Mass Shooting at Pulse Nightclub in Orlando

[Rooney]

If owning guns is a constitutional right (which I don't believe it should be, but it currently is) then flagrantly denying constitutional rights because of someone's medical history, someone who has never committed a crime, it sets precedent to start denying them any other rights. "Oh you're mentally ill, sorry the first amendment doesn't apply to you, you can't have free speech anymore because you're mentally ill, so just shut up " Dumb example but you get the idea.

Did you miss the part in civics where those rights aren't absolute? The government can restrict them provided they have a compelling interest in doing so. (no I don't think medical history should factor into the restrictions, but when combined with other factors, maybe)

[FNH]

I think all gun sellers should have (and be required to use) access to the background check system. It's pretty ridiculous to me that they don't - I shouldn't be able to legally privately sell a firearm to a convicted felon or terrorist suspect, but I am.

Government funding would be the lynchpin for that. Echeck would need better servers, and they went to that system because of labor cuts for operators

[Ghost_Wheel22]

Best way to sell UBC would be reducing processing time (requires bigger budget), reducing costs to the customer (requiring a larger budget), incentives to FFLs to process person-to-person transfers* (...budget), making it a class 2 felony to sell a firearm to anyone that couldn't pass a 4473, and some good handwaving and obfuscation that those P2P transfers are not registration (which it totally would be because NSA).


*I know of two local gun store FFLs here in Oregon that flat out refuse to deal with Person-to-Person transfers by people trying to comply with our new UBC law because the stores lose money when they could've been selling things to actual customers.

[Meresgi]

Do people really think the mentally ill are that dangerous?

Yes. I have nothing against mentally ill people, I suffer from mental health issues and a ton of other people do as well, however it is far more likely they will commit violent crimes on a scale that gets media attention, which should be obvious as only someone actually suffering from a mental health illness would EVER commit to such acts of terror and horrific violence.

Your trucker example COULD but I would more likely assume he would be the type to be all bluster and bitch about "all dem blacks and muslims" to his family but realize he shouldn't do something as crazy as shoot up a clinic. Now his bluster might reach someone who DOES suffer from a mental health issue and contorts what he is saying into a vendetta.

[archibaldcrane]

only someone actually suffering from a mental health illness would EVER commit to such acts of terror and horrific violence.

/facepalm

[BerenTebogo]

Some good posts past few pages. Quality, well thought out, educated posts.

[Meresgi]

/facepalm

Because rational and mentally healthy people go around shooting up clubs, movie theaters and flying planes into buildings amirite.


Or were you reading it as me literally saying "People who have depression will strap a bomb to themselves given time guys!"

[archibaldcrane]

Lol

[Melena]

Do people really think the mentally ill are that dangerous? Who do you think is more likely to shoot someone with a gun: Someone suffering with an anxiety disorder (a mental illness! oooooo so scary) and purchases a gun because they're afraid their house will be broken into, or a loud racist bible-loving truck-driving beer-drinking violent redneck with his own person collection of hundreds of firearms? One is """""""""""""""normal""""""""""""" and the other is mentally ill. Feel free to guess which group is more dangerous and has more guns combined than any other group in the country.

Violent =/= mentally ill, most mentally ill people are absolutely not violent and are far, far, far more likely to be a victim of a violent crime. For those who equate violence with mental illness, do you think every member of ISIS just happens to be mentally ill? The mental illness brigade? Awfully convenient. Is the dumb popular jock at a highschool who shoves nerds into lockers and gets into fights mentally ill? No, society would consider him perfectly normal, just like the redneck. People in general are just violent. It's unfortunately human nature. Someone mentally ill is more likely to not have the energy to even act on violent impulses if they had any to begin with. Most violent criminals are not mentally ill.

If owning guns is a constitutional right (which I don't believe it should be, but it currently is) then flagrantly denying constitutional rights because of someone's medical history, someone who has never committed a crime, it sets precedent to start denying them any other rights. "Oh you're mentally ill, sorry the first amendment doesn't apply to you, you can't have free speech anymore because you're mentally ill, so just shut up " Dumb example but you get the idea.

It's almost like pre-crime prosecution, essentially criminalizing people before they've even had the chance to do anything illegal.
"Oh, you have depression, so you might end up killing people or yourself, so we're going to go ahead and take away your second amendment right juuuuuust in case"
Meanwhile gun-toting rednecks can just waltz on by with their guns and do whatever they please, completely unaffected because they're likely not diagnosed with anything.
So targeting the mentally ill is not only going to further stigmatize them, but it's not going to actually prevent anything.

