Man shoots wife and pets, blames NRA

WTF?

Which extremist rightwing DISINFORMATION site did that load of crap come from?

 

I can agree in that everything we do is subject to definition, which is also variable in that it is subject to who is doing the defining. Even well written rules get distorted by the people who apply them. What matters in the case of the gun issue is one of magnitude. That is to say priority, degree of impact, effect vs benefit. To block people considered unbalanced from buying guns would not really affect that many compared to the objectives of the anti-gun group which would be universal in a multitude of ways. Restriction based on instability would not be something permanent or irreversible as it would be a decisions regarding one persons qualification and perhaps depend on a handful of people to change, where the anti-gun objectives apply en masse and require nationwide pressure and acts of congress to revise- and no matter what, would be unjust to many or even all citizenry. Whatever problems may be associated with an effort to control the sale of guns to people who are mentally disqualified pale beside the benefits of doing so.

The anti-gun crowd has no problem with the idea of imposing their will on all law-abiding gun owners in the nation, despite those people not posing risk, so why would they object to imposing restrictions on a small portion of the people who do pose risk?

If you buy a gun today, there are questions on the form that relate to mental stability, so we are already attempting to consider that. However this is in the opinion of the applicant; and most unbalanced people do not think of themselves that way and are not likely to admit it on the form. The person selling the gun has no power to challenge that so the answer depends only on the applicant. Most drunk drivers claim they aren't drunk either, that is human nature- but when a cop has examined them, we have a more realistic assessment. Same thing here. It would make just as much sense for a psychologist to report a person as unqualified as it does for the sheriff to report them as having a restraining order over possible domestic violence, which does disqualify their purchasing a gun.

Anybody genuinely concerned with the violence rather than just their phobia of guns should be able to recognize ways to actually do some good. That's not what seems to matter to most, and that makes their real motives doubtful.

 

Your source.

Maybe you should read it.

B. Which mental disorders do we evaluate under each listing category?

1. Neurocognitive disorders (12.02).

1. 1. These disorders are characterized by a clinically significant decline in cognitive functioning. Symptoms and signs may include, but are not limited to, disturbances in memory, executive functioning (that is, higher-level cognitive processes; for example, regulating attention, planning, inhibiting responses, decision-making), visual-spatial functioning, language and speech, perception, insight, judgment, and insensitivity to social standards.
2. Examples of disorders that we evaluate in this category include major neurocognitive disorder; dementia of the Alzheimer type; vascular dementia; dementia due to a medical condition such as a metabolic disease (for example, late-onset Tay-Sachs disease), human immunodeficiency virus infection, vascular malformation, progressive brain tumor, neurological disease (for example, multiple sclerosis, Parkinsonian syndrome, Huntington disease), or traumatic brain injury; or substance-induced cognitive disorder associated with drugs of abuse, medications, or toxins. (We evaluate neurological disorders under that body system (see 11.00). We evaluate cognitive impairments that result from neurological disorders under 12.02 if they do not satisfy the requirements in 11.00 (see 11.00G).)

 

The scum shot the dog, and possibly cat, and you all are back to spitting at each other over the 2nd Amendment and who should have guns.

Draw and quarter the SOB.....

 

Worth mentioning with regard to the above, is how the homosexual community has the greatest concentration of HIV and/or AIDS of any minority community in the united states. Thus the rule change implemented by Barack Obama essentially held that homosexuals cannot legally possess firearms.

 

Exactly.

Once again, leftist provides source....leftist crows about MUST DO THIS....leftist fails to comprehend what leftist uses as own source....leftist doesn't spend two seconds thinking about implications....leftist looks stupid.

It plays out here every day.

 

Too bad that you FAILED to read it because there is ZERO

HIV results in DEPRESSION and people with DEPRESSION commit SUICIDE!

MENTALLY UNSTABLE people commit MASS MURDERS!

Too bad your BIASED NRA DISINFORMATION sources deliberately and disingenuously DISTORT the FACTS for their NEFARIOUS gun obsessed AGENDA!

 

Thank you for PROVING my point about the DISTORTION of the facts to produce BIGOTED NRA gun obsessed DISINFORMATION!

