discollector

Your position isn't flying over anyone's head. It's just that it is not true.

There are fewer incidents of gun violence in America today and there are more firearms than there were a few years ago. THAT flies over your head.

While the number of incidents are down, the raw numbers aren't going down proportionally (though they are going down) mostly because we have mass shooters.

Virtually all mass shooters are political jihadists and / or people that are KNOWN to have severe mental disorders.... and almost all of those on a schedule of drugs called SSRIs. We've previously discussed how to reduce this. You refuse entry into America of any person whose religious beliefs are antithetical to our nation (hint: Muslims because they are in a declared war against us.) And, the other class of people need to be held in protective custody while under the influence of mind altering drugs that may put the public at risk.

If we are going to give safe haven to political terrorists and allow the criminally insane to roam our streets freely, there is no amount of gun control that will save you from an inevitable injury or death.

For every person that dies from a firearm related incident, FOUR Americans will die due to second hand smoking. Yet, for the sake of Freedom and Liberty, we accept the consequences of people enjoying their habit. I've never understood why we tolerate the use of tobacco (which has no positive effects) and then scream for gun control. Having a firearm protects your Liberty and Freedom; firearms helps prevent tyranny in government; firearms deter criminals.

Twisted Sister

The dude from Texas got a BCD from the Air Force but the Air Force forgot to report it to the FBI so he bought his guns legally. This mass killing is on the shoulders of the Air Force.

TreeDoc

You sure seem quick to want to take away someone else's liberties and cry foul when yours are regulated.

discollector

Besides that, he had trouble with violent episodes and should have been held in protective custody.

People who pose a threat to themselves and / or the public should not be running amok in a free society.

Once a person has been convicted of a crime of violence AND escaped a mental institution, that individual is a threat to society. I've advocated that those on SSRIs be given those drugs only after they have exhausted the other options. Prescribing SSRIs should be the last treatment option. Furthermore, once you put yourself in someone's care for a medical or mental condition, THEY (meaning your medical / mental custodian) should have temporary custody of a patient's ability to travel about until such time as the disability has been treated, the patient is off the drugs, and can operate their life with some semblance of normalcy.

Turning the criminally insane into the streets is irresponsible, deadly and not justified by any stretch of the imagination.

In this case, the Air Force should definitely take the hit, but we must also look at how patients can escape a mental health facility and run amok in our society, endangering the people.

BS Filter

A few years back we had the local nut house take some clients on a "field trip" to the County Fair. A couple of them escaped. Needless to say, heads rolled.

justoneman

He was jailed in the Air Force for beating his wife and fracturing his infants skull. He tried to kill his dog.he escaped a mental institution. He assulted two other young women.

This guy should have been in jail. There are a lot of people on the streets who should be in jail.

discollector

The issue that we aren't talking about is the fact that background checks don't work AND they are unconstitutional.

The way to protect society would have been, in this case, to put this guy in prison for his crimes and then into a mental facility until he could be rehabilitated and returned to society.

If we cannot rehabilitate people, you simply cannot throw them back into society, unsupervised where they end up killing their fellow man.

Sensible

Ok I have given to plenty of time to get your skulls full of mush together and come to a consensus.

What do you want to do? propose something! Gun confiscation? More meaningless laws, designed to make the average law abiding gun owner less safe?

Just give us the talking points if you can't come up with something.

goober

Even if the air Force had reported the conviction properly, he could have purchased the same guns at a gun show.

goober

You start your post with an outright lie.

The number of mass shootings is directly proportional to gun ownership. The more guns the more people get shot.
That's true.