(December 15, 2012 at 12:17 pm)LastPoet Wrote: Its not about forbidding completely guns A Theist, its about better regulation. Having automatic weapons and military caliber guns it goes way over the need to defense.

In the USA, it does. The second amendment was specifically created so that citizens could fight back against the government if they believed the government was being too controlling. If the US military has automatic weapons, by the second amendment, so should its citizens.

Quote:What do you think of people owning guns having clean records, with compulsory regular psychological & physical examination, besides some lessons on how to use them when taking the license. This is how its done here, it won't end gun related incidents, but at least keep it to a minimum.

Indeed. The thing with tragedies like this is that they aren't commonplace, and are almost always the result of mental health problems not being taken into consideration. Improve mental health detection and care, restrict people with mental health problems from owning guns, and you'll see these incidents drop or disappear completely.

Also, according to at least one expert, the media can do things to reduce the number of shootings:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PezlFNTGWv4

---

(December 15, 2012 at 12:20 pm)Rev. Rye Wrote: Because the last time we did that, it led to a huge increase in crime. Remember Prohibition?

What do you mean, "remember prohibition"? We're living in a prohibition right now...the prohibition of drugs. Like with alcohol prohibition, the prohibition of drugs has led to huge increases in crime, and also in prison populations.

(December 15, 2012 at 11:46 am)A Theist Wrote: That wasn't my question TJ...

Quote:...and what of alcohol? Everything you just posted can be said for alcohol too....Alcohol related deaths in America kill more people per year than all the deaths by guns and drugs combined...is your opinion the same for alcohol too?.... (the use of alcohol can also seriously impair those who have no paranoid schizophrenia and other mental health issues...but its continued use can lead to those issues)

....since alcohol related deaths kill more people in America per year, (including traffic fatalities), than all the deaths by drugs and guns combined....do you think there should greater regulations controlling alcohol?

Simply put, I still have the same answer for guns, cars and alcohol: they shouldn't be taken away from people, but they should be regulated better than they are now. Some people have no business owning or using them and those, specific people should be restricted from using them (generally, prohibit people from using if they can't hadle the responsibility).

(December 15, 2012 at 11:19 am)A Theist Wrote: Legalizing marijuana would just be adding to an already seriously existing problem to drug and alcohol use....

Quote:"Marijuana remains the most widely abused illicit drug in the United States and around the world. There remains significant controversy over the effects of the drug on physical and mental health. However, marijuana is no longer considered a benign drug. It has been shown to have negative effects on both physical and psychological health and is associated with the possible development of tolerance, dependence and a withdrawal syndrome."

http://www.usc.edu/student-affairs/Healt...subs2.html

In the Netherlands, where I live, problems with marijuana are relatively low, due to a policy of prevention instead of criminalization. Often people think it is widely tolerated, yet most people think smoking weed regularly is pathetic.

The result;
- less people use weed
- lower costs
- less crime, less people in jail
- selling pointa are regulated, keeping the costumer away from the crack dealers.

The policy is not perfect though.

I don't think marijuana is an easy drugs. Daily users often suffer mental problems, but stoned people are rarely agressive, in contrary to drunk people.

(December 15, 2012 at 12:17 pm)LastPoet Wrote: Its not about forbidding completely guns A Theist, its about better regulation. Having automatic weapons and military caliber guns it goes way over the need to defense.

What do you think of people owning guns having clean records, with compulsory regular psychological & physical examination, besides some lessons on how to use them when taking the license. This is how its done here, it won't end gun related incidents, but at least keep it to a minimum.

Another thing, your example is rather idiotic, it has nothing to do with guns. While obesity may be a health issue, being obese harms noone else but the subject. Apples & oranges Ol'chap, apples and oranges.

You guys are doing a good job of tap dancing around the topic of this thread....let's try this again, (or are you guys being selective on regulating things that only fit within a certain political agenda)....

