General Discussion

jmg257

(11,996 posts)

58. I'm sorry - did you miss the part about a panel, to provide due process, BEFORE any

Sun Jan 27, 2013, 05:51 PM

Jan 2013

rights were taken away? Restrictions you should be for as they clearly AND EQUALLY are a well-balanced way to address the issue you are so quick to identify as 'the problem'?

What you are actually trying to do is avoid dealing with the REAL issue, which is the unfettered access to guns. If YOU have it, so does everyone else. You are trying to maintain the status quo, by blaming any convenient target for the faults of the gun culture system, just like your pals in the NRA and their other dupes do, by pretending guns aren't the problem.

You and Wayne's pipe dream is over, don't you see? No one else is buying the bullshit anymore. They are paying attention...20 destroyed kids and 7 dead adults all killed by 1 ass with an AR will do that. Might take another mass massacre or two to get past the selfishness and fear of so many bots and their lobbiests, but the ball has already started rolling.

Pathetic that your selfishly determined perceived needs for arms don't diminish 1 iota in light of all those being killed with them.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

87 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

A proposal for dealing with the potentially dangerous mentally ill [View all] Lurks Often Jan 2013 OP

Our mental health resources are totally inadequate to do this at this time. kickysnana Jan 2013 #1

It is not a list Lurks Often Jan 2013 #17

Two people I know with health insurance have been unable to get kickysnana Jan 2013 #75

this is a horrendous idea that deprives citizens of due process. cali Jan 2013 #2

How so? Lurks Often Jan 2013 #6

yes, and medical professionals are just so infallible cali Jan 2013 #82

I agree with you Lurks Often Jan 2013 #86

Anything to deflect from the root of the problem Cirque du So-What Jan 2013 #3

An unproductive answer Lurks Often Jan 2013 #7

And YOUR answer is productive? Cirque du So-What Jan 2013 #10

So you have nothing Lurks Often Jan 2013 #14

Allow me to retort Cirque du So-What Jan 2013 #23

Congress thinks otherwise, Lurks Often Jan 2013 #26

More 'resistance is futile?' Is that all ya got? Cirque du So-What Jan 2013 #31

Going to have to disagree Lurks Often Jan 2013 #39

Many of us consider mental illness a root cause hack89 Jan 2013 #8

Ah, we meet again... Cirque du So-What Jan 2013 #13

I would start with mental health services first hack89 Jan 2013 #19

Of course you would Cirque du So-What Jan 2013 #25

Why don't you ask NY - they are implementing a mental health database. hack89 Jan 2013 #32

It does have value, but it is not the be-all & end-all Cirque du So-What Jan 2013 #33

Cracking down on gun trafficking is an excellent idea hack89 Jan 2013 #48

Making it more costly to obtain a firearm just makes it more difficult for the poor. The rich will DogPawsBiscuitsNGrav Jan 2013 #61

Certainly disarming the entire population would be MUCH more effective. jmg257 Jan 2013 #15

And a determination of Lanza needing a hold would have helped how exactly? jmg257 Jan 2013 #4

Unknown at this time since the final police report has not been released. Lurks Often Jan 2013 #9

Ofcourse nothing is going to get through Congress. The NRA and their dupes jmg257 Jan 2013 #11

I worry a lot more about the "potentially dangerous" normal people. bemildred Jan 2013 #5

Just about every day you put your live in the hands of strangers Lurks Often Jan 2013 #12

I can tell you a more realistic threat - distracted drivers. Denninmi Jan 2013 #18

Exactly Lurks Often Jan 2013 #21

I guess I don't understand why this is so different from what we have now overall. Denninmi Jan 2013 #16

There difference now Lurks Often Jan 2013 #20

That's kind if what I thought the situation was. Denninmi Jan 2013 #22

There have been more than 1000 gun deaths in the US in the month since Newtown. Fire Walk With Me Jan 2013 #24

How about.... Morning Dew Jan 2013 #27

Why? Lurks Often Jan 2013 #29

I've owned a gun - don't own one now. Morning Dew Jan 2013 #30

So, make it a panel...you want to stop the mentally ill from obtaining weapons, this seems a great jmg257 Jan 2013 #37

