Hearts and prayers, hearts and prayers, hearts and prayers,..........move on.

https://www.politico.com/news/2021/04/16/shooting-fedex-facility-indianapolis-482329

This isn't a good time to be discussing gun control. It's what NRA acolytes say after each mass murder. So they say it a lot.

The one in Indy, like so many others, having been carried out by someone with an assault style weapon. Like the kind white supremacists pretending to be soldiers carried in to the statehouse in MI to protest measures to prevent the spread of COVID. A scene so surreal it still boggles my mind. As are the scenes of anyone of any political persuasion open carrying semi-automatic weapons on the streets of America. It is crazy that we allow this to happen.

America has a deep seated sickness when it comes to guns. Full stop.

 

Is it any wonder given the number of right wing gun nuts out there?

Some of the few Republican lawmakers who voted to impeach him after he incited a violent insurrection at the Capitol on Jan. 6, have been pouring tens of thousands of dollars into personal security measures.

Per first-quarter Federal Election Commission records reported by Punchbowl on Friday, Sen. Mitt Romney (R-UT) spent $43,633 on a Utah-based security firm while his Senate colleague, Pat Toomey (R-PA), spent nearly $70,000 on five different companies that provide security surveillance and protection services.
https://talkingpointsmemo.com/news/...ring-tens-of-thousands-into-personal-security

American Insurrection
https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/frontline/

 

I've been thinking about this topic quite a bit just because of all the recent shootings. Clearly, the foundation of our country is based in the right to bear arms and anything that has the potential to encroach on that is instantly dismissed. So, it's clear that we need a Plan B or Plan C.

I tend to think if we can deal with this by openly discussing things with the intent of understanding the other side versus attacking them. We see this same kind of divide in race relations. At some point we have to stop and be willing to hear the other side if we want resolution.

With that said, what can we do, as a society, to bring about a fundamental change in the way we address mental health issues in our country?

 

You mean those weapons which have the same capability as any other semiautomatic rifle, but kinda look like a military weapon. But is not a weapon that any real army would ever use. You mean those "assault weapons"?

 

Basically we prove once again that at our hearts AMERICANS by and large prefer to be an uncivilized group who are quite content to live and die for their weapons of human life termination. We would rather have the100 or more killed every single day of the year and the 200 or more wounded than live without our most holy and revered possession the almighty gun. The love of the gun by my fellow Americans far outweighs the daily and annual deaths inflicted upon our population by7 the most important thing in their lives the much worshipped gun.

 

And since there is an average of more than one mass shooting per day in this country, that's the perfect foxhole.

 

Those and any that have the same capability to kill many people in a short amount of time.

 

Except that is not what he said. His comment only exhibited ignorance.

The guns are going to be here whether they are banned or not. There are too many to get rid of in any time less than decades.

The problem is not the guns. The problem are those who should not have access to guns and the lack of punishment of those who obtain them illegally. Does the name Hunter Biden ring a bell?

The major problem is not even these "mass shootings". Those numbers are trivial compared to what happens in Chicago in a typical weekend. Those killings are ignored by the press because they aren't "mass shootings" or a cop killing a black person.

 

You may be on to something. Sickness is absolutely an issue here. Currently, consumption of psychiatric drugs that list "Suicidal thoughts or actions" as side effects are at record levels. Will good people work to prevent violence or will we end up repeating the same attacks on the rights of non violent people while sick people take more victims?

 

how about the media starts uniting people instead of race baiting, vilifying opposition 24/7.. the media is an efficient producer of hate, division and all to make a dime..

This would be a good start in curbing violence

 

100% of humans have the same capacity.

 

Not bad almost everything you said was wrong.

 

We need to find out why people are resorting to shooting up workplaces, schools, movie theaters, malls, concerts, etc. as a way to cope with things that don’t go their way.
We have had access to guns for centuries and yet mass shootings are a relatively new thing. Why were there no mass shootings in schools or workplaces in the early to mid 1900s for example? Plenty of people had the guns to do it, so why didn’t they? Seems the issue is people and not guns.

 

I don't.

But you need to re-read what you are responding to. We're talking about guns. Not humans. Any reason, other than lack of arguments to rebut a statement that appears to have struck a chord, for which you are changing the subject?

 

bring sick or taking prescription antipsychotics soes not disqualify gun ownership, or even "constitutional carry." the second amendment, written long before freud, makes no exception for schizophrenics or any other lunatics. they have the same rights as non violent people.

 

You are incorrect. As a human, you are capable of doing harm. Guns are not. That is as on topic as it gets. I don't understand why you cloud your posts with claims that only mind readers can make. My chords remain unstruck. You do trigger a chuckle from time to time.

