PDA

View Full Version : NBC video: gun buying sting


Packy14
07-23-2012, 12:22 PM
http://today.msnbc.msn.com/id/26184891/vp=48283194#48283194

Personally I don't think sales like this should be legal, there should be good background checks with mental health screening.

Coded-Dude
07-23-2012, 12:29 PM
we should have mental health screenings before people are allowed to be born, reproduce, go out in public, drive a car, vote, etc. /sarcasm - ban crazies.

nick
07-23-2012, 12:46 PM
http://today.msnbc.msn.com/id/26184891/vp=48283194#48283194

Personally I don't think sales like this should be legal, there should be good background checks with mental health screening.

Why not? Personal fears aside, is there any evidence that this actually increases crime (aside from the other arguments against your suggestion)?

NYsteveZ
07-23-2012, 12:56 PM
I know how sales work here in the PRK, but is there any crimes commited by NBC in this video? I would love to see the predator become the prey

Packy14
07-23-2012, 1:08 PM
its funny, I doubt most of you want people with mental illness to have guns, yet whenever it is suggested that maybe something should be done about it, its all "ban crazies". Believe me, I own guns, shoot guns, love guns. I believe any responsible law abidding citizen should have a gun. That said, crazy people probably shouldn't. Maybe they shouldn't drive either, I don't have comment on that.

Dantedamean
07-23-2012, 1:30 PM
its funny, I doubt most of you want people with mental illness to have guns, yet whenever it is suggested that maybe something should be done about it, its all "ban crazies". Believe me, I own guns, shoot guns, love guns. I believe any responsible law abidding citizen should have a gun. That said, crazy people probably shouldn't. Maybe they shouldn't drive either, I don't have comment on that.

While I agree people like Holmes should probably not have access to firearms, where do we stop? Baring people from obtaining a gun simply because of something they may or may not do is too extreme for me. Many people have mental illnesses, depression, anxiety, psychopaths, aggression, ect. Some people are worse then others, if we did an FMRI before someone bought a gun I have a feeling half the people who currently own a weapon wouldn't pass. You start going down that road and it can easily get out of control.

thekwyjibo
07-23-2012, 1:46 PM
While I agree people like Holmes should probably not have access to firearms, where do we stop? Baring people from obtaining a gun simply because of something they may or may not do is too extreme for me. Many people have mental illnesses, depression, anxiety, psychopaths, aggression, ect. Some people are worse then others, if we did an FMRI before someone bought a gun I have a feeling half the people who currently own a weapon wouldn't pass. You start going down that road and it can easily get out of control.

And to add to this statement, remember that many of the Gun control advocates would argue that anyone who desires a firearm is, by definition, mentally ill. Ergo, no one should be allowed to purchase a firearm.

There are many people who fear this slippery slope here, and justifiably so. Given some of the tendencies we have seen in the government, to take some of the intricacies in the English language, plus a little motivated reasoning (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motivated_reasoning) to create some really scary stuff. The whole argument on what the writers of the second amendment actually meant is one item of which this forum is very much aware.

People are not saying that this predator should have been allowed to purchase a firearm, they are more concerned with the unintended consequence of what could happen should a poorly written law be enacted.

Dannicus
07-23-2012, 2:26 PM
Isn't there a space on the DROS form to admit that you're crazy? That should keep guns out of the hands of the mentally unstable just fine.

Steve1968LS2
07-23-2012, 3:23 PM
The biggest problem with "crazy" is that some people hide it very well..

And who decides what "crazy" is? the govt? you?

And if a "crazy" person was bent on carnage and couldn't get a gun they would mow down dozens with truck, blow them up with a common chemical bomb, burn down a crowded venue or buy a katana and go ape**** ..

You can't stop evil people from doing evil things..

Packy14
07-23-2012, 4:45 PM
well, if you watch the video... not every state has a dros process for ppt's. not saying that the dros process here is much more than a formality/tax, but at least it stops most convicts from legally acquiring weapons (illegal is a different story of course). Oh well, this country is going to s*** anyway.

bloodhawke83
07-23-2012, 4:51 PM
well, if you watch the video... not every state has a dros process for ppt's. not saying that the dros process here is much more than a formality/tax, but at least it stops most convicts from legally acquiring weapons (illegal is a different story of course). Oh well, this country is going to s*** anyway.

A lot of criminals don't have records yet. The can go rent a gun and steal it or buy one legally.

Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk 2

tenpercentfirearms
07-23-2012, 4:52 PM
They wait until the transaction is about over and then they have the guy say he probably couldn't pass a background check anyway. Not that it matters here, but in Free America, cancel that transaction right away.

I like the guy who says he has no problems selling a .50 BMG. He realizes it isn't a big deal. The reporter claims a .50 BMG is the choice of the drug cartels. Idiot.

Much more of this crap and I might actually start to get scared this backlash on this one might last.

norcal.xd
07-23-2012, 4:55 PM
its nice to see even the news is recycling in this hard economy.....lol I seen that video awhile ago on this site, minus all the stuff about Colorado.

TempleKnight
07-23-2012, 6:23 PM
I like the guy who says he has no problems selling a .50 BMG. He realizes it isn't a big deal. The reporter claims a .50 BMG is the choice of the drug cartels. Idiot.



Made me laugh. I got this mental picture of some 5'5" guys trying to carry around 5' rifles weighing 30 lbs without ammo. As their "every day carry" pieces.

Great reporter

Agent 0range
07-23-2012, 6:32 PM
I'm not sure how PPT gun sales work in free states, but I'd be hesitant to sell one without going through an FFL. Just like selling a car, I don't want that VIN, or in this case, serial # to be in my name once it's no longer in my possession. On the flip side, I'd probably buy one without going through a FFL if it was legal to do so.

