Guns...Times have changed...

[Henro]

The good people carrying guns theory went to hell in Texas. Not only armed , but , with body armor , a nice swat armored truck and neat cowboy hats. They sat as little kids got turned into jello.

I am not anti gun but I most certainly do not buy that logic.

I think your logic is a bit off the mark.

Point really is, that like in the case of that woman recently, IF someone is armed they MIGHT be able to do something IF THEY CHOOSE TO. Nothing says they have to.

Using the apparent poor performance of those law enforcement officers in Texas to claim what that woman did recently can’t happen, is illogical. It DID happen. And could happen again, and again. But only if a good person carrying a weapon happens to be there.

 

[radas]

no its not, its emotionally charged groupthink leading up to the taking away of

Dr. Rachel Levine, former pediatrician and current Health Secretary. Should HE be allowed to buy a gun under your proposed psych eval process? Obviously a super smart guy but also very obviously has some mental issues.

If Dr. Levine can pass a psych eval showing no aggressive, suicidal, or homicidal tendencies, then sure.

Between the two posts, it's apparent you cannot formulate your own ideas.

 

[motionclone]

If Dr. Levine can pass a psych eval showing no aggressive, suicidal, or homicidal tendencies, then sure.

Between the two posts, it's apparent you cannot formulate your own ideas.

Fair enough. How about murderers that have no previous documented cases of aggressive, suicidal or homicidal tendencies and just lie on the forms so they can get a gun to go on a murder spree? They would be allowed to buy a gun under your proposed psych evals?

 

[radas]

Fair enough. How about murderers that have no previous documented cases of aggressive, suicidal or homicidal tendencies and just lie on the forms so they can get a gun to go on a murder spree? They would be allowed to buy a gun under your proposed psych evals?

That's what is currently happening!!! A competent mental health professional can evaluate someone better than they can self-evaluate on a form that has no audit trail. Will some slip through the cracks? Sure, no system is perfect. But it is a hell of a lot better than relying on someone's word.

If people have to go through this level of screening to adopt a child and keep them safe, why isn't it a requirement to go through a similar process to keep guns out of hands of those who have ill intent and keep our children and citizens safe.

 

[Clevus]

I think I have articulated my position well enough using fact instead of hyperbole.
So I’ll just throw out one of my favorite meme.

 

[Nicfin36]

There is an easy way to get around psychological evaluations. It is called lying. A psychopath/sociopath is VERY good at it. I've personally worked with a sociopath. They are slick, until you catch onto them. Of course, some are better at it than others. Regular people are good at lying too.

There is too much assumption that a person intent on committing evil will obey laws in the first place. They don't. Only law abiding people do. So, in the end, only law abiding people are the ones that are affected by more laws. How many existing laws did the Uvalde shooter break?

 

[mcmxi]

A competent mental health professional can evaluate someone better than they can self-evaluate on a form that has no audit trail.

I wonder how many mental health professionals are opposed to firearms ownership. Are the majority of mental health professionals able to be objective and professional? In today's highly polarized society I very much doubt it. If you start out with the desire or intention of looking for a reason to say no you're probably going to find one.

This reminds me of the chances of finding an objective journalist. They used to be ubiquitous but now they're unicorns.

 

[motionclone]

That's what is currently happening!!! A competent mental health professional can evaluate someone better

And who gets to determine comepetent? The government? A group of doctors?
Sounds super easy to be persuaded by politics or social pressure/ cancel cuture. See my previous posts about mental illness.

 

[motionclone]

If people have to go through this level of screening to adopt a child and keep them safe, why isn't it a requirement to go through a similar process to keep guns out of hands of those who have ill intent and keep our children and citizens safe.

Adopting children isnt a constitutionally protected right, gun ownership is thats why.

 

[Flintknapper]

Gender dysphoria is still listed in the DSM-5. Not sure where you're getting your information from or why you have to lie to make a point. Again, time to ask yourself, how and why does this impact you?

Inaction, or dismissal of something because it doesn't 'impact YOU' directly....is the type of complacency that has us where we are today. Again, it is born of the idea that "Everything is OK, its just different" and some people are all too willing to accept things labeled by progressives as the 'New Normal'.

We reap what we sow and a lot of BS is being sown.

 

[Clevus]

2a.

Inaction, or dismissal of something because it doesn't 'impact YOU' directly....is the type of complacency that has us where we are today. Again, it is born of the idea that "Everything is OK, its just different" and some people are all too willing to accept things labeled by progressives as the 'New Normal'.

We reap what we sow and a lot of BS is being sown.

