Another psyco get his hands on guns.

[Paladin_Hammer]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/niu_shooting

Well doesn't this sound familar? Remember Virgina Tech lastg year? Well, Seung-Hui Cho (the shooter at VT), had a known history of anxiety-disorder, mutism, and severe cases of depression. Well, now ANOTHER mentally ill person has gotten through a state loophole in the gun laws and purchased weapons legally.

Seugn-Hui Cho's mental health and the loopholes he went through.

The shooter in Illinois was supposed to be medicated when he managed to purchase his guns. A 1968 federal law prohibits the selling of guns to anyone with a mental illness. In BOTH STATES then its illegal to sell a gun to someone with a mental history, or is currently undergoing treatment for mental illness. But thanks to the laws stating that a person does not have to disclose his mental health.

Doesn't anyone in the country think that we shouldn't sell guns to people with mental illness?! Damnit, it should have been pretty fucking obvious after VT (hell, beforehand even) that anyone with a mental illness, or a history thereof, shouldn't be allowed to purchase a gun!!! Whats so damn hard about this to understand?

[Panda Man]

Doesn't anyone in the country think that we shouldn't sell guns to people with mental illness?! Damnit, it should have been pretty fucking obvious after VT (hell, beforehand even) that anyone with a mental illness, or a history thereof, shouldn't be allowed to purchase a gun!!! Whats so damn hard about this to understand?

Well no shit, that's why there are laws against it. It'll just take forever to get it set up to where all medical info can be disclosed to gun dealers.

[Paladin_Hammer]

Well no shit, that's why there are laws against it. It'll just take forever to get it set up to where all medical info can be disclosed to gun dealers.

You missed the key issue Panda. State laws circumvent the gun Control Act of 1968. Basically these laws state that you don't have to reveal to anyone (including a gun-dealer) that you have a mental illness, and if you were committed to a state mental health facility or given medication from a state facility, those wouldn't show up on either your federal or state background checks (the state doesn't hand over its citizens mental health backgrounds due to said laws).

The problem here isn't getting the information to a dealer, in the age of the internet and even the POSTAL SYSTEM, the 30-day wait periods are easily enough to to get someones mental health background to a dealer. The problem is that the dealer isn't, by law, allowed to view said information.

[Panda Man]

You missed the key issue Panda. State laws circumvent the gun Control Act of 1968. Basically these laws state that you don't have to reveal to anyone (including a gun-dealer) that you have a mental illness, and if you were committed to a state mental health facility or given medication from a state facility, those wouldn't show up on either your federal or state background checks (the state doesn't hand over its citizens mental health backgrounds due to said laws).

The problem here isn't getting the information to a dealer, in the age of the internet and even the POSTAL SYSTEM, the 30-day wait periods are easily enough to to get someones mental health background to a dealer. The problem is that the dealer isn't, by law, allowed to view said information.

It'll just take forever to get it set up to where all medical info can be disclosed to gun dealers.

I was referring to the getting laws set up for full disclosure It'll take forever to battle those idiot's that think that they're lives will be destroyed by having this info disclosed.

[Paladin_Hammer]

I was referring to the getting laws set up for full disclosure It'll take forever to battle those idiot's that think that they're lives will be destroyed by having this info disclosed.

If someone opposes a gun-shop owner knowing that he's schizo, then chances are he's trying to buy a gun to shoot whatever he see's (being a schizo). Fuck the mentally ill's egos, I don't want to die. I do want to go hunting. I don't want people using fully-automatic guns for "home-defense". I do want to be able to defend my home, I just don't want the bullets to go through a wall, kill my one of my brothers, mother, or father (see: pretty much any rifle caliber, or fully-auto guns). I do want to shoot ducks in-season, but I don't need a full-auto shotgun to do it. I do want to shoot a pistol in competiton, but I don't want to use a fucking armor-piercing bullet, or anything greater than .45 caliber in terms of muzzle velocity (the average .45 ACP only travels 1200 fps, which can easily be stopped by your average house-wall at ranges of 10 feet or more).

Look at Finland. 50% of houses own a gun (source: Download the PDF in that link, the one titled "United Nations International Survey on Firearm Regulation" . Its even legal to own an AK-47 in finland (just not in full-auto). Just look at where they compare to the US, even though its legal to own most kinds of firearms! If you don't believe me that they can own AK-47's, just look at this guy.

If you live in the US, please, for the love of god, contact a senator or something! I've e-mailed Claire McCaskill (US Senator, Missouri), and I've spammed the hell out of every local legislator I could find. Maybe if enough people start bitching, someone will say: "So apparently US Citizens are concerned about the mentally insane owning guns...". Its worth a shot.

[Evans]

LOL USA LOL

Enjoy your freedom to get shot in the face by some retard, guys.

Look at Finland. 50% of houses own a gun (source: Download the PDF in that link, the one titled "United Nations International Survey on Firearm Regulation" . Its even legal to own an AK-47 in finland (just not in full-auto). Just look at where they compare to the US, even though its legal to own most kinds of firearms! If you don't believe me that they can own AK-47's, just look at this guy.

Let's see... Different country, different part of the world, different mentality... My, and they even bahave differently. What a surprise.

Not.

I see this argument from you EVERY SINGLE TIME you get this debate started. Find something else.

[Elmdor Rizer]

Also, last time you pulled up some weird numbers on Sweden. I've *never* seen a gun, and the only people that have them are hunters. And we don't get those "shot with legally owned firearm"-scenarios.

[Panda Man]

I'm considering removing PH's right to make threads. I'm not even joking.

[Evans]

I'm considering removing PH's right to make threads. I'm not even joking.

About as much right to making threads as anyone else.

No matter how dumb.

[Panda Man]

About as much right to making threads as anyone else.

No matter how dumb.

That's why I'm not really going to do it

[crusher]

I don't think guns should be sold at all but hey, that's probably just me!

[Evans]

I don't think guns should be sold at all but hey, that's probably just me!

But... then only the big bad criminals would have some. And the filthy gov'ment.

The same one that came and done gone stolen mah babbies.

[Huey Kruthas]

Look at Finland. 50% of houses own a gun (source: Download the PDF in that link, the one titled "United Nations International Survey on Firearm Regulation" . Its even legal to own an AK-47 in finland (just not in full-auto). Just look at where they compare to the US, even though its legal to own most kinds of firearms! If you don't believe me that they can own AK-47's, just look at this guy.

Gonna have to agree with Evans. It's a pretty weak argument. I think it can be agreed upon that environment and genetics are the driving forces that make up how a person acts. Now, I can't say I've ever been to Finland, but I'll go out on a limb and say that it is a completely different environment from America. I'll also go out on a limb and say that it is mostly Finnish people living there, as opposed to America which has a large amount of different ethnicities. Which could also be attributed to the different environment.

Therefore, people in Finland must behave completely differently than people in America, and any statistical comparisons involving behavior between the two are pointless, other than to point out the differences.

[Libra]

It's not the guns, it's the people. If guns were taking away, people would use the next best thing to kill. As long as there is man, there is war.

[Huey Kruthas]

It's not the guns, it's the people. If guns were taking away, people would use the next best thing to kill. As long as there is man, there is war.

This is a weak argument too. It's easy to disprove just by pointing out the college shooting. I don't exactly see how it would have been possible for him to have killed/injured as many as he did without a gun.

Sure, he could have made an explosive. But, being as medicated and insane as he was, I doubt he would have been able to. Probably just flipped out and hurt one or two people, maybe killed them.

The point isn't that taking away guns will eliminate murder, but reduce.