreat her, no matter how bad you were. Were there exceptions? yes. But by and large, even criminals in the old west would respect a woman and wouldn't tolerate harming a woman.  This was something you were brought up to, and something that was ingrained into you by societal conditioning.

However, in the modern world, we have no such compunctions, and such behavioral conditioning has gone by the wayside.

Yes, a gun, by virtue of being a great equalizer, gives power to a person who wields it. But the gun and its availability does not inherently change behavior, save for the decision making of what to use of the available tools (No gun? can't use one, will use something else), so by taking away the tool you're again not fixing the problem or the underlying issue, you're just reducing the toolset and masking the problem.

We have these discussions and people throw out Canada and Europe and other such countries as examples of gun control. But gun control itself is not the complete story. Canada has, arguably, fairly lax gun control laws. France, the Czech Republic, Norway, Finland, Sweden, Germany, all allow firearms ownership to some degree, and the tradition of sport shooting and hunting and so on are quite alive there.

What is different in these places is that in those societies, the use of guns as a tool to solve problems doesn't exist. People are conditioned to have an entirely different response to guns. Until that german teenager took his father's guns and shot up a school with them, guns were even more permissive, and yet they didn't have the same level of crime we do.

You argue that we need to be "whollistic" as if somehow addressing guns as the problem is going to cure anything. In the short term, it might reduce certain criminal acts, but it's not going to solve the problem and it's going to in some ways exacerbate certain others.  The key here is that until we fix the shiat that's wrong with society itself, taking away guns isn't going to solve all of these problems.

Now, before you jump on me about "do nothing", please keep in mind that I'm not advocating that. I'm all for better background checks, screening, and better ways to tie the criminal and mentally ill to gun checks so that they don't get access to guns. I'm also all for laws that make penalties for certain unsafe behavior with a deadly weapon a crime and/or reason to make a person inelligible to own firearms.  You endanger someone else's life by having an AD? you lose your right to own them. You kill someone with a gun because you were being stupid? You get charged with a crime and lose your rights.

NOTHING says that that is incompatible with continuing to allow us to enjoy a rich culture of hunting, sports shooting, and concealed carry. The NFA didn't stop people from owning full-auto weapons or short barreled shotguns, etc., it just made it take more time to get them, and it made it cost a little, and required some forms of extensive background checks and registration to take place to do so, and as far as I know, no one has, or has proposed, rounding up and confiscating those items from lawful owners.

There have been cases, such as in NY, where the states attempted to pass laws including mandatory confiscation, or have leveraged registries to perform confiscation (NYC in the 1990s sticks out in my head when they outlawed the ownership of certain weapons within the city and people living in the city with registered firearms were compelled to move or have their weapons confiscated), so having any kind of process like this requires some degree of visibility and checks/balances that mitigates the temptation to abuse the system.

But even I, an ardent owner of guns and supporter of the 2A (Pro-gunner-in-name-only? PGINO? I guess...) am forced to admit that save for a few rare cases, just registering weapons hasn't lead to a a sudden rush to confiscate guns.

Let this be a lesson to us all, though: If we continue to biatch and bicker about whether it's Off-White, Bone White, or Linen, and keep thrashing about over feel-good, knee-jerk reactions to this shiat and we don't take a long, serious, hard look at ourselves in the mirror and how we choose to live our lives, as well as the behavior we espouse, then we're not going to get very far in changing people's reactions and conditioned responses to stress, depression, and conflict. We're just going to make them prove that they REALLY want to do something bad, and/or choose other alternatives.
 
2013-09-17 06:34:37 PM

birdmanesq: This text is now purple: birdmanesq: Two things: (1) It's pretty established at this point that the government is allowed to place taxes and fees on firearms and firearm licensing.

1. Once upon a time, poll taxes were legal and common. Then it became a right incorporated against the states.
2. The second amendment received that bump on June 28, 2010.
3. Whether firearm license fees are legal hasn't been challenged yet.

Except that the Heller and Washington opinions (incorporating the Second Amendment) expressly acknowledged permissible regulations, including taxes and fees. They're constitutional. Poll taxes are not analogous.

Tax and fee-free gun ownership is a wet dream.


Maybe, maybe not. McDonald also turned over this:
'Mandate that guns be re-registered annually, with another payment of the fee'
 
Displayed 50 of 548 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report