People this isn't hard…

[Alex K]

"No mentally ill people" is a very problematic generalization though. Where do you draw the line, and which mental illnesses count?

[BrokenQuill92]

"No mentally ill people" is a very problematic generalization though. Where do you draw the line, and which mental illnesses count?

It may seem harsh but my safety (and their own safety) comes before the feelings of any mentally ill person. And since I have no idea how exactly a persons' mental illness will manifest itself I would feel safer with a blanket ban. That's just me personally.

[Goosebump]

"No mentally ill people" is a very problematic generalization though. Where do you draw the line, and which mental illnesses count?

It may seem harsh but my safety (and their own safety) comes before the feelings of any mentally ill person. And since I have no idea how exactly a persons' mental illness will manifest itself I would feel safer with a blanket ban. That's just me personally.

How do you quantify it though? National database of everybody with a mental illness? Good idea, costs though. What about those undiagnosed? Back to the logistical problem with your 1.

Short of a national database of everybody's mental status I think you'll have a hard time getting this fully implemented. /s

[Alex K]

Shades of grey... It's not a yes/no decision

[Goosebump]

Shades of grey... It's not a yes/no decision

Indeed, I'm a gun enthusiast and in favor of gun reform. I don't think a fully liberal no guns no how solution is plausible. Also I think the mental illness issue is a bit of a red herring. Less guns more regulated is the way I would go if I could (as King) decree it. I think the way US handles cars is a good model. Licences based on training and a test. ID licences required to operate, insurance required to operate, registration required to operate, plate = unique identifier independent of the manufacturer's id required to operate.

Lot of hoops? We can all pretty much still drive can't we? Only 6 or 7% of gun owners are NRA members. They are just the extremist "shouting" voice. Like most things.

[downbeatplumb]

"No mentally ill people" is a very problematic generalization though. Where do you draw the line, and which mental illnesses count?

No people who think they are turtles.

[Goosebump]

"No mentally ill people" is a very problematic generalization though. Where do you draw the line, and which mental illnesses count?

No people who think they are turtles.

My niece taught me this is called "throwing shade" which is easy to do to turtles cause they are low to the ground.

[FebruaryOfReason]

Here's my alternative rules:
1. Look at the countries which have the lowest rates of gun deaths
2. Adopt their gun laws

[BrokenQuill92]

It may seem harsh but my safety (and their own safety) comes before the feelings of any mentally ill person. And since I have no idea how exactly a persons' mental illness will manifest itself I would feel safer with a blanket ban. That's just me personally.

How do you quantify it though? National database of everybody with a mental illness? Good idea, costs though. What about those undiagnosed? Back to the logistical problem with your 1.

Short of a national database of everybody's mental status I think you'll have a hard time getting this fully implemented. /s

I mostly thinking an evaluation to see anyone had violent or unstable tendencies before being allowed to register for a gun license. And anyone with previous mental health problems would automatically be barred from registering to own a gun.

[BrokenQuill92]

Here's my alternative rules:
1. Look at the countries which have the lowest rates of gun deaths
2. Adopt their gun laws

Yeah but those places don't allow their citizens access to firearms. And I'm not so naïve as to think that would happen here. So my list was trying to a least be reasonable.