Where, oh where will the next mass shooting be?

Since 1966, the National Rifle Association has urged the federal government to address the problem of mental illness and violence. As we noted then, “the time is at hand to seek means by which society can identify, treat and temporarily isolate such individuals,” because “elimination of the instrument by which these crimes are committed cannot arrest the ravages of a psychotic murderer.

More recently, the NRA has supported legislation to ensure that appropriate records of those who have been judged mentally incompetent or involuntarily committed to mental institutions be made available for use in firearms transfer background checks. The NRA will support any reasonable step to fix America’s broken mental health system without intruding on the constitutional rights of Americans.

 

The NRA can push for congress to implement new gun laws.

 

They already have.

 

There's no educated, rational reason for the NRA, or anyone else, to push for any of the laws you want.

 

It’s a start, however for the safety of the general public, no one with a mental illness even with background checks, is supposed to have access to a firearm.

Plus, the AR15 has to go, it’s proven to be too much of a threat to modern society.

 

Note questions 11e and 11f.

https://www.atf.gov/firearms/docs/4...n-record-over-counter-atf-form-53009/download

 

Not effectively enough apparently, as the mass shootings in the last three years have demonstrated there is a dire need for gun reform in the country.

 

That's not what the law says.

You are fully aware of the fact this statement is false.

 

And you haven’t seen the NRA coming out saying mentally ill people shouldn’t have firearms, why?

 

Said no informed, rational, reasoned person, ever.

 

Federal law already covers this.

 

And how is anyone supposed to know that when the mental health lobby insists mental health records must be sealed and cannot be entered into NICS?

The AR-15 is nothing more than a black semi-auto firearm just like millions of other semi-automatic firearms, it just looks different which is why anti-gunners are afraid of such.

And when it comes to long guns the AR-15 is no where near one of the most powerful firearms out there, you don't understand that because you have never studied the issue one bit, all you can do is regurgitate anti-gun talking points, which really makes you appear to be foolish and uninformed.

 

Actually what the mass shooting in this country clearly demonstrate is the U.S. has a serious mental health problem and refuses to remove dangerous people from the population where they cannot get access to any weapons whatsoever.

 

You posted...."Once a certain gun has caused enough bloodshed, and has a track record of doing so, the best move for the people of a country in terms of their safety is to ban that gun."

Semi-auto handguns have been used to cause bloodshed, as have shotguns, revolvers, semi-auto rifles etc, etc...so based on your comment it does appear you'd like all those type guns banned.

 

There is a justified reason to take the AR15 out of commission, and though the Pittsburgh shooter used a different firearm, the AR15 has been used in everything from Aurora to Sandy Hook to Vegas. It’s obvious it needs taken out of circulation to the general public. And yes, the term “assault rifle” is justified here.

Gun and mental health lobbies are both to blame for the recent massacres in American history. That friction has led to too many Americans being killed.

 

OR...the people in congress, who actually implement the laws, can push for new gun laws. In other words new laws ultimate falls on congress, not the NRA.

 

Yes, but only a certain gun has been used time and time again. The country needs to emulate what Austrailia has had in place for the last two decades. Gun laws are more strict and not nearly as much bloodshed. I’m willing to put a certain portion of blame on America’s culture as well.

It would take a real President to execute an executive order to get this issue reconciled. The gun lobby is too strong otherwise, and the NRA raises funds for pro gun candidates. A aggressive EO is the only solution.

 

Oh? Are you saying one type of gun has been used in more mass shootings than any other type gun? If so, which gun are you referring to?

 

You are fully aware of the fact your statement is false.

 

Yes. Handguns. Three orders of magnitude more than the AR15. Can't ban them.

Said no informed, rational, reasoned person, ever.
But, good of you to admit you want to confiscate guns.

 

How do you measure that threat?

 

You are very misinformed, the AR-15 has been used in a microscopic amount of mass shootings, by far the most common firearm used in mass shootings has been the handgun.

Incorrect again, mentally ill people are to blame for all of the recent massacres.

 

How scary it looks.

 

It's been used to cause fewer casualties than all handguns, all shotguns and all other rifles.

 

Here: start counting.

https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2012/12/mass-shootings-mother-jones-full-data/

A EO would be unconstitutional and violate the separation of powers. Your civics education seems lacking.