"Its not about forbidding completely guns A Theist, its about better regulation."...okay, (even though there are those who advocate banning guns altogether), let's scratch the word "ban" for "regulate"...I'm talking about regulating the use and purchasing and selling of alcohol....Alcohol related deaths kill more people in America than all the deaths by drugs and guns combined, (alcohol related deaths to include homicides, suicides, traffic fatalities, domestic violence, alcohol related diseases, mental health, etc.)....Alcohol use is proven to be far more deadly than guns or drugs....if you're going to jump on the wagon to "better" regulate guns, why not jump on to better regulate the purchasing and selling of alcohol since it's proven to be far more deadly in our society?....

Quote:""Alcohol related injuries and deaths in the United States is a major problem that has seen little improvement over the last decade. In fact, alcohol related car accidents kill more people between the ages of 17 and 34 than any other cause. Alcohol is also closely associated with homicides, suicides, workplace injuries, domestic violence, assault, and complications and death resulting from alcohol related disease like cirrhosis of the liver. Understanding the potentially injurious or fatal risks that people take when they drink is essential to creating an educated public that is more cognizant of the need for self-control over alcohol.....While most adults in the country are probably aware that alcohol related car accidents are a serious problem, few are aware that the physical risks taken just by drinking are severe enough that thousands of people die from conditions related to alcoholism every year. According to the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, there are more than 23,000 deaths related to alcohol each year that are not traffic fatalities or homicides, and 14,406 of those are caused by alcoholic liver disease.(2) Adding these totals to just the total number of drunk driving fatalities alone and we can see that nearly 47,000 deaths occur as a result of these alcohol related causes alone."

http://recoveryfirst.org/alcohol-related...e-us.html/

"Another thing, your example is rather idiotic, it has nothing to do with guns. While obesity may be a health issue, being obese harms noone else but the subject. Apples & oranges Ol'chap, apples and oranges."....It wasn't meant to be taken as an example, it was intended for sarcasm...Ol' Chap.

---

(December 15, 2012 at 12:51 pm)Dee Dee Ramone Wrote:

(December 15, 2012 at 11:19 am)A Theist Wrote: Legalizing marijuana would just be adding to an already seriously existing problem to drug and alcohol use....

http://www.usc.edu/student-affairs/Healt...subs2.html

In the Netherlands, where I live, problems with marijuana are relatively low, due to a policy of prevention instead of criminalization. Often people think it is widely tolerated, yet most people think smoking weed regularly is pathetic.

The result;
- less people use weed
- lower costs
- less crime, less people in jail
- selling pointa are regulated, keeping the costumer away from the crack dealers.

The policy is not perfect though.

I don't think marijuana is an easy drugs. Daily users often suffer mental problems, but stoned people are rarely agressive, in contrary to drunk people.

Thanks at least for staying on topic...

I'm just curious A Theist, because I'm not entirely sure, are you in favor of Alcohol being criminalized? You are making the case for it being much worse than Marijuana or Guns. Guns and Alcohol both kill more people than Marijuana. It seems in a post arguing for consistency you either need to be in favor of all three being legal or all three being illegal or admit to being inconsistent. That's why I believe all three should be legal.

I agree with this topic. I'm sick and tired of reading about crazy people taking bottles of scotch into schools and murdering 30 people with them. No false equivocation here.

(December 15, 2012 at 11:47 am)Rhythm Wrote:

(December 15, 2012 at 11:00 am)TaraJo Wrote: This, plus, I think we need to do a better job with mental health issues. I've seen way too many of these incidents where the shooter is completely batshit crazy but got a small aresnal of guns completely legally. I'm sorry, but if you have paranoid schizophrenia or other mental health problems you have NO business being anywere near a firearm.

A firearm focused application of the "don't give a baby to Crazy" rule.

I think you’ll find that Groups like the NRA have no problem with background checks that keep firearms out of the hands of criminals and the mentally defective (government’s term not mine). The National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) already has a system in place for reporting and recording such records that most states already use to perform background checks for gun purchasers. Resistance to fully implementing the NICS systems does not come from groups like the NRA. It comes from the individual states unwillingness to implement the system, conflicts with existing laws and regulation, and push back from privacy advocacy groups.

I’m a gun owner. I currently have 13 handguns, 7 shotguns and 23 rifles. After the holidays I am going to add another rifle by ordering my 3rd M1 Garand from the CMP. It’s the only place in the country where a non-licensed individual can mail order a modern firearm and have it mailed directly to their home. My collection includes 6 NFA controlled items. I have a short barreled shotgun, a short barreled rifle, a M16A3 select fire assault rifle and 3 supressors. I am also a lifetime member of the NRA.

