RE: Gun Control and mass murder, one does not eliminate the other. (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion



Message


tazzygirl -> RE: Gun Control and mass murder, one does not eliminate the other. (12/17/2012 6:03:05 PM)

Just out of curiosity, could that be because your system treats mental illness instead of pretending it doesnt exist?




BamaD -> RE: Gun Control and mass murder, one does not eliminate the other. (12/17/2012 6:22:09 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: tazzygirl

quote:

all of the shooters mentioned were under 21 an thus it was a violation of federal law for them to own a handgun


We know..... you are late to the party.

All were legally obtained by someone they knew.

quote:

It claims to tell us how many times something of which there is no record happenes there it is nothing but a wag (wild a!! guess)


Its been documented.

obtaining a hadgun for a minor is also a federal offence
keeping me from owning one because it could be stolen and misused is exactly the same as saying I shouldn't have a car because it could be stolen and missused
and I was in this party before you were born




jlf1961 -> RE: Gun Control and mass murder, one does not eliminate the other. (12/17/2012 6:27:42 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Politesub53

The 1994 ban on assault rifles would still have stopped people owning the gun used.

http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2012/07/20/557811/expired-assault-weapons-ban-would-have-covered-rifle-used-in-colorado-shooting/?mobile=nc



The original ban did not do anything about the ones already made, in warehouses and in private hands.

It did not do anything about the Ruger Mini14 that can be bought with a collapsible stock, has a high rate of fire and is the same caliber as the bushmaster. The bill exempted 900 specific weapons.

It was in the anti crime bill.

It did not stop crime, most criminals do not use military style weapons, you cant hide the thing under a long coat and they are really obvious to anyone but a blind man that somebody has a fucking gun.

It did not prevent sales of existing semi auto weapons between individuals, in fact no gun control law has.

It did nothing about the various 9mm pistols you can slap a 15 or 20 round mag in and do just as much damage.

It did nothing about the monster pistols, the 357,44, or 50 caliber desert eagles that you could put 15 round mags in.

According to the statement put out by the Senator that introduced the original is not good, it still does not address the problem that makes these weapons so deadly. It will stop the manufacture and sales of new large capacity mags, but does nothing about the existing ones.

In the long run, the original ban didnt do a damn thing it was supposed to do, and form Feinstein's statement, the new one is just as useless, and unless the majority of Republican members of the house are struck down by some party specific pandemic, it will never get past the house.

Yep, today two Republican senators came out today and said something has to be done. Nothing along those lines from republicans in the house.




Tallblkdom -> RE: Gun Control and mass murder, one does not eliminate the other. (12/17/2012 6:37:01 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Politesub53

The 1994 ban on assault rifles would still have stopped people owning the gun used.

http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2012/07/20/557811/expired-assault-weapons-ban-would-have-covered-rifle-used-in-colorado-shooting/?mobile=nc


That article is nearly a 100% outright lie........a post ban rifle sold within the AWB, actually had the same functions and capability as the pre ban rifle. What the article leaves out is that the AWB defined assault weapons if they had at least 10 points. If the rifle did not have at least 10 of the points it was not classified as an assault weapon. Thus, you remove all the cosmetics(about 60% of the points); pistol grip, collapsible stock, flash hider, bayonet lug, grenade launcher it was not classified as an assault rifle.
Ironically, the rifle displayed in the article would have been legal under the AWB in nearly all states just by selling it with a 10 round magazine and turning down the barrel at the muzzle which prevented flash hider from being attached.




LookieNoNookie -> RE: Gun Control and mass murder, one does not eliminate the other. (12/17/2012 6:51:40 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: tazzygirl

Seems that way... we also dont know what may have been used in the hallways.


Well said....if I recall (and of course, everything written in the first 2 months is going to be speculation at best, even as it's trotted off as fact), the kid did have some form of gun that wasn't one shot stuff.




jlf1961 -> RE: Gun Control and mass murder, one does not eliminate the other. (12/17/2012 7:37:54 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: tazzygirl

Just out of curiosity, could that be because your system treats mental illness instead of pretending it doesnt exist?