Wildeman_13
07-23-2012, 6:37 PM
I like the guy who says he has no problems selling a .50 BMG. He realizes it isn't a big deal. The reporter claims a .50 BMG is the choice of the drug cartels. Idiot.

Well sure! If given a CHOICE I would pick the .50 BMG too! Who wouldn't?!?!?

Kendall6.8
07-23-2012, 7:40 PM
Unfortunately the media creates more drama and makes issues bigger than they are. I am not down playing this event at all, and my prayers go out to the families and the survivors. But every news cast I have seen yet just focuses on the phrase "Assault Weapons". This creates a more dramatic effect. But even if this guy could not get guns he would have just done something else to hurt people. Evil people will always find a way. But making this about guns and gun control will only unarm all of us law abiding citizens and make us victims.

QQQ
07-23-2012, 10:42 PM
its funny, I doubt most of you want people with mental illness to have guns, yet whenever it is suggested that maybe something should be done about it, its all "ban crazies". Believe me, I own guns, shoot guns, love guns. I believe any responsible law abidding citizen should have a gun. That said, crazy people probably shouldn't. Maybe they shouldn't drive either, I don't have comment on that.

You're crazy for suggesting that we impose more restrictions on a Constitutionally-guaranteed right.

BAM! No guns for you.

Riksk
07-24-2012, 12:03 AM
Wow, wonder what undercover employee of NBC got to keep all the nice firearms the station legally purchased.

Kudos to them for putting more cash into the gun economy. Also, if there is no transfer or paperwork on a ppt.... What's to stop a Cali inmate from going on a road trip? Wonder if you could be convicted for that.

stix213
07-24-2012, 3:36 AM
http://today.msnbc.msn.com/id/26184891/vp=48283194#48283194

Personally I don't think sales like this should be legal, there should be good background checks with mental health screening.

I would only support that if there was a website or phone number an individual private party seller can access when they sell their gun.

If you think that is stupid cause it would be practically voluntary, you're fooling yourself cause it already is that way.

SanPedroShooter
07-24-2012, 6:25 AM
Yawn...

I hate to point out the 'California effect', but in 90% of the country you can dispose of your private property without asking the government for permission.

Freedom is kind of scary isnt it? Dont worry, baby steps....

Packy14
07-24-2012, 7:47 AM
You're crazy for suggesting that we impose more restrictions on a Constitutionally-guaranteed right.

BAM! No guns for you.

Well, I hope no crazy person who legally bought a gun shoots you or your family.

bill_k_lopez
07-24-2012, 8:16 AM
http://today.msnbc.msn.com/id/26184891/vp=48283194#48283194

Personally I don't think sales like this should be legal, there should be good background checks with mental health screening.

And that's because the number of gun related deaths every year due to people with mental illness is so high? And people with questionable backgrounds who want to buy guns always follow the "legal" processes put in place.

What planet do you live on?

Well, I hope no crazy person who legally bought a gun shoots you or your family.

How mature of you.

Coded-Dude
07-24-2012, 8:33 AM
everybody knows criminals and the mentally unstable follow the letter of the law to the t. we just make it easier for them to do so......

Bangzoom
07-24-2012, 8:37 AM
ok now my blood pressure went up...

why dont they do a story on how easily it is to buy drugs when they are banned all over the country?..how many people die from illegal drugs? how many people die from turf wars over drugs? how many....oops im havg a strok...be rite bak

1911su16b870
07-24-2012, 8:51 AM
That is an older recycled story capitalizing on the Aurora tragedy. They did all that buying in Arizona which IIRC does not have any PTP FFL requirements.

Moto
07-24-2012, 9:10 AM
I truly hate these piece of gargage news reporters!

QQQ
07-24-2012, 9:17 AM
Well, I hope no crazy person who legally bought a gun shoots you or your family.

Why does it matter if the crazy person bought the guns legally or illegally?

I just hope that the only thing between me and my being able to own a firearm to protect myself against said crazy person is not a left-wing, ivory-tower psychologist or social worker.

crackerman
07-24-2012, 9:27 AM
What's to stop a Cali inmate from going on a road trip? Wonder if you could be convicted for that.

Just to be a smart ***, technically for a Cali INMATE to go on a road trip he would have to have broken out of jail and I'm pretty sure that's illegal :p


But yeah its sad that they just recycle this junk, I wonder how many of these transactions they did where the seller was, "you know what, not cool here is your money back" that they did not show.

Bangzoom
07-24-2012, 9:43 AM
Just to be a smart ***, technically for a Cali INMATE to go on a road trip he would have to have broken out of jail and I'm pretty sure that's illegal :p


.

Just give the liberal politicians time..Some countries in Europe it is not a crime to escape prison...but if you take the uniform youre wearing that would be theft...LOL

safewaysecurity
07-24-2012, 10:11 AM
If you support background checks on all gun transfers or transactions then I consider you antigun. What part of "shall not be infringed" do you not understand? Plus background checks don't show any evidence of reducing crime or even working.

bill_k_lopez
07-24-2012, 10:21 AM
If you support background checks on all gun transfers or transactions then I consider you antigun. What part of "shall not be infringed" do you not understand? Plus background checks don't show any evidence of reducing crime or even working.

<sarcasm> You must be a gun nut.</sarcasm>

Dantedamean
07-24-2012, 10:26 AM
If you support background checks on all gun transfers or transactions then I consider you antigun. What part of "shall not be infringed" do you not understand? Plus background checks don't show any evidence of reducing crime or even working.