Despite all that I recognize that the current system for performing background checks is woefully inadequate. Some of the things that I believe need to be fixed are:

1. Require the states to use the NICS system. Currently all licensed dealers are required to perform a background check. However each state is allowed to decide how that is done. Several states have chosen to implement their own system that doesn’t necessarily talk to other national databases.
2. Require the states to report mental health issues to the NICS system.
3. Require mental health professionals to report mental health concerns to the states.
4. Require private transfers to perform a background check and allow non-licensed individuals access to the NICS system.

Of those four things the NRA doesn’t object to 1-3. Fuck them on number 4. The objections to 1-3 come from the states. It would be expensive to implement those provisions and most don’t want to spend the money. Privacy advocacy groups also object to 3 and 4.

http://smartgunlaws.org/mental-health-re...y-summary/

(December 15, 2012 at 1:28 pm)Ryantology Wrote: I agree with this topic. I'm sick and tired of reading about crazy people taking bottles of scotch into schools and murdering 30 people with them. No false equivocation here.

Ever heard of drunk drivers causing massive pile-ups and causing the deaths of multiple people involved? Yeah, me too.

No false equivocation when you look at it that way.

(December 15, 2012 at 12:17 pm)LastPoet Wrote: Its not about forbidding completely guns A Theist, its about better regulation. Having automatic weapons and military caliber guns it goes way over the need to defense.

You are going to have a hard time convincing me I shouldn't be allowed to own a machine gun. Since NFA was enacted in 1934 there has been only one case of someone being convicted of using a legally owned machine gun to kill someone. In that instance an Ohio police officer used his privately owned MAC-11 to murder an informant. Legally owned machine guns in the hands of civilians are not the problem many would like them to be.

(December 15, 2012 at 1:07 pm)A Theist Wrote: You guys are doing a good job of tap dancing around the topic of this thread....let's try this again, (or are you guys being selective on regulating things that only fit within a certain political agenda)....

Besides the rather odd comparision, I just wanted to state my opinion on the gun issue, since its the first term in said comparision. As to political agenda, I have none regarding your country, only stated my opinion, I'm mature enough to admit that political affairs from a country a few thousand kilometers away from mine aren't really my speciality.

Quote:"Its not about forbidding completely guns A Theist, its about better regulation."...okay, (even though there are those who advocate banning guns altogether), let's scratch the word "ban" for "regulate"...I'm talking about regulating the use and purchasing and selling of alcohol....Alcohol related deaths kill more people in America than all the deaths by drugs and guns combined, (alcohol related deaths to include homicides, suicides, traffic fatalities, domestic violence, alcohol related diseases, mental health, etc.)....Alcohol use is proven to be far more deadly than guns or drugs....if you're going to jump on the wagon to "better" regulate guns, why not jump on to better regulate the purchasing and selling of alcohol since it's proven to be far more deadly in our society?....

You are comparing several different things: guns, alcohol & drugs. I will try to make it clear, so bear with me if I don't.

Alcohol & drug abuse primarily do harm to the person itself and although in many cases third persons can get harmed by it, no one does so with criminal intent to harm others. That is why for example a person that kills another as a result of DUI is charged with manslaughter.

Gun abuse on the other hand, barring accidents that can be minimized by regulation (mandatory education on gun handling & storage), are the result of criminal intent for the simple reason that, guns to all effects are made to be used to injure (at least) its target. That is why if one kills someone else with a gun, one is charged minimally with 2nd degree murder.

That is why your comparision is silly, you are grasping to some warped idea that somehow it is inconsistent to regulate gun usage when alcohol does more harm. I hope I made it clear enough.

---

(December 15, 2012 at 1:37 pm)Tiberius Wrote: Ever heard of drunk drivers causing massive pile-ups and causing the deaths of multiple people involved? Yeah, me too.

No false equivocation when you look at it that way.

Yeah, but even on those cases, unless proven that the person thought of causing such a massive pile-up before drinking and just used alcohol to "gain courage", it would still be manslaughter (or several counts of it).