If guns weren't a constitutional right and you needed to apply for a license like a car to get one, making it a privilege, then I could see someone's medical history preventing them (just like epilepsy would bar you from driving) but that's not how it currently is. Either people have a right to defend themselves, and the mentally ill ARE people, or they don't. America really needs to decide. I don't like guns at all but I hate double standards like that even more, especially when it's based on misinformation that would damage an already marginalized people and wouldn't stop massacres from happening anyway

People with severe mental illness can be highly agitated and potentially lead to violence. You're kind of grasping at straws here, though i'm sure some people on BG would say that such an undying loyalty towards religion and killing those who don't believe the same invisible man as you is a mental illness.

We also already restrict constitutional rights for a multitude of behaviors. Voting is a constitutional right, yet felons who are incarcerated, on parole, or probation are denied the right to vote.

[tyven]

FYI Chris Murphy is filibustering the Senate right now to get an amendment added to the commerce/justice/science aprops bill that would address the terror gap and i quote "there are some signs that there could be a bipartisan agreement on a provision making it harder for someone on the watch list to buy a gun"

i mean talk about non committal language. whether this could force a compromise is very doubtful to me but fingers crossed, right gang?

[Yuri-G]

http://www.vanityfair.com/news/2016/...ghts-amendment


"Days After Orlando Attack, House G.O.P. Blocks Vote on Gay-Rights Amendment"


Meanwhile, this fucking shit keeps happening.

[Quicklet]

I'm just saying, 49 gay men and women were slaughtered because of - at least in part - their sexuality... and here we are less than a week later talking about how the rights of straight cisgendered men need to be protected. in this very thread. that is literally what is happening right now. I'm diluting the discussion to make a point; there is a lot more going on in this thread than just that. but that fact just disgusts the shit out of me.


I ain't trying to cause trouble or steer the discussion in another direction; I'm not so foolish as to believe I could do so or that it would be productive. but goddamn do I have a right to be disgusted right now.

Your sentiment is important and needs to be heard, particularly in the general discourse and not just within the confines of an internet forum. My fear for a while now has been that the only way things are going to change to reduce these horrific events from occurring is that so many different communities will sadly be visited by the tragedy of gun violence that there will finally be an unwillingness to simply move on without taking action. My hope is that we have seen over and over again that doing nothing is not working, and we have an opportunity this year to hold politicians accountable for their inaction so that this stops being something that happens every few weeks/months to other communities.

[archibaldcrane]

They all need to happen at the same time though - we need a black church, a gay nightclub, an elementary school, a Republican political convention, a mosque, and a WNBA game to be shot up within a week of each other.

THEN we'll get some action on gun control.

[Yuri-G]

Your sentiment is important and needs to be heard, particularly in the general discourse and not just within the confines of an internet forum. My fear for a while now has been that the only way things are going to change to reduce these horrific events from occurring is that so many different communities will sadly be visited by the tragedy of gun violence that there will finally be an unwillingness to simply move on without taking action. My hope is that we have seen over and over again that doing nothing is not working, and we have an opportunity this year to hold politicians accountable for their inaction so that this stops being something that happens every few weeks/months to other communities.

Thank you. I needed to hear that, and it brought tears to my eyes. I really do hope we can get this gun shit under control, and just not just for the gays - for everyone, obviously. I just can't engage in that conversation at the moment; too focused on the victims and the feelings of our community. This will be a very interesting gay Pride coming up in a few weeks...

[Karbuncle]

Um, not that I don't relate to your sentiment regarding Armchair politics... but I have to ask, what does the right to own firearms have to do with Cis-gendered white men? You do understand that there are people from every ethnicity and within the LGBTQ community who own firearms and would fight to keep them, that any legislation or law passed regarding gun rights would effect them as much as a ciswhiteman, right?

My mom, who I'm closer to than anyone else in my family, is a Lesbian, and I've already told her not to go to the Gay pride festival later this month here in STL because I'm afraid for her, terrified even, and for the others there, especially considering the guy who was caught who was going to blow up the one there... This hits home for me too. So you have to forgive me i'm only expressing my confusion on the wording... And of course the 100% possibility I missed a topic of conversation between the Incident reports and the gun law debate and now and you were talking about that...

[archibaldcrane]

Yuri-G never said anything about white.

[Karbuncle]

Yah, okay, muscle memory on my part, my bad didn't mean to put words in their mouth. But LGBTQ men and women and everything inbetween still affected by any and all of these laws if any would come to pass because of this tragedy and hate crime.

[archibaldcrane]

When you say affected, do you mean "somewhat less likely to be killed for who they are"?

[Xno Kappa]

Damn, just found out a good friend of mine's cousin was one of the injured. Met him a few times when we were kids. What a small fucking world.

[Karbuncle]

When you say affected, do you mean "somewhat less likely to be killed for who they are"?

What are you even talking about? I'm only talking about any law passed regarding restrictions of firearms will affect every US citizen, regardless of Sex, race, sexual orientation... anything. If you make sense in context of my post I can at least try to earnestly answer your questions.