I completely agree, however that view seems to be a bit extreme.

Packy14
07-24-2012, 10:36 AM
To drive a car: take a driving test; can be medically revoked

To buy a gun: take a test? (the current test is a joke); can be medically revoked (or should be if mentally unstable?)

Definitely no current or probabably possible screening tool would have prevented the CO shooting. In that case, law abiding citizens with LTC's would have been more helpful (several, because I doubt one LTC holder would have stopped him).

Coded-Dude
07-24-2012, 10:55 AM
driving an automobile on public roads is a privilege........owning a firearm for self defense is a natural, inalienable right.

NOTHING would have prevented this psychopath from injuring innocent people short of locking him away for something he hadn't done yet.

tackdriver
07-24-2012, 10:56 AM
Anyone understand the rationale of when the undercover bimbo makes the statement "I probably couldnt pass a background check"?
What is it they think the seller is supposed to do? Tell the guy not to shoot anyone until he leaves the building?
I think I'll try that on the car dealer next time I buy a car. "Ya know, I really shouldnt be allowed to drive".. Wanna see if he tears up the contract??

DannyInSoCal
07-24-2012, 11:06 AM
Exactly how many helicopters have been shot down by .50Cal sniper rifles...?

Pathetic hype rhetoric from delusional azzhats who -

In spite of overwhelming PROOF -

Believe restricting gun rights of law abiding tax paying citizens -

Makes us "safer".

Pathetic...

bill_k_lopez
07-24-2012, 11:11 AM
Exactly how many helicopters have been shot down by .50Cal sniper rifles...?

......

Makes us "safer".

Pathetic...

The same number brought down by hand held lasers...

johnthomas
07-24-2012, 11:29 AM
So, this guy bought guns where it is legal to do so, but the government set up gun buys that were not legal and many people were killed. Both ended badly but the government gets away with it. Makes perfect sense to me. Now the government wants to paint everyone with the same brush and further their agenda of total gun control. I am not saying the left is happy about this mass murder, but they will use it as a perfect example of why the American public cannot be trusted with such a dangerous product.

rromeo
07-24-2012, 11:49 AM
They wait until the transaction is about over and then they have the guy say he probably couldn't pass a background check anyway. Not that it matters here, but in Free America, cancel that transaction right away.


According to my state law, it is illegal for me to knowingly sell a firearm to a prohibited person.
Any person who sells, barters, gives or furnishes, or has in his possession or under his control with the intent of selling, bartering, giving or furnishing, any firearm to any person he knows is prohibited from possessing or transporting a firearm pursuant to 18.2-308.1:1, 18.2-308.2, subsection B of 18.2-308.2:01, or 18.2-308.7 shall be guilty of a Class 6 felony.

Most sellers in this area ask to see a carry permit or voter ID, and a lot ask to sign a bill of sale. I haven't sold many guns, and those have been mostly to people I know or friends of friends.

knucklehead
07-24-2012, 11:49 AM
..........

LAWABIDINGCITIZEN
07-24-2012, 12:17 PM
NBC ingnores thousands of guns sent across the border by our own government under F&F and the first time in history a sitting AG is held in contempt, but then does a "sting" in a parking lot over a few guns sold by individuals.

The reporter will no doubt win a Pulitzer and multiple Nobel Peace Prizes.

njineermike
07-24-2012, 12:23 PM
To the OP:

Congratulations. You have single-handedly accomplished creating the one thing the gun owning community has been lacking; Unity. You have managed to get posters who won't even agree to the color of the sky to ALL disagree with you and point out the obvious errors of your position.

Well done good sir. A round of applause is in order.

duc748bip
07-24-2012, 12:34 PM
I think the fine line is what is mentally ill.

Packy14
07-24-2012, 3:51 PM
To the OP:

Congratulations. You have single-handedly accomplished creating the one thing the gun owning community has been lacking; Unity. You have managed to get posters who won't even agree to the color of the sky to ALL disagree with you and point out the obvious errors of your position.

Well done good sir. A round of applause is in order.



What is the error of my position, is it the part that I don't think mentally ill people should be able to legally own guns? Then I will gladly disagree with any and all of you.

Coded-Dude
07-24-2012, 3:53 PM
precisely define what mentally ill is and who determines inclusion.....

Packy14
07-24-2012, 4:10 PM
precisely define what mentally ill is and who determines inclusion.....

So, because it may be difficult to include all who may be mentally ill, lets just forget about even trying? Some of you guys are geniuses.

It's hard to childproof a house, and despite your best efforts, a child can still get hurt even in a "childproofed" house. Does that mean you shouldn't try to take care of the obvious risks that a child might happen upon such as chemicals, medications, etc? Obviously, any effort to keep better track of mentally incompentent or unstable people would be difficult, and some would fall through the cracks.... but maybe some would be prevented from doing harm, at least with a firearm. This would also prevent easy outcry against all legal gun ownership (it won't stop it, because some people believe no one but cops should have guns).

Like I also said, none of this would do anything about someone like the CO shooter. His parents knew he was off, but they didn't care to do anything about it. I wish I could LTC, because depending on this backward state and government to keep us safe anywhere is a losing proposition; it would be nice to at least have a fighting chance.

johnny_22
07-24-2012, 4:18 PM
That is an older recycled story capitalizing on the Aurora tragedy. They did all that buying in Arizona which IIRC does not have any PTP FFL requirements.


It looked familiar.