And in the United States, most mental illness is treated haphazardly with the limits put on it by health insurance companies, and Obamacare doesnt push it hard for much more than behavioral problems like drug addiction.

As for low income people who suffer from mental illness, the feds and states dont give a fuck about them.




tingdatt -> RE: Gun Control and mass murder, one does not eliminate the other. (12/17/2012 7:40:29 PM)

Obama should show that he's committed to gun safety. Make the White House a gun-free zone.




Yachtie -> RE: Gun Control and mass murder, one does not eliminate the other. (12/17/2012 8:22:01 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: tingdatt

Obama should show that he's committed to gun safety. Make the White House a gun-free zone.



YUK YUK YUK[8D]




BamaD -> RE: Gun Control and mass murder, one does not eliminate the other. (12/17/2012 9:28:00 PM)

Please note that a man with a 1866 winchester and a pair of 1851 colt navy revolvers could have done the same damage in the same time




tazzygirl -> RE: Gun Control and mass murder, one does not eliminate the other. (12/17/2012 9:56:14 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD


quote:

ORIGINAL: tazzygirl

quote:

all of the shooters mentioned were under 21 an thus it was a violation of federal law for them to own a handgun


We know..... you are late to the party.

All were legally obtained by someone they knew.

quote:

It claims to tell us how many times something of which there is no record happenes there it is nothing but a wag (wild a!! guess)


Its been documented.

obtaining a hadgun for a minor is also a federal offence
keeping me from owning one because it could be stolen and misused is exactly the same as saying I shouldn't have a car because it could be stolen and missused
and I was in this party before you were born



Where did I say you couldnt own one?




tazzygirl -> RE: Gun Control and mass murder, one does not eliminate the other. (12/17/2012 9:58:57 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

Please note that a man with a 1866 winchester and a pair of 1851 colt navy revolvers could have done the same damage in the same time


1866 Winchester rate of fire... 28 per minute.

1851 colt navy revolver... 6 per minute....

Dont think so.




tazzygirl -> RE: Gun Control and mass murder, one does not eliminate the other. (12/17/2012 10:00:05 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: jlf1961


quote:

ORIGINAL: tazzygirl

Just out of curiosity, could that be because your system treats mental illness instead of pretending it doesnt exist?


And in the United States, most mental illness is treated haphazardly with the limits put on it by health insurance companies, and Obamacare doesnt push it hard for much more than behavioral problems like drug addiction.

As for low income people who suffer from mental illness, the feds and states dont give a fuck about them.


It does get rid of the monetary caps.




jlf1961 -> RE: Gun Control and mass murder, one does not eliminate the other. (12/17/2012 10:16:48 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: tazzygirl


quote:

ORIGINAL: jlf1961


quote:

ORIGINAL: tazzygirl

Just out of curiosity, could that be because your system treats mental illness instead of pretending it doesnt exist?


And in the United States, most mental illness is treated haphazardly with the limits put on it by health insurance companies, and Obamacare doesnt push it hard for much more than behavioral problems like drug addiction.

As for low income people who suffer from mental illness, the feds and states dont give a fuck about them.


It does get rid of the monetary caps.


It does? From the websites I have checked, it doesn't, but then there is a bunch of bullshit about behavioral disorders such as drug addiction. and that is the only example.




tazzygirl -> RE: Gun Control and mass murder, one does not eliminate the other. (12/17/2012 10:51:55 PM)

Americans with mental illness had good reason to celebrate when the Supreme Court upheld President Obama’s Affordable Care Act. The law promises to give them something they have never had before: near-universal health insurance, not just for their medical problems but for psychiatric disorders as well.

Until now, people with mental illness and substance disorders have faced stingy annual and lifetime caps on coverage, higher deductibles or simply no coverage at all.

Now comes the Affordable Care Act combining parity with the individual mandate for health insurance. As Dr. Dilip V. Jeste, president of the American Psychiatric Association, told me, “This law has the potential to change the course of life for psychiatric patients for the better, and in that sense it is both humane and right.”

