Texan_Til_I_Die Posted April 17, 2007 Report Share Posted April 17, 2007 Already, the left wing press in Europe has launched an attack against the NRA, and is even accusing Charlton Heston of personally being responsible for the actions of Cho Seung-Hui. I'm sure it's just a matter of time before those same cries are taken up by the mainstream media here is the U.S. But I want to offer a slightly different solution. Try this out... [Edited at the request of a Moderator...] Hey, this makes about as much sense as calling for more firearm restrictions!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Texan_Til_I_Die Posted April 17, 2007 Author Report Share Posted April 17, 2007 Let me try to illustrate my point in a slightly different way. I hear people saying that if we had more gun control laws, this tragic event would not have happened. But it wasn't the gun that decided to go out and kill a bunch of people, it was a foreign student here on a visa. Why can't we just eliminate all student visas to keep this from occurring again in the future? That would certainly have been effective in this case, wouldn't it? Are there any flaws in this logic??? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wtnhunt Posted April 17, 2007 Report Share Posted April 17, 2007 Pretty crazy really isnt it, and I agree completely with what you are saying here. It is a true shame that the antis will use a tragedy like this solely for their agenda. They will waste no time in doing it either, showing a total lack of compassion for the families and friends of those who have been so devastated. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AdvantageTimberLou Posted April 17, 2007 Report Share Posted April 17, 2007 this kid was a loner and had issues, he choose the wrong path and ruin 32 lives and the lives of their families, the issue should not be gun control, it should be about helping these people before they go to these extremes!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deerslayer79 Posted April 18, 2007 Report Share Posted April 18, 2007 What happened was very tragic and still has many questions that needs to be answered,the way the dems have used this to broaden thier support for their gun control campaign is really freaking disgusting.It is not the time to figure out ways of totally raping the 2nd amendment,it is time to give support to those who have lost their love ones who were not killed by the gun but by a sick freak who wanted people to suffer.IMHO the dems should lay off the gun control,and focus on the control of who can get the guns and not taking guns away from people who need/deserve them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
markyj987 Posted April 18, 2007 Report Share Posted April 18, 2007 I think it's no surprise that the politicos would be all over this. At this point, I am still in shock--maybe I shouldn't be given the nature of our society. Perhaps it's part of our human nature. We want closure--we want to assign blame--and you can't hang a guy if he's already killed himself. So, many will blame tools fashioned out of metal--guns. Even if we don't blame guns, we'll find someone or something to blame. The kid's parents, kids who picked on him, how society failed him--how we failed to raise him because we all know it takes a village. The fact that this was just one sick, evil individual is so simple that the "experts" can't see it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldksnarc Posted April 18, 2007 Report Share Posted April 18, 2007 Watching 48 Hours on CBS - they are quick to point out the killings were with guns with 15 and 10 round capacities. The killings were done by a sick individual. The guns are inert objects and not responsible for the killings. I can lay my gun down on the street and, until someone comes along with mental deficiencies, it will not kill a single person. Since the person killed himself there will be NO closure. Closure will come only when the libs find a way to blame the instrument and not the handler. The gun seller folowed the law in selling the gun(s) and even though they they were sold a month or more ago, the mods will claim a waiting period is required. The guns were purchased over a month before the shootings which belies that waiting periods would have avoided the tragedy. The talking heads (most of them left-wing) will blame the instrument. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tominator Posted April 18, 2007 Report Share Posted April 18, 2007 Story I heard on the news was that this kid was a full fledged American, not a student here in a visa. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wtnhunt Posted April 18, 2007 Report Share Posted April 18, 2007 Cho-warning signs in 2005 Just heard Cho had been committed in 2005, then later released. They knew he was unstable, but communication failed somewhere. Is there not a question when you purchase a firearm from that asks about mental state and whether or not you have been committed? Seems the aps I have filled out in the past ask that question. Seems at this point somehow somewhere someone in the mental healthcare system really failed in this:( Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gator Posted April 18, 2007 Report Share Posted April 18, 2007 Just heard Cho had been committed in 2005, then later released. They knew he was unstable, but communication failed somewhere. Is there not a question when you purchase a firearm from that asks about mental state and whether or not you have been committed? Seems the aps I have filled out in the past ask that question. Seems at this point somehow somewhere someone in the mental healthcare system really failed in this:( But if he answered "no", and with no place to "look", how far would this issue be pursued? I don't know how the system works, so this is ignorance talking:o Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wtnhunt Posted April 18, 2007 Report Share Posted April 18, 2007 But if he answered "no", and with no place to "look", how far would this issue be pursued? I don't know how the system works, so this is ignorance talking:o While it does not, I kind of tend to think the background check we pay for when we purchase guns should include any type of psychiatric information such as this. In other words if you lie on the ap, when the person running the check gets it back, they would know. Unfortunately medical hipa rights probably do not allow that, and even more unfortunate is the fact that neither of the girls who reported Cho for stalking were willing to press charges on him prior to him being taken in for evaluation. As many illegally obtained firearms as there are out there, the outcome of this sad situation still would have likely been the same had he been unable to purchase them legally, but have to wonder really if our mental facilities are not sometimes too quick to let some people out who should not be loose in public. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Texan_Til_I_Die Posted April 18, 2007 Author Report Share Posted April 18, 2007 Your mental health records, along with your other medical records, are protected information under HIPAA. I doubt if there is currently any way for a dealer to verify a prospective buyers mental state. And that's not likely to change anytime soon. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wtnhunt Posted April 18, 2007 Report Share Posted April 18, 2007 And that's not likely to change anytime soon. You might be right, but I would not be so sure as to what kind of repercussions might come out of this with the liberal congress currently in control. I put nothing past them. Obviously any step in the direction of gun control is a step in the wrong direction, however, for those who are mentally unstable and it is KNOWN FACT and documented that this is the case, it might not be wrong for the health care people to have to share that information with the feds. Where do you draw the lines with privacy issues and hipaa and securing protection of others though . Obviously some people out there have no business being out there in public in the first place, this obviously was a perfect example, the idea of them having weapons of any sort is quite frightening. Really this is another good debatable topic and probably deserves its own thread. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Texan_Til_I_Die Posted April 18, 2007 Author Report Share Posted April 18, 2007 You might be right, but I would not be so sure as to what kind of repercussions might come out of this with the liberal congress currently in control... ...Really this is another good debatable topic and probably deserves its own thread. I would think that the liberals would be the ones fighting to keep the mental health records of the "loonies" hidden. After all, that's one of their major constituency groups! But it would make a good topic for another thread. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
njbowhntr Posted April 19, 2007 Report Share Posted April 19, 2007 I know that in NJ you have to consent to a full medical background check in order to get your firearm purchasers card, initial card takes @ 3-6 months. Everytime I want to buy another handgun I have to apply for a handgun permit, application time @ 3weeks to 3 months. But to buy a long gun, as NJ refers to them, you do not have to update you mental state or purchasers card. I personally do not have a probelem with this. Being I know that I am of sound mind and body, as far as they know. I could see how alot of people would have a problem with this though. It is change for many. In NJ this has been standard practice for many, many years. I got my first purchasers card at 18y/o, I am now 34y/o. Everytime I move I have to apply for a new card within the municipality, which means full medical and police background checks. But it is what I have grown up doing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevebeilgard Posted April 25, 2007 Report Share Posted April 25, 2007 there are over 20, 000 gun laws in our country today. they don't work. and, i cannot think of a gun law that could stop these guys intent on mass murder. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.