Coded-Dude
07-24-2012, 4:18 PM
So, because it may be difficult to include all who may be mentally ill, lets just forget about even trying? Some of you guys are geniuses.

It's hard to childproof a house, and despite your best efforts, a child can still get hurt even in a "childproofed" house. Does that mean you shouldn't try to take care of the obvious risks that a child might happen upon such as chemicals, medications, etc? Obviously, any effort to keep better track of mentally incompentent or unstable people would be difficult, and some would fall through the cracks.... but maybe some would be prevented from doing harm, at least with a firearm. This would also prevent easy outcry against all legal gun ownership (it won't stop it, because some people believe no one but cops should have guns).

Like I also said, none of this would do anything about someone like the CO shooter. His parents knew he was off, but they didn't care to do anything about it. I wish I could LTC, because depending on this backward state and government to keep us safe anywhere is a losing proposition; it would be nice to at least have a fighting chance.

so, i take it you don't want to be the one to define it or decide who determines whether or not you get listed? Or did you just not answer my request because you didn't feel like it? you have a clear desire to make this happen, so I am curious where you think the lines should lie.

Also, did you know his parents, do you know for a fact they never tried to get him help, or "do anything?" What if they spent thousands of dollars on treatment and went broke just trying to get him help to no avail? It's awful nice of you to judge them in such a demeaning manner("they didn't care enough to do anything").... carry on.

GREASY357
07-24-2012, 4:25 PM
its funny, I doubt most of you want people with mental illness to have guns, yet whenever it is suggested that maybe something should be done about it, its all "ban crazies". Believe me, I own guns, shoot guns, love guns. I believe any responsible law abidding citizen should have a gun. That said, crazy people probably shouldn't. Maybe they shouldn't drive either, I don't have comment on that.

if everybody had guns and there were no gun free zones then when crazies went on shooting sprees they could be stopped fast. it doesnt matter the laws, if a crazy/ murdurous person really wants a gun he will get one. more bans just makes it harder on us noncrazies.

Riksk
07-24-2012, 4:58 PM
Just to be a smart ***, technically for a Cali INMATE to go on a road trip he would have to have broken out of jail and I'm pretty sure that's illegal :p


But yeah its sad that they just recycle this junk, I wonder how many of these transactions they did where the seller was, "you know what, not cool here is your money back" that they did not show.

I meant us....not an actual inmate. I wish I had the ability to buy a firearm without the Gov always trying to molest me for it.

njineermike
07-24-2012, 7:01 PM
What is the error of my position, is it the part that I don't think mentally ill people should be able to legally own guns? Then I will gladly disagree with any and all of you.

Lets examine your postulation:

Personally I don't think sales like this should be legal, there should be good background checks with mental health screening.

We already have a dubious system in place that can easily place a citizen in the arena of a prohibited person merely on the word of another who may or may not have a grudge. "Mental health screenings" have been used in the past to justify lifelong incarcerations without due process right here in this country. It is a flawed system, capable of abuse by those with an agenda, and has no recourse for due process. If a gun is removed from a homicidal maniac, he will still kill. Jeffrey Dahmer didn't need a gun, Ted Bundy didn't need a gun, John Wayne Gacy didn't need a gun. Were they lunatics? Yes. Was the issue whether or not they had access to a gun? No.

SilverTauron
07-24-2012, 7:16 PM
So, because it may be difficult to include all who may be mentally ill, lets just forget about even trying? Some of you guys are geniuses.
.

I believe you share common ground with the membership here in that you do not wish to see insane people callously murdering others. It is a perspective I agree with completely.

There are effective ways of adressing that problem of people insane or otherwise deciding to coldly murder their fellow man. Factually speaking, increased government regulation of firearms is not one of them.






It's hard to childproof a house, and despite your best efforts, a child can still get hurt even in a "childproofed" house. Does that mean you shouldn't try to take care of the obvious risks that a child might happen upon such as chemicals, medications, etc? Obviously, any effort to keep better track of mentally incompentent or unstable people would be difficult, and some would fall through the cracks.... but maybe some would be prevented from doing harm, at least with a firearm. This would also prevent easy outcry against all legal gun ownership (it won't stop it, because some people believe no one but cops should have guns). .

This analogy is flawed, because unlike the situation of a guardian over a toddler a spree shooter is an independent thinking person. Someone intent on committing planned atrocities such as the latest outrage cannot be stopped or deterred from their plans by anything except chance. The human mind is a devious machine.

Remember, just as easily as we can read the laws ...so can the bad guys. We read the laws and find ways to comply. The other side reads the regulations and finds ways to neutralize them. If a law says someone must endure ,say, a 6 month mental evaluation before purchasing a gun a demented madman simply will lie on the form, or accomplish a straw purchase as what happened in Columbine , or even join Law Enforcement to bypass the regulations if they are committed. Do not dismiss the latter situation as extreme hyperbole-one of Communist China's spree shootings was by a soldier of the PLA, and South Korea's worst shooting rampage was by a cop.

We can pass regulations all day to prevent disturbed people from getting guns, and all we do is inspire the demented murderers of the future to become more creative in bypassing them. If prohibition of acess works so well, why is it harder to buy a gun legally in some places than it is to score a baggie of Cocaine?



Like I also said, none of this would do anything about someone like the CO shooter. His parents knew he was off, but they didn't care to do anything about it. I wish I could LTC, because depending on this backward state and government to keep us safe anywhere is a losing proposition; it would be nice to at least have a fighting chance.