I saw a quote I like that is relevant.
”If you can force people to accept absurdities, you can get them to commit atrocities”

 

[Flintknapper]

2a.
I saw a quote I like that is relevant.
”If you can force people to accept absurdities, you can get them to commit atrocities”

Very true. And each time an atrocity is not addressed.....it serves to desensitize. Eventually it is considered 'normal' or at least acceptable on some level.

 

[jkrubi12]

I wonder how many mental health professionals are opposed to firearms ownership. Are the majority of mental health professionals able to be objective and professional? In today's highly polarized society I very much doubt it. If you start out with the desire or intention of looking for a reason to say no you're probably going to find one.

This reminds me of the chances of finding an objective journalist. They used to be ubiquitous but now they're unicorns.

VERY well stated

 

[Ridelght]

Very true. And each time an atrocity is not addressed.....it serves to desensitize. Eventually it is considered 'normal' or at least acceptable on some level.

You both are correct. That is why the new anything is ok, and as long as it isnt directly affecting you shut up mentality is dangerous.

 

[jkrubi12]

If responsible gun owners do not find ways to respond to the long-running (and now building) anti-gun establishment, elected officials will utilize the opportunity to appease the 'loudest' crowd with new, stricter requirements of all types onto gun owners and manufacturers.

'Anti-gunners' in most cases would not be considered as knowledgable firearms persons, assuming the likelihood that they've neither owned or used them.

It's up to KNOWLEDGABLE firearms users to acknowledge the situation and protect their interests by working harder than anyone to find solutions.

I don't want to see a host of new laws/restrictions/mandates etc., placed on law-abiding taxpaying citizens! If the problem isn't adequately and promptly addressed, someone that doesn't have any interest in your interests will create a legislative solution.

 

[mcmxi]

It's up to KNOWLEDGABLE firearms users to acknowledge the situation and protect their interests by working harder than anyone to find solutions.

Very, very well said. Unfortunately I don't see the NRA helping in this regard.

 

[motionclone]

And in the latest news on murderers going on killing sprees....This one was stopped by a woman with a gun. Good thing emotional anti-gun "people" didnt keep her from owning and possessing and using a firearm:

 

[Daren Todd]

If responsible gun owners do not find ways to respond to the long-running (and now building) anti-gun establishment, elected officials will utilize the opportunity to appease the 'loudest' crowd with new, stricter requirements of all types onto gun owners and manufacturers.

'Anti-gunners' in most cases would not be considered as knowledgable firearms persons, assuming the likelihood that they've neither owned or used them.

It's up to KNOWLEDGABLE firearms users to acknowledge the situation and protect their interests by working harder than anyone to find solutions.

I don't want to see a host of new laws/restrictions/mandates etc., placed on law-abiding taxpaying citizens! If the problem isn't adequately and promptly addressed, someone that doesn't have any interest in your interests will create a legislative solution.

There are quite a few states with open carry laws on the books. And several with pretty much do as you please laws on the books.

If 2a was repealed and a gun grab put into place by the feds, your pretty much looking at east coast, west coast, and the few outlying states in between. The rest of the states wouldn't follow suit. Heck, pretty much every commercial for candidates on TV at the moment spouts about protecting that very freedom. From the governor to the lowly mayor and every senator and representative for Arkansas.

 

[radas]

I wonder how many mental health professionals are opposed to firearms ownership. Are the majority of mental health professionals able to be objective and professional? In today's highly polarized society I very much doubt it. If you start out with the desire or intention of looking for a reason to say no you're probably going to find one.

This reminds me of the chances of finding an objective journalist. They used to be ubiquitous but now they're unicorns.

That's a very real possibility, there may be some that are very pro 2A as well. I agree with you on unbiased journalism not being a thing anymore - they are employed by big business (some of which owned by our billionaire oligarchs).

Inaction, or dismissal of something because it doesn't 'impact YOU' directly....is the type of complacency that has us where we are today. Again, it is born of the idea that "Everything is OK, its just different" and some people are all too willing to accept things labeled by progressives as the 'New Normal'.

We reap what we sow and a lot of BS is being sown.

"Everything is OK, just different" - isn't this the textbook definition of Freedom? I don't agree with every single mainstream thing that is being said or done here, but if it doesn't infringe upon my freedoms, who am I to say what people can or cannot do? Same goes with you. Freedom of thought, speech, and action as long as it doesn't infringe upon others freedoms isn't "progressive", it's an amendment just like the 2nd protected by the first and the ninth.

 

[radas]

It's up to KNOWLEDGABLE firearms users to acknowledge the situation and protect their interests by working harder than anyone to find solutions.

Yes, this.