The number of children killed in the next school shooting may be much higher

[Lurker66]

"Mental" people should not have firearms. I agree with that. I think we all agree with that. How do we go about stopping the Loughners without some sort of suitability test for purchases, or is that a reasonable solution? Even if we did have a test it wont stop the Lanzas of the world killing some body and taking their guns.

As for the second sentence, I need a clarification or translation.

oops. My second sentence is the form that we fill out when buying a firearm. Specifically the "have you been diagnosed" question or the silly are you a legal citizen.

I dont think we can ever stop mass killings, but we can tighten up the screening or background checks.

Its against the law for a felon to own guns and if they try it pops up on the background check. Mental people have to be adjudicated. I think this adjudicating process is where we could tighten the laws up. Streamline the adjudicating process, get Dr.s involved. Maybe thats a starting point.

It might not stop all mass murders but it might prevent some murders or suicides.

 

[OliverKlohzoff]

Why can't they just sit at home with their AR's and Twinkies listening to Alex Jones... like the rest of us!?

You got twinkies ?????

 

[uncle money bags]

oops. My second sentence is the form that we fill out when buying a firearm. Specifically the "have you been diagnosed" question or the silly are you a legal citizen.

I dont think we can ever stop mass killings, but we can tighten up the screening or background checks.

Its against the law for a felon to own guns and if they try it pops up on the background check. Mental people have to be adjudicated. I think this adjudicating process is where we could tighten the laws up. Streamline the adjudicating process, get Dr.s involved. Maybe thats a starting point.

It might not stop all mass murders but it might prevent some murders or suicides.

Seems reasonable to me. Now we just have to sell it to people who wont address it as the issue.

 

[redneckgearhead]

I'm not sure i can hang my hat "might" while banning crazies from buying guns is a noble idea, I'm not sure how it could be implemented. Do you really want the government deciding who is sane enough to own a weapon? Bad things happen, there is no stopping it. Without guns crazies would just find other ways to do crazy sh1t. What's that saying? Those willing to sacrifice freedom for safety deserves neither.

 

[Free Trapper]

Why can't they just sit at home with their AR's and Twinkies listening to Alex Jones... like the rest of us!?

You have Twinkies?

 

[71buickfreak]

You got twinkies ?????

I think he was referring to me and my freezer full of Hostess goodness. They defrost just as good as fresh, I have to say. I have had worse straight off the shelf. And they are miles better than little debbie.

 

[uncle money bags]

I'm not sure i can hang my hat "might" while banning crazies from buying guns is a noble idea, I'm not sure how it could be implemented. Do you really want the government deciding who is sane enough to own a weapon? Bad things happen, there is no stopping it. Without guns crazies would just find other ways to do crazy sh1t. What's that saying? Those willing to sacrifice freedom for safety deserves neither.

That is the crux of the problem. You will find very few people here who believe the government can do it without overstepping and oppressing. You will also find that the vast majority of us adhere to your last sentence.

 

[Rhino55]

I hear everyone on here talking about our gun rights are at stake because of the school kills. If that person didn't have a gun, he would have found another tool to kill with. If he would have lived, I believe he should have been tried by the gun owners because the Anit-gun people have already given up their second amendment rights.

 

[Glocktogo]

Then lets make our arguments "emotional". Now, how do we do that?

First off, we have to call it the same every time. It's not gun control and we need to call it "predator protection laws" or "easy prey laws". We need to do that EVERY single time. If we have to say it a dozen or more times in a single interview or debate, so be it. If a bill comes up in the house or senate, our side needs to call it by one of those names, not the sweet, innocent and purposeful sounding BS the authors label it as.

 

[aeropb]

The number will most likely be much much lower.