Your closing statement contradicts the foundation of your original post. Either you believe the government can keep people safe through laws and regulations-a philosophy I personally believe is a proven failure-or you believe the individual is empowered to make the best decisions for themselves. Under the first system, people are only empowered to die when the government fails. Under the second, people are empowered to do the right thing when no one else can.

tonelar
07-24-2012, 8:28 PM
I miss the CA I grew up in. Me and my shooting friends traded guns around quite a bit.


if everybody had guns and there were no gun free zones then when crazies went on shooting sprees they could be stopped fast. it doesnt matter the laws, if a crazy/ murdurous person really wants a gun he will get one. more bans just makes it harder on us noncrazies.

They might even be dissuaded from trying.

Winchester 73
07-24-2012, 8:41 PM
Well, I hope no crazy person who legally bought a gun shoots you or your family.

I hope no crazy person throws a cup of gasoline on you. You want to ban gasoline or make everyone pass a background check to buy it?

707electrician
07-24-2012, 9:01 PM
First of all, background checks don't prevent criminals that haven't yet been caught from buying guns and second, background checks only prevent convicted criminals from buying guns the 'legal' way, it does nothing to stop them from getting guns on the black market

Winchester 73
07-24-2012, 9:20 PM
By definition criminals break laws. It stands to reason that creating laws aimed at criminals don't work.

BRANCHER
07-24-2012, 9:27 PM
First let me say my heart goes out to the victims and their friends and families.

I have been not wanting to comment on this, however this is getting annoying... And really getting me mad.

Per MSNBC News "Officials told NBC News that all four were purchased legally, beginning in May, from two national chain stores: Gander Mountain Guns and Bass Pro Shops."
(Full article here (http://usnews.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/07/20/12854157-aurora-suspect-james-holmes-was-buying-guns-dropping-out-of-graduate-school?lite))

So he went to a guns store filled out paperwork and was approved for a purchase so WTF is this about buying a gun without a background check.

This is Virginia Tech all over again... "... We need to close the gun show loophole"... and not a single gun used in that tragedy was bought from a gun show.

Antigun people use this and we should out them as using this tragedy for their gain when in fact this would not have prevented it at all.

I never hear this stated (including Fox news).

GREASY357
07-24-2012, 10:21 PM
They might even be dissuaded from trying.

exactly. switzerland anyone?

Packy14
07-25-2012, 11:04 AM
First let me say my heart goes out to the victims and their friends and families.

I have been not wanting to comment on this, however this is getting annoying... And really getting me mad.

Per MSNBC News "Officials told NBC News that all four were purchased legally, beginning in May, from two national chain stores: Gander Mountain Guns and Bass Pro Shops."
(Full article here (http://usnews.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/07/20/12854157-aurora-suspect-james-holmes-was-buying-guns-dropping-out-of-graduate-school?lite))

So he went to a guns store filled out paperwork and was approved for a purchase so WTF is this about buying a gun without a background check.

This is Virginia Tech all over again... "... We need to close the gun show loophole"... and not a single gun used in that tragedy was bought from a gun show.

Antigun people use this and we should out them as using this tragedy for their gain when in fact this would not have prevented it at all.

I never hear this stated (including Fox news).


Exactly, no law would have prevented this. Even stronger screening for mental illness wouldn't stop it. Some things can't be prevented with laws. I do think the current system is fatally flawed, as someone who has been 5150 or 5250'd need only lie on the dros sheet and no one will be the wiser; there should be a clearinghouse where these kind of admits are logged and flagged; it may be that the person was wrongfully admitted under a hold, but, then it should be able to be cleared from the clearinghouse. I do think a criminal and pyschiatric background check on all gun purchases make sense. I also think that LTC for any non-prohibited person makes sense. I really don't understand why anyone on here would have a problem with those suggestions, but I'm sure someone will.

JxPakman
07-26-2012, 12:52 AM
my $0.02 :

i kinda agree with the OP. mentally ill people shouldnt be able to buy or own firearms. as far as what determines a person mentally ill? i work in a pharmacy and i think anyone who is on any kind of psychotropic or antidepressant medication should not own a firearm period. a quick review of a persons prescription history could be a simple and fast way to determine mentally ill person. it wouldn't catch them all but i think its a good start. and i think smarter people than me can come up with better ways to determine a mentally ill person. but i am pretty adamant that anyone who is taking xanax, cymbalta , prozac, etc. by definition is mentally ill. and i can vouch for that, i deal with a lot of *******s at work.

if a person relies on medication to be able to function in society... NO GUNs.

njineermike
07-26-2012, 7:38 AM
Evidently the "medial experts" here never heard of HIPAA

Packy14
07-26-2012, 4:50 PM
Evidently the "medial experts" here never heard of HIPAA

hahah... I know more about HIPPA than you, I am 100% positive and would wager all the money you have on that.

repubconserv
07-26-2012, 4:54 PM
http://today.msnbc.msn.com/id/26184891/vp=48283194#48283194

Personally I don't think sales like this should be legal, there should be good background checks with mental health screening.

Uh... no. These types of transactions are already illegal in CA, yet they happen everyday anyway. If you already legally own a gun, it is ridiculous that you should HAVE to pass ANOTHER NICS check, and have to go through a gun shop (which you would not have to anyways if you did not care about legality)

njineermike
07-26-2012, 4:54 PM
hahah... I know more about HIPPA than you, I am 100% positive and would wager all the money you have on that.

Then you should know that medical data is private on purpose, and cannot be released without prior consent. Or were you asleep for that part when it was explained to you?

Packy14
07-26-2012, 10:33 PM
This whole thread is of course, a suggestion for a law that will never happen. As someone in the health profession, who interacts more often that I wish with mental unsound individuals, I wish there was more hindering the mentally unsound from getting a gun legally. End of story.