 

You are incorrect. Under federal law, a person can be tallied in a database and barred from purchasing or possessing a firearm due to a mental illness under two conditions: if he is involuntarily committed to a mental hospital, or if a court or government body declares him mentally incompetent.

 

The more successful programs (all outside the US) do not include our strategy of treating the mentally ill like criminals. That IMO is the first step we need to take. A simultaneous step we would have to take is to provide funding for the programs. Simply put, people need access to mental health treatment, and at the same time not be disincentivized from using it.

"The experience of deinstitutionalization in Italy was led by Franco Basaglia, a charismatic psychiatrist and community organizer who, through force of logic and moral suasion, was able also to acquire considerable political influence. In 1978, he persuaded Italy's parliament to pass an inclusive law requiring the closure of all the specialized mental hospitals in the country.

Basaglia promoted as replacement a model that respected the dignity and freedom of the mentally ill; their right to live as citizens in the community; and the great therapeutic value of engaging them in its daily activities.

The previously coercive, paternalistic, and exclusionary medical model was replaced by an emphasis on interpersonal relations, improved living conditions, and opportunities to work and play. Coercion, seclusion, closed doors are all eliminated.

The focus is on the person; the illness is put 'in brackets.' Long stays in hospital never treat mental illness; they often make it chronic and promote demoralization, along with new and worse symptoms.

For deinstitutionalization to work, there must be not just the closing of hospitals, but also the opening of society. Patients had not only to be discharged from closed units, but also embraced by open communities. This doesn’t happen without a lot of organization, preparation, hard work, persuasion, and occasional turmoil.

In Trieste, 1,200 mental hospital beds were closed. Housing, 24-hour community centers, home care, social clubs, work co-ops, and recreational opportunities all had to be developed from scratch. The fear and opposition in the community dissolved as the model proved its worth, safety, practicality, and reduced cost.

For over 35 years, the town of Trieste (240,000 inhabitants) has not had any kind of specialized mental hospital. The asylum was replaced by 40 different structures with different roles and tasks."

World's Best and Worst Places to Be Mentally Ill | Psychology Today

 

Therefore.... what?

I do know the "Guns don't kill people..." nonsense. Getting old.... but just as absurd as the first time it was uttered. Probably more.

Apparently pro-gun advocates haven't been able to come up with a better strawman in .... decades... Clear indication that they are losing the debate.

 

A gun is a tool just like any other tool. It can be misused just like any other tool. Properly handled it is safer than many other tools. Automobiles and chain saws are two which can easily be mishandled with disastrous results.

Most of my guns are locked in a safe for months at a time. I don't think about them or see them. They are harmless until I opt to change that.

The strawman is the antigun crowd making guns other than an inanimate object.

 

The age of a fact does not change anything. Gun control is not from a position of concern for human life.

 

Constitutionally, yes they do. But not legally. Not anymore. Personally, I think they should, at least until they engage in criminally violent action. Currently, if one is diagnosed with schitzophrenia, bipolar, borderline personality dissorder, complex post traumatic stress dissorder and a host of other illnesses, not only can they become prohibited from legally owning firearms, but they can be blacklisted from certain jobs, lose their right to care for or see their children, become unable to control their finances and even be locked up. It should then come as no surprise why folks might avoid seeking help when they suspect they may have a mental illness, which results in that illness progressing to criminality and violence. Earlier in the thread I cited an article talking about places that have (much!) better track records with treating mental illness. In combination with much more resources allocated to the task, they tend to not coerce or compulse treatment, but rather respect the dignity and freedom of the mentally ill. The results are that the patients have a much higher rate of recovery from and/or successful management of (because some are indeed incurable) their illness and eventually at a lower cost than trying to exclude them from society in hospital.

 

Exactly! It's a tool designed for the purpose of shooting people. And gun advocates, having no argument against restricting the sale, possession and use of that tool, are desperate to change the subject to whether or not that tool will spontaneously start shooting and killing people on its own.

A childish argument, I know, but it appears to be the only one gun advocates have left.

 

Hmm... so from your lofty perch, you believe folks won't act the way you want them to, so, in the most pejorative manner of paternalistic tyranny, you're going to take guns from everyone. And when only illegal guns remain, and you've defunded the police, and only crime remains unchecked and undeterred and criminal chaos remains, you'll be happy? Full stop.

 

I know that you believe that. Because you are pro-guns. What other option would you have? I don't agree with you. I think human life is the one and probably only concern we need to be addressing in this debate.