 

Thank you for establishing that BIGOTRY is a PRIMARY source of the nefarious NRA gun obsessed DISINFORMATION AGENDA!

 

Thus an open admission on the part of yourself that those who are infected with HIV and/or AIDS could not legally possess firearms under the rule change implemented by Barack Obama.

If such is not actually what is being stated on the part of yourself, explain precisely why it is not.

 

More nonsensical bovine excrement!

Simply having HIV would NOT stop anyone from obtaining a firearm!

There would need to be ADDITIONAL CRITERIA involved that you are DISINGENUOUSLY OMITTING!

But hardly surprising that the gun obsessed would engage in such nefarious DISINFORMATION!

 

Such is nothing more than an interpretation on the part of yourself, that does not necessarily reflect the plain text of the cited regulations. If HIV and/or AIDS can directly result in major neurocognitive disorders, as the regulations suggest, being infected with HIV and/or AIDS would be regarded as sufficient grounds for a preemptive prohibition on firearms ownership by the afflicted.

Not only does such unduly target the homosexuals community for having the greatest concentration of HIV and/or AIDS out of any minority community in the united states, it would also serve to discourage individuals from getting tested and thus allow more infections to occur due to the attached stigma that would be associated with such.

 

So all you have are MASSIVE loads of meaningless bovine excrement?

Got it!

Had you actually bothered to READ the regulations they ONLY APPLY to someone who is incapable of managing their own finances!

Are you PRETENDING that EVERYONE with HIV is incapable of managing their own finances?

Of course you are because FACTS don't matter to the gun obsessed!

 

One requesting a payee is not the same thing as one being incapable of managing their own finances. There are many reasons to request a payee that have nothing to do with mental health.

Is it being stated on the part of yourself that it is absolutely impossible for someone on the social security administration to abuse the language of the regulations, and interpret it to mean having HIV and/or AIDS would be grounds for classifying an individual as prohibited from firearms ownership? If such an interpretation can be carried out in this discussion, what would realistically serve to prevent the same interpretation from being utilized by government bureaucrats for politically-motivated ideology?

Rather than engaging in blatant abuse of the capslock function when hurling out-of-hand denials due to disagreeing with the message presented, try to stop and consider that some points of discussion are brought up to reference a particular aspect that is not initially realized.

 

Once again your hissyfit footstomping response PROVES that you NEVER bothered to read the ENTIRE REGULATION for yourself before posting your usual load of bovine excrement!

INVENTING bogus STRAWMAN drivel is all you ever have once your massive load of crap is EXPOSED!

Sad!

 

The only aspect that could be considered "sad" in this discussion, beyond the initial agreement with the deranged ramblings of a mentally ill individual as if they were valid, is the belief that a bureaucratic agency of the united states government can actually be trusted to exercise honesty and integrity.

The united states government is not known for honesty and integrity, it is known for corruption and incompetence, the social security administration included.

Perhaps those who blindly trust every decision made by government should be classified as being mentally ill.

 

Once again the meandering nonsensical deflection after the FACTS have EXPOSED the usual load of bovine excrement!

Sad!

 

Facts, such as how the NRA is supposedly responsible for the actions of this particular individual, because he accused them of being responsible and forced him to murder others because he had no choice? Facts, such as how the delusional ramblings of a clearly mentally ill individual are being treated as if they were valid? Those facts, demonstrated on the part of yourself?

 

Yet more BASELESS STRAWMAN DRIVEL that you cannot substantiate!

Sad!

 

It was yourself, and only yourself, who chose to side with the mentally deranged individual in blaming the NRA for forcing him to murder his own family, and leaving him no choice but to commit the actions that he did. Such are facts in evidence at the start of this discussion, and no amount of out of hand dismissal will serve to change those facts.

 

We have more than enough evidence of your inability to read what has actually been posted and/or linked so there is no need to provide any more.

Have a nice day!

 

Meaning that there is no desire on the part of yourself to address the matter of agreeing with the delusional ramblings of a mentally ill individual who murdered his family.

 

Meaning that I have no intention of wasting my time trying to fathom the bizarre nonsensical content of your posts.

 

The initial post on the part of yourself speaks for itself.

Believing the delusional ramblings of a mentally ill individual are valid.