NSR500
07-26-2012, 10:40 PM
OP = Adjudicated to be Mentally Defective

Must turn guns over ASAP.

As for FTF gun transactions in Texas, I'd only sell to a valid Texas CHL holder. Too many illegal dirtbags in Houston with fake ID.

Deadbolt
07-27-2012, 12:22 AM
ooorrrrr

we could outlaw cars.

Joe
07-27-2012, 10:07 PM
You want a gun? You must be insane. Now you cannot have any guns as only crazies want guns.

Understand?

Joe
07-27-2012, 10:11 PM
Most biased anti-gun news "report" I've ever seen.

SWalt
07-28-2012, 9:36 AM
I believe you share common ground with the membership here in that you do not wish to see insane people callously murdering others. It is a perspective I agree with completely.

There are effective ways of adressing that problem of people insane or otherwise deciding to coldly murder their fellow man. Factually speaking, increased government regulation of firearms is not one of them.






This analogy is flawed, because unlike the situation of a guardian over a toddler a spree shooter is an independent thinking person. Someone intent on committing planned atrocities such as the latest outrage cannot be stopped or deterred from their plans by anything except chance. The human mind is a devious machine.

Remember, just as easily as we can read the laws ...so can the bad guys. We read the laws and find ways to comply. The other side reads the regulations and finds ways to neutralize them. If a law says someone must endure ,say, a 6 month mental evaluation before purchasing a gun a demented madman simply will lie on the form, or accomplish a straw purchase as what happened in Columbine , or even join Law Enforcement to bypass the regulations if they are committed. Do not dismiss the latter situation as extreme hyperbole-one of Communist China's spree shootings was by a soldier of the PLA, and South Korea's worst shooting rampage was by a cop.

We can pass regulations all day to prevent disturbed people from getting guns, and all we do is inspire the demented murderers of the future to become more creative in bypassing them. If prohibition of acess works so well, why is it harder to buy a gun legally in some places than it is to score a baggie of Cocaine?




Your closing statement contradicts the foundation of your original post. Either you believe the government can keep people safe through laws and regulations-a philosophy I personally believe is a proven failure-or you believe the individual is empowered to make the best decisions for themselves. Under the first system, people are only empowered to die when the government fails. Under the second, people are empowered to do the right thing when no one else can.

^^^^

A most excellent post!

nicki
07-28-2012, 7:42 PM
I am all for gun rights, but you know we have to be responsible.

If you are selling your gun to a friend or relative that you know is a responsible person, that's fine.

If you are selling to someone who shows you a valid CCW fine.

If I was in a "free state" and I was selling some guns, I would find a FFL dealer that I could run a quick insta-check to ensure I am not selling a gun to a prohibited person.

Sorry guys, but in my mind I would feel guilty if I sold a gun to a violent felon.

Trying to make background checks mandatory is a can of worms.

Instead how about the following, if you sell a gun to someone after doing a background check that comes back clean, you have NO CIVIL or CRIMINAL LIABILITY if they go on to do something bad with the gun.

On the flip side, if you sell a gun to someone without a background check and it turns out that they were a prohibited person when you sold them your gun, then you have both CIVIL and CRIMINAL LIABILITY.

While we are doing the background check, we can also check to see if the gun is "STOLEN".

For those of you who want untraceable guns, my suggestion is for you to just build your own gun.

This is an issue that is a loser for us with the general public, yes NBC did showed us in a bad light, but some of the answers they got were totally irresponsible.

Nicki

707electrician
07-28-2012, 8:05 PM
Not that long ago there was a woman who got in her car and chased her ex-boyfriend on his motorcycle and hit another car that flipped over and caught on fire killing the driver. Should the person that sold her the car have been held liable?

Perhaps we need mental screenings before selling people cars.

Guns are not the only tool people use to commit crimes

tenpercentfirearms
07-29-2012, 9:40 AM
Sorry that I have asked for a bit of deeper thought about how to ensure that responsible mentally sound people are the only ones that can legally acquire guns. I know that level of thinking is difficulty for some on here. I'll stop at that.

The problem with your desire is that who defines the word "responsible"? If you owe more than $20,000 in credit card debt are you responsible? Hardly. No guns for you. Did you have a child under the age of 18? Not being responsible, no gun for you anymore. Are you on government assistance? You are not responsible, no gun for you. Did you get a speeding ticket in violation of the vehicle code? That is not responsible, no gun for you.

If you don't understand that allowing the government or even the majority of citizens to define what a "responsible" citizen is, you are are allowing the government to control you, there isn't much more we can do for you. I do not want the government or anyone else defining responsible for me at the expense of my exercising my Constitutional right to keep and bear arms.

Who defines "mentally sound"? I still listen to New Kids on the Block occasionally. Is that mentally sound? This might or might not be me (http://s53.photobucket.com/albums/g52/elrojo14/guns/?action=view&current=jk3.jpg). Mentally sound? Ever gone to a psychiatrist? You probably aren't mentally sound.

And what happens when we discover that even mentally sound people sometimes deteriorate and become mentally unsound? Will your new law stop people from violating the law against murder and assault with a deadly weapon?

The reason we do not want to talk about your "common sense" gun control is we have already proven that your laws will not work. They do not stop people from violating other laws that have been established since the beginning of eternity. So take your silly ideas and bury them. They won't work, they don't work, and you don't have a leg to stand on.

