Rush to "Gun Control" thoughts...

[ratski]

So here are some of my thoughts on the current "rush to do something" about firearms.

I heard one talking head this morning saying that "we all have to accept the loss of some civil liberties" for there to be progress in "gun control."
Well OK, then...

I think that all records should be available during the background checks that are done for a firearm purchase through an FFL.
By that, I mean ALL.

All Juvenile records need to be available instead of closed or sealed. How many times would this have prevented a problem?

All Medical records need to be available to be screened for psychotic/psychological issues. Especially certain medications. To include Medical Marijuana.

All Federal records need to be searchable. This is to include all Military Medical records and police records.

I'm not in favor of the current flavor of "red flag laws".
I think that due process needs to be involved.
Just saying "he's got a gun and is a menace" should NOT be sufficient cause to remove someone's firearms.
Any more than saying "he's got a car and likes to drink" should be sufficient cause to remove someone's automobile.

I'm sure that there are plenty more, but if "we all have to accept the loss of some civil liberties" then isn't it time that "we all" includes "all" and not just firearms owners??
I'm sure that this will stir the pot, but seriously, so many times something that was known before a tragedy could have stopped the tragedy.

Just want to see...

 

[dlbleak]

Had quite the long talk with a close friend that is a teacher yesterday. We’ve hunted,fished and shot together for 30 years. He’s freaked out and on board with getting rid of all semi autos,period.
I truly do think we need to look at mental health. My fear is that people will stop seeking treatment because they don’t want that ‘label’ on their record. The end result over time could be really bad.

 

[GnometownHero]

I believe many mass shootings are enabled by our criminal government to push the narrative.

 

[OK Corgi Rancher]

This isn't new. It happens every time there's a horrible incident like this because democrats and other anti-gunners know their voice carries further when they're standing on a pile of bodies.

It's a matter of numbers. The more shootings like this there are, the more the anti-gunners get to preach from on high (atop the bodies). Eventually, if they do it enough, they'll succeed. And they are persistent.

 

[Revolvers4Life]

I believe many mass shootings are enabled by our criminal government to push the narrative.

Very convenient how we all of a sudden stop talking about gas prices, inflation, and Ukraine. With the Supreme Court leak and now this all of a sudden democrats have something to mobilize their base.

There isn’t a way to regulate or pass laws to stop these things. You could ban all guns for people under 50, require insurance, make them be locked up, and that wouldn’t stop an 18 year old from stealing his grandpas key, taking a gun without permission and doing this.

 

[alank2]

Shall not be infringed - sadly those words and their simple meaning seem to be lost, as is our nation.

 

[kirk1978]

Closing all the crazy housing and treating crazy people with drugs...doesn't seem to be working very well. Getting rid of a few guns doesn't stop evil.

 

[RickN]

Despite what the keyboard commandos believe, the Democrats will keep trying to take our guns and there is nothing they can do about it, except vote conservative Republican and keep those calls and letters coming in. And maybe write the laws the right way, to protect our rights.

 

[chuter]

I posted my thoughts about red flag laws on another thread, copied here:

Just thinking out loud here, not saying I'm a proponent of red flag laws.

Red flag laws that had a very precise list of things that indicate a threat, like posting on social media or making verbal threats of mass violence, and the ability to carry out the act.
Isn't that close to what assault is? A threat and the ability to carry it out? (not a lawyer).

If the threat doesn't say "shooting", but something like 'I'm going to hurt a bunch of kids at school', does that mean we take away all tools of violence? Knives, vehicles, hammers? What if there are no firearms in the home? If the firearms are properly locked up do they take all the family firearms?

What if the threat is only made against one person; "Billy is mean to me so I'm going to hurt him", does that get a red flag?

If a red flag order is issued should it come with mandatory counseling and inspection of the family and home by state DHS? To insure a healthy home life?
If the person is dangerous enough to have his weapons taken away then they obviously need serious help.

People making a false red flag claim should suffer some consequences.

There are a lot of people now that think all republicans are evil and have blood on their hands for gun violence; these people should not be able to just say "Johnny said some scary stuff and his dad has guns" and be able to start red flag proceedings.

 

[Okie4570]

Had quite the long talk with a close friend that is a teacher yesterday. We’ve hunted,fished and shot together for 30 years. He’s freaked out and on board with getting rid of all semi autos,period.
I truly do think we need to look at mental health. My fear is that people will stop seeking treatment because they don’t want that ‘label’ on their record. The end result over time could be really bad.

Is your teacher friend in favor of teachers carrying at school?