Is it time to talk about guns?

And by some peoples standards you are mentally ill, should have all of your guns taken away, and be thrown in jail.

 

One could argue that's true, if we could identify and prevent them beforehand. That's mainly what Red Flag laws are designed to do. A RAND corporation study found "no qualifying studies showing that extreme risk protection orders decreased any of the violence outcomes it studied, including both mass shootings and unintentional injuries and deaths from firearms.https://www.rand.org/research/gun-policy/analysis/extreme-risk-protection-orders.html Research suggests they can be effective in suicide prevention, with a few recent studies indicating they might help with mass gun violence, as well. Can ‘red flag’ laws curb gun violence? Here’s what the research says. Of course, that has to be weighed against concerns of abuse by neighbors and authorities, as well as reluctance of friends, family and authorities to make use of them.

 

LOL. Wow, lots of posts. Let's take this one by one.
" My statements are my opinion..." Agreed, and they will be given as much attention as they deserve.
" I love to read, many people want to ban books..." Yes. Dr. Seuss has six books that are very controversial, and the political Left wants them banned.
"Things I enjoy..." With some digging, I'm sure something can be found offensive to others.
Not taking up Archery simply because the School doesn't have a club is a poor reason. If She was interested in an activity, in this case shooting sports, she could have pursued it, be it Archery, BB Guns, slingshot, anything. What drives her desire to shoot a firearm? Should she seek Professional help?
"These idiots that own assault rifles..." Another opinion, and huge assumption.
" What do drugs/ Bordes issues have to do with guns..." Tishomingo brought up, basically, keeping people safe. Very admirable. My point is that other problems cause far more deaths than Firearms. maybe it's time to "talk about border security, and the drug problem".
" By some people's standards..." Such elite Left-Wing thinkers such as "The queen on nice", Rosie O'Donnell has stated as much. I doubt she is alone in her thinking, judging by the support she had from her audience.

Yes---I am saying that the taking of human life is a mental illness, (With extremely rare exceptions). A gun is an inanimate object. It cannot impose its will on anyone. It requires a person to plan, load, and pull the trigger. It is not the gun, it is the person behind the gun.

 

Humans have been killing each other since Cain took out Abel, apparently because of jealousy and sibling rivalry. Those emotions are still with us, along with a range of other anti-social impulses we try to keep in check. Was it mental illness or sin? The Bible says sin. The DSM might label