QQQ
07-29-2012, 9:48 AM
The problem with your desire is that who defines the word "responsible"? If you owe more than $20,000 in credit card debt are you responsible? Hardly. No guns for you. Did you have a child under the age of 18? Not being responsible, no gun for you anymore. Are you on government assistance? You are not responsible, no gun for you. Did you get a speeding ticket in violation of the vehicle code? That is not responsible, no gun for you.

If you don't understand that allowing the government or even the majority of citizens to define what a "responsible" citizen is, you are are allowing the government to control you, there isn't much more we can do for you. I do not want the government or anyone else defining responsible for me at the expense of my exercising my Constitutional right to keep and bear arms.


Bravo!

morfeeis
07-29-2012, 11:23 AM
Well, I hope no crazy person who legally bought a gun shoots you or your family.

Damnit, i never thought i'd see a bleeding heart post like that on here. full of emotions, devoid of logic and intended to cause fear to promote action:(:(:(.

tenpercentfirearms
07-29-2012, 11:30 AM
Well, I hope no crazy person who legally bought a gun shoots you or your family.

That is why I carry a gun. If they decide to, then I have the means to defend myself. Without my gun I would still be subject to the desires of a crazy person who illegally bought a gun. So how the person bought their gun is inconsequential to me. What I am going to do about it is more important.

And passing new laws that might lump me into the crazy crew aren't going to help me in the slightest.

If we don't advocate for more effective and sensible gun laws, those who believe no citizen should own a gun will create the laws.Wrong. Those willing to stand up for liberty and what is right will stop those who think no citizen should own a gun. You are clearly afraid of those who seek to enslave you. You think they have the power to do what they want to you. We do not. We will not compromise our rights and our values out of fear. You have made your choice. We know where you kneel. We made our choice. You know where we stand. This thread is done...for you.

Let all other patriots and those who value freedom see where the enemy lies. It isn't just the anti-gunners. It is also those of us who think compromise is going to somehow save us.

We are winning. Do not let chicken little here try and convince you otherwise. The NRA has created a spectre that if you try and pass gun legislation after Colorado, you will be held accountable. Let's keep that message solid.

dieselpower
07-29-2012, 11:37 AM
its funny, I doubt most of you want people with mental illness to have guns, yet whenever it is suggested that maybe something should be done about it, its all "ban crazies". Believe me, I own guns, shoot guns, love guns. I believe any responsible law abidding citizen should have a gun. That said, crazy people probably shouldn't. Maybe they shouldn't drive either, I don't have comment on that.


Yet you think THEY shouldnt have a gun...THEY have no right to self protection...THEY are a threat.

What do you say when THEY becomes YOU?

The problem with your thought process is who is making this determination on the mental health of THEY? 90% of doctors agree people who buy guns for reasons other than hunting and professional sport ARE MENTALLY UNSTABLE to varying degree.

Think about that.

Sky_DiveR
07-29-2012, 12:20 PM
It seems the lame-stream media is really successful at instilling fear propaganda. That so-called sting is recycled (as previously noted).

Ever wonder why those that are really "crazy" never have a mass shooting at a local gun range (indoor or outdoor)? Or almost never in a gun store or police station? Or in a town where gun ownership is mandated? Why is that?

Why doesn't the media report on the shooting at a church in the same town of Aurora earlier in the year where a responsibly armed individual stopped the shooter after only one victim?

Why doesn't the media report that the "Batman" shooter was already under psychiatric care before all of this (which should've already been on his medical records)? Why didn't this surface when he legally purchased his weapons?

Just thinking out loud.

Packy14
07-29-2012, 8:01 PM
It seems the lame-stream media is really successful at instilling fear propaganda. That so-called sting is recycled (as previously noted).

Ever wonder why those that are really "crazy" never have a mass shooting at a local gun range (indoor or outdoor)? Or almost never in a gun store or police station? Or in a town where gun ownership is mandated? Why is that?

Why doesn't the media report on the shooting at a church in the same town of Aurora earlier in the year where a responsibly armed individual stopped the shooter after only one victim?

Why doesn't the media report that the "Batman" shooter was already under psychiatric care before all of this (which should've already been on his medical records)? Why didn't this surface when he legally purchased his weapons?

Just thinking out loud.



Wait... you just made my point. He was under psychiatric care, but currently, other than stating you aren't mentally ill, there is no check for it. Oh but wait, maybe Njineer or someone else will have something smart to say..

Sky_DiveR
07-29-2012, 9:50 PM
Actually checking for mental health is already part of the firearm background check (thank you brady bunch)

tenpercentfirearms
07-29-2012, 9:54 PM
The problem is, oh braveheart protector of liberty and possessor of the coveted LTC, is that the average Californian (I will only say Californian and not American, because I live in Cali and other states may not be as backward on average) does not think anyone should own guns. They will vote along those lines if it ever comes to a vote, and they will support Obaminator if he tries to push a presidential decree.True, we are outnumbered in CA, however, what presidential decree is Obama going to push? Last I checked, Obama is going to have to get these things through Congress and despite CA state politics being anti-gun, the rest of the nation is not. Sorry, but you keep advocating compromise when none is necessary. Your logic is flawed.

The funny thing is, instead of engaging this idea, most of you would rather just attack me. You are correct. I would rather protect my rights than give them up. Sorry you are on the wrong side of the fight.

I am as pro-2A as they come, but suddenly I am the enemy. Its ok, I shouldn't have expected more, but I'll stop wasting my time.You are not as pro-2A as they come. It is pretty sad that you even think so. You most certainly must be a typical CA gun owner. You are willing to sacrifice everyone's rights so you can have a false sense of security.

What is amazing is you think we should embrace your denial of rights. Absolutely amazing.