To get a sense of the magnitude of the potential benefit, consider that about half of Americans will experience a major psychiatric or substance disorder at some point, according to an authoritative 2005 survey. Yet because of the stigma surrounding mental illness, poor access to care and inadequate insurance coverage, only a fraction of those with mental illness receive treatment.

One of the health care act’s pillars is to forbid the exclusion of people with pre-existing illness from medical coverage. By definition, a vast majority of adult Americans with a mental illness have a pre-existing disorder. Half of all serious psychiatric illnesses — including major depression, anxiety disorders and substance abuse — start by 14 years of age, and three-fourths are present by 25, according to the National Comorbidity Survey. These people have specifically been denied medical coverage by most commercial insurance companies — until now.

From an epidemiologic and public health perspective, the provision that young people can remain on their parents’ insurance until they turn 26 is a no-brainer: By this age, the bulk of psychiatric illness has already developed, and there is solid evidence that we can positively change the course of psychiatric illness by early treatment.

Mental disorders are chronic lifelong diseases, characterized by remission and relapse for those who respond to treatment, or persistent symptoms for those who do not. In schizophrenia, for example, relapse is common, even with the best treatment. It makes no sense to tell someone with this condition that his lifetime mental health benefit is just 60 days of inpatient hospitalization.

Psychiatric illness is treatable, but it is rarely curable; it may remit for a while, but it doesn’t go away. That is why the current limits on treatment are as irrational as they are cruel — the discriminatory hallmark of commercial medical insurance.

No more. The Affordable Care Act treats psychiatric illness like any other and removes obstacles to fair and rational treatment.


http://www.nytimes.com/2012/07/10/health/policy/health-care-law-offers-wider-benefits-for-treating-mental-illness.html




jlf1961 -> RE: Gun Control and mass murder, one does not eliminate the other. (12/17/2012 10:56:34 PM)

Thank you, tazzy.

I admit I was wrong.




tazzygirl -> RE: Gun Control and mass murder, one does not eliminate the other. (12/17/2012 10:59:18 PM)

Not wrong. This law has been so maligned and so many didnt bother to read it. They just listened to the "talking heads" and the media, who also didnt read it at first, went along with the easier ride.

Way back when I said there was more to this law than most people realized. While its not what I wanted, its a hell of a lot better than what we had.




tj444 -> RE: Gun Control and mass murder, one does not eliminate the other. (12/17/2012 11:17:49 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: tazzygirl

Just out of curiosity, could that be because your system treats mental illness instead of pretending it doesnt exist?

well,.. that may be one component (along with an overabundance of guns).. but imo its more than that, its the US culture & attitude.. the whole take-the-law-into-your-hands thing (& a gun is really handy in those situations.. [8|] ), an-eye-for-an-eye, a-life-for-a-life,.. people counting down the minutes for someone on death row to die.. stuff like that.. jmo..

1. America is an unusually violent country.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2012/07/23/six-facts-about-guns-violence-and-gun-control/




BamaD -> RE: Gun Control and mass murder, one does not eliminate the other. (12/17/2012 11:18:34 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: tazzygirl


quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

Please note that a man with a 1866 winchester and a pair of 1851 colt navy revolvers could have done the same damage in the same time


1866 Winchester rate of fire... 28 per minute.

1851 colt navy revolver... 6 per minute....

Dont think so.

40 x 4=160 i could and I know people lots better than me with guns




tazzygirl -> RE: Gun Control and mass murder, one does not eliminate the other. (12/17/2012 11:45:25 PM)

40 x 4 = 160... I dont know what you are talking about.

Mind explaining?




BamaD -> RE: Gun Control and mass murder, one does not eliminate the other. (12/18/2012 12:22:22 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: tazzygirl

40 x 4 = 160... I dont know what you are talking about.

Mind explaining?

40 rounds in 2 minutes (one revolver in each hand) 4 2 minute periods = 160 rounds
forget the pistols 28 rounds a minute x 8 minutes = 224 rounds almost 10 rounds per victim




Page: <<   < prev  14 15 [16] 17 18   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
0.046875