Interesting to me that the NRA feels so strongly about protecting access to guns (2nd Amendment rights) and yet want to:
(1) blame the media, and thus restrict violence in games and TV and movies (thus violating 1st Amendment rights); and
(2) maintain a registry, to control and limit anyone who has ever had any sort of mental problem (violating almost every other Amendment rights)
Those are obviously better solutions than just making it harder to obtain certain types of weapons?
… Also seems to me that there are some types of weapons that are outlawed. I presume even the NRA doesn’t want individuals to own nuclear weapons (even though I would only use small nuclear devices for hunting rabbits). So, it’s only a question of where the line is drawn, n’est-ce pas?
Plus I suspect it’s not so that we can seek out to provide good mental health to everyone who needs it. I wonder what happens under this scheme at Mr. God-fearing All-American Gun Owner’s home when his girl gets diagnosed as High Function Spectrum, or the Missus need meds for PPD.
Like someone else mentioned upthread - the disconnect between this and the refusal to contemplate registering every gun ownership is just lovely.
What will Mr. God-Fearing All-American do when someone tells him that HE needs psychological consultation?
Lose your temper in traffic? Burst into tears at work? Someone sees you walking around in the cold weather without a coat on? You’re crazy! Call in the white coats.
Will Mr. God-Fearing politely turn over his weapons until he is deemed fit? Or will he buck and scream about his rights being trampled?
I only skimmed the text of the press release, but they actual call for legislation to limit violent video games, or was it just a “shame on the entertainment industry” discussion?
Also, can you elaborate on the registry thing: what they are specifically calling for and how that specifically violates any of the rights outlined in the constitution?
Not saying I know you’re wrong on either of these things, just would like some cites to back up the claims being made.
A substantive USA-wide mental health program would cost untold billions, and right now the party controlling the House of Representatives refuses to countenance raising taxes by a nickel on people making a million dollars a year.
I still find it mind-boggling that people are taking this ludicrous idea/plan to put an armed policeman in every school seriously. This is insane.
And if these clowns push through this assbackward law, you know it is only a matter of time until the George Zimmerman they hire at minimum wage becomes the legally armed idiot who shoots up the school because he didn’t like what a kid said to him, or didn’t like his Christmas bonus, or didn’t like working double shifts or whatever.
Oh wait, then the NRA will say what we really needed was TWO armed police on every shift - one to watch over the other to make sure he doesn’t kill everyone else.
Please people, stop even debating this ridiculous bullshit the NRA is trying to use to deflect the debate on the real issue of GUN CONTROL. This is trick number one in any debate class - throw your opponent off base by throwing out a ridiculous red herring to discuss instead of the real issue.
One-third of schools already have armed guards. It would cost $2.5 billion to arm the remaining schools. A figure which assumes the guards are paid the same as police officers. But why should they get paid the same as police officers? Unless they are working at Eastside High, they are going to be spending 99% of their time sitting in the lobby, listening to the kindergarteners sing the ABC song over and over and over again. (OK, maybe they do deserve a decent salary.)
Some research shows that guards make kids (white kids, interestingly) uncomfortable. Guards may negatively effect the learning environment.
Columbine had an armed security guard on the day of the shooting. I wonder if that guy (or woman) was given a hard time for not being the big hero everyone imagines they would be if they had been there with a gun.
Here’s the quote - emphasis mine - with some preceding remarks for context, from page two of the transcript:
The remarks were part of his general “shifting of the blame” portion of his speech. It’s not clear if he thinks such a database has been proposed and was voted down or what. I have no doubt if you asked him, he’d say it was a good idea, but I doubt he has any specific plan in mind in mind other than boosting gun sales.
The only specific action for which he called was that congress hurry up and spend a whole bunch of money on hiring cops.
Nothing like a little government money to spread that holiday cheer.
Well, apparently here’s the deal about the “refusal” to create a national registry of mentally ill people: it falls under states rights. Many states DO report data to the Feds, but they can’t be forced to. And each state has different standards.
Does he have any idea how many would have their guns taken away because they would be diagnosed with from paranoid delusions, sexual inadequacies and messiah complexes? I’m not saying that all gun owners are twisted but a not insignificant number are fearful of the boogie man hiding in the closet.
It is an interesting question. Suppose they actually created a national “crazy people” registry. Would the NRA support banning gun sales to anyone on the list?
Didn’t the NRA also fight background check requirements for gun sales?
Do they oppose closing the background check loophole allowing nearly unlimited sales at gun shows?
What good is a Registry of The Crazy if there’s no some gun-taking involved?
If you are in the Registry, does this mean you’re automatically disallowed from buying a gun? If so, doesn’t it follow that you should have to turn over the guns you already own as well? And that the people you live with do something with their guns?
If there are no regulatory teeth to the Registry, then it’s pretty pointless.
I don’t like the mental illness data base idea. Several problems arise. What would constitute a mental illness severe enough to warrant a data base entry? Depression, PTSD, PPD, autism, schizophrenia, OCD, ADHD??? What would be the limit? I was hospitalized for 5 days for PPD and was on Effexor for 2 years. Am I too mentally unstable to buy a gun? Who’s right is it to determine that I am? It seems a huge infringement of personal rights, which is it surprising that the NRA is supporting this since I am sure many of their members would be too mentally ill to own or purchase guns.
The guns used in Connecticut weren’t owned by the shooter; they were his mother’s. Banning sales to only people on a mental illness ain’t gonna do shit.
Maybe they should ban mothers? Not only would mentally ill sons not have access to guns, It would probably cut down on a lot of mental illness as well.