Packy14
07-29-2012, 11:10 PM
True, we are outnumbered in CA, however, what presidential decree is Obama going to push? Last I checked, Obama is going to have to get these things through Congress and despite CA state politics being anti-gun, the rest of the nation is not. Sorry, but you keep advocating compromise when none is necessary. Your logic is flawed.

You are correct. I would rather protect my rights than give them up. Sorry you are on the wrong side of the fight.

You are not as pro-2A as they come. It is pretty sad that you even think so. You most certainly must be a typical CA gun owner. You are willing to sacrifice everyone's rights so you can have a false sense of security.

What is amazing is you think we should embrace your denial of rights. Absolutely amazing.


I know you live in Taft, but are you really so Daft as to not know about the UN treaty Obama has backed to disarm all citizens? For our champion of liberty you sure don't read much do you.

Maddog5150
07-29-2012, 11:26 PM
we should have mental health screenings before people are allowed to be born, reproduce, go out in public, drive a car, vote, snip.

And post on internet forums :D

NSR500
07-30-2012, 1:43 AM
The more the OP posts the more convinced I am of this:

OP = Adjudicated to be Mentally Defective

tenpercentfirearms
07-30-2012, 7:06 AM
I know you live in Taft, but are you really so Daft as to not know about the UN treaty Obama has backed to disarm all citizens? For our champion of liberty you sure don't read much do you.

Yeah the same one that they decided not to vote on? The same one that even if proposed, the United States Senate would have to ratify. The same United States Senate that is not controlled by President Obama? Please tell us what the point of bringing that up was other than to convince us further you have no clue what you are talking about and exist solely to troll and/or piss away our rights in the name of "compromise".

You might also want to refrain from throwing out names. You are having enough trouble articulating and supporting your position that any names you use will most likely be self reflective.

Moto
07-30-2012, 7:32 AM
The problem is that you are too thick headed to understand that nobody here is advocating that everyone should have guns. We are simply saying that laws do nothing to stop people that are hell bent on destruction from obtaining guns.

Most guns used in crimes are obtained illegally meaning that person didn't go through a background check to get it. The rest are purchased legally by people that haven't committed crimes yet, or haven't been caught committing crimes yet and therefore can pass the background check.

Point is, creating laws like these, that have little to no effect on stopping crime, is a slippery slope and can possibly lead to innocent people losing their rights.

Yes

ldsnet
07-30-2012, 7:46 AM
The biggest problem with "crazy" is that some people hide it very well..

And who decides what "crazy" is? the govt? you?

Absolutely true. If there is a hole in the firearms laws, this it. At what point is a medical determination sufficient to take away a person's right?

Does a doctor do this? Does it have to be approved be a judge? Is there any recourse to restore rights (for some "crazy" is not for ever)

Who is going to pay for it? Who is going to oversee it?

zfields
07-30-2012, 8:24 AM
well, if you watch the video... not every state has a dros process for ppt's. not saying that the dros process here is much more than a formality/tax, but at least it stops most convicts from legally acquiring weapons (illegal is a different story of course). Oh well, this country is going to s*** anyway.

You forget to point out a lot of those states have lowers % per capita of gun violence then California.

Sent from my Incredible 2 using Tapatalk 2

Packy14
07-30-2012, 7:46 PM
You forget to point out a lot of those states have lowers % per capita of gun violence then California.

Sent from my Incredible 2 using Tapatalk 2


Yes, they also have smaller populations, less urban poor, and less organized crime. You probably have a point, I just missed it or something.

njineermike
07-30-2012, 7:59 PM
Yes, they also have smaller populations, less urban poor, and less organized crime. You probably have a point, I just missed it or something.

So, you're comparing apples to light bulbs is what your saying......

TempleKnight
07-30-2012, 8:05 PM
its funny, I doubt most of you want people with mental illness to have guns, yet whenever it is suggested that maybe something should be done about it, its all "ban crazies". Believe me, I own guns, shoot guns, love guns. I believe any responsible law abidding citizen should have a gun. That said, crazy people probably shouldn't. Maybe they shouldn't drive either, I don't have comment on that.

Who decides what crazy is? If I got to decide, Carolyn McCarthy and Nancy Pelosi would be in the loony bin. What's would stop "mental health professionals" from saying that if you want a gun you must be nuts?

Packy14
07-30-2012, 8:25 PM
Who decides what crazy is? If I got to decide, Carolyn McCarthy and Nancy Pelosi would be in the loony bin. What's would stop "mental health professionals" from saying that if you want a gun you must be nuts?

Pelosi, Boxer, and Brown...they are definitely on my list lol.

jonzer77
07-30-2012, 8:34 PM
Yes, they also have smaller populations, less urban poor, and less organized crime. You probably have a point, I just missed it or something.

Do you know what per capita is?

bloodhawke83
07-30-2012, 8:40 PM
We should do dna tests too and check to make sure you're not a rapist too, for the safety of the public.

Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk 2

Kestryll
07-30-2012, 8:41 PM
Anyone want to guess who in this thread WON'T be posting in a few minutes if the attacks, insults and snide remarks don't stop NOW?

drdarrin@sbcglobal.net
07-30-2012, 10:01 PM
Why does it matter if the crazy person bought the guns legally or illegally?

I just hope that the only thing between me and my being able to own a firearm to protect myself against said crazy person is not a left-wing, ivory-tower psychologist or social worker.

Or a fellow gunny who thinks, just this one little bit will make us all safer

Moto
07-30-2012, 10:26 PM
Or a fellow gunny who thinks, just this one little bit will make us all safer

Agreed