So much for innocent until proven guilty n/t Lurks Often Jan 2013 #42

So much for you REALLY caring about solving the problem. nt jmg257 Jan 2013 #54

Pathetic, you're willing to take people's rights away without due process. Lurks Often Jan 2013 #56

I'm sorry - did you miss the part about a panel, to provide due process, BEFORE any jmg257 Jan 2013 #58

What's pathetic is Lurks Often Jan 2013 #59

Oh, so now we are on to 'banning SA guns is impossible' and 'dropping crime rates'?!? jmg257 Jan 2013 #60

Not even a good try. Lurks Often Jan 2013 #64

Wow - NOW its the election time meme!?! Have you given up on validating your solutions jmg257 Jan 2013 #70

More emotional rhetoric from you Lurks Often Jan 2013 #71

Emotional? I am stone cold...other then a few laughs at the humour you are providing jmg257 Jan 2013 #74

Wow - GREAT idea! It is so simple, and addresses the problem before-hand. jmg257 Jan 2013 #35

Everybody probably needs a mental health Clarence. Jamastiene Jan 2013 #28

Do we have clearance, Clarence? Roger. Fire Walk With Me Jan 2013 #36

May I remind you and anyone who makes the "mental health" jazzimov Jan 2013 #34

I notice you avoided Lurks Often Jan 2013 #40

I fully support enforcing the current laws jazzimov Jan 2013 #53

Then we need to find a way to reduce violence Lurks Often Jan 2013 #55

Yes, you are absolutely correct jazzimov Jan 2013 #62

Then we disagree with the method Lurks Often Jan 2013 #63

At least we agree with the desired outcome jazzimov Jan 2013 #67

Yes we agree on the outcome Lurks Often Jan 2013 #69

Know what? I'm FAR more worried about these emotionally ill people and the mass harm they cause: Fire Walk With Me Jan 2013 #38

Then I encourage you to start your OWN thread about it. n/t Lurks Often Jan 2013 #41

Even I give at least three responses to someone before going anywhere near that sort of reply. Fire Walk With Me Jan 2013 #43

Not at all, your post has NOTHING to do with my original post. n/t Lurks Often Jan 2013 #45

As a "mentally ill" person (who also hates violence and doesn't care for guns) I find your call to Fire Walk With Me Jan 2013 #49

My proposal was limited strictly to those Lurks Often Jan 2013 #57

I had to stop at "determined". You KNOW who they are? You can tell? You are qualified? Fire Walk With Me Jan 2013 #65

If a patient tells a medical professional that they want hurt themselves Lurks Often Jan 2013 #68

You have no concept of the state of the "mental health care system" or that if you start calling out Fire Walk With Me Jan 2013 #80

We're not going to agree, Lurks Often Jan 2013 #87

+1000000 Jamastiene Jan 2013 #83

I think an FDA review of antidepressants is in order kudzu22 Jan 2013 #44

Agreed, Lurks Often Jan 2013 #46

I like my proposal better. LWolf Jan 2013 #47

+1 leftstreet Jan 2013 #50

I can't believe you said "socialist" quinnox Jan 2013 #52

Yep. LWolf Jan 2013 #81

Are there any studies gollygee Jan 2013 #51

It depends on your viewpoint Lurks Often Jan 2013 #73

It should be limited to specific illnesses which involve agression or threats to others FarCenter Jan 2013 #66

"mental health Clarence?" Did spellcheck suggest that? nt raccoon Jan 2013 #72

I would imagine a mental health Clarence would be Jamastiene Jan 2013 #84

Lanza was blocked from buying a rifle. dkf Jan 2013 #76

I'm not sure I follow what you are trying to say. Lurks Often Jan 2013 #77

The law worked, but it didn't stop anything. dkf Jan 2013 #78

Oh yeah. Those laws really stopped him, didn't they? Jamastiene Jan 2013 #85

Couple proposals tama Jan 2013 #79