Key word here is involuntary commitments and involuntary outpatient treatments. Are you aware of how few individuals actually get any sort of involuntary mental health treatment? I like how you specify involuntary because that proves my point. If an individual goes to see their psychiatrist or therapist and tells them they've killed animals for fun, have raped in the past, or have homicidal or suicidal ideation, this type of information (unless there is a plan specified, or means of execution) is not reported to the authorities - e.g. not ending up on a database. You need mental health data housed in an accessible location to do the type of screen I'm referring to (NOT just involuntary mental health data) and that information is confidential.
On your original gun laws comment, as a minority, I find it humorous that you think I am implying less minorities should be armed. I, myself, am armed because I am more likely to be targeted by some radical "patriot" nutjob than any minority group you mention. To your "we all know that Muslims are bad" comment, that's because the media you claim "brainwashed the Libs" has brainwashed you into this mindset.
You want teachers armed? You're seem pretty confident that will work. What about the LEOs that showed up to that school and stood around for 40 mins while other potentially armed civilians could have put an end to the bloodshed?
Yes, I think anyone who is determined to be a part of a radical group, should be screened from owning a firearm. Slippery slope or not, I'd feel safer in my own country if MAGA, Antifa, Proud Boys, Militia groups, Taliban, Nazi, Gang members, etc... were not armed.
Again, laughable that you think our existing screening process prevents folks from obtaining firearms. No other country in the world has firearms issues like we do, and this is coming from someone that owns multiple firearms.
I don't have time to reply to the rest, but you get the gist.
You once again are incorrect. I will speak on the outpatient treatment and my State, which is Illinois because that is what I have researched. Voluntary or involuntary, if you seek professional treatment and have homicidal or suicidal thoughts or indications that are indicated to the medical provider, you are reported. So, once again you prove that you aren't as smart as you think.
Don't take my word for it, but talk to psychiatrists in this State, which I talked with four of them at a conference about this very topic. These rules apply to medical doctors and certified counselors also.
As far as you being targeted, maybe you need to consider your life choices if you feel that people are out targeting you. Most likely, you aren't on anybody's radar.
It is a shame you did not read the whole paragraph and understand the point with the Muslim reference. Although, sadly I believe you do and you would by your very own words like to see groups suppressed just for their beliefs.
"Slippery slope or not, I'd feel safer in my own country if MAGA, Antifa, Proud Boys, Militia groups, Taliban, Nazi, Gang members, etc... were not armed."
Your belief is exactly what allowed the Nazi groups in Germany come to power. When you feel that your belief is more important than another groups, you have an issue. You are no more important and no less important than any other group. I may not agree with other groups beliefs, but that doesn't give me the right to stop them from believing the way they do.
I do find it interesting that your list doesn't include any leftist extremists groups, but I guess they are okay since they align with your beliefs?
You will find that is the biggest difference between you and I. I may not agree with you, but I'm not willing to trample on your rights so I can feel better.
As far as no other country having firearm issues as laughable, you once again are wrong. You make broad statements yet give no FACTS, which I have presented in everyone of my post. Once again I will show you the facts to disprove your broad statement with one simple word, Mexico. Look at our southern border and the issue they have there. You will dismiss that as an outlier. Will how about Brazil, Argentina, India, Philippines, and should I go on? Probably not, because you don't want to deal with facts, but instead you want to deal with emotions.
The jury is still out on the police response to this situation. It appears there may have been mistakes made by their response, but it is early in the investigation and if I was on trial, I would want everyone to have all the facts before they pass judgement.
You may not be aware, but the police have no duty to protect you. SCOTUS has ruled that the police are there to investigate crimes and make arrest, they do not have a duty to protect you unless you are in their custody. Courts have ruled that you have the responsibility for your own protection, although with the modern mindset it is much easier to blame someone else. Children are not adults and have no duty to protect themselves, but this falls upon the parents and when given to another (i.e. school district, babysitter, etc.) to protect the minor.
Just in case you are not aware, police are armed civilians. You have military and civilians, the police in the US is not military, but a civilian force. In other nations the police force is part of their military.
Finally, would I expect that the teachers defend themselves against the attacker? YES. Most teachers I know would die protecting the kids they teach. I feel, which is my opinion and no way to validate, that those two teachers if given the tools would have done everything possible to protect those kids. I'm fairly confident that those two teachers did everything they could to protect those kids even without the proper tools. If you don't believe that everyday people use firearms to protect themselves, do a little research and you will see where firearms are used more to protect people than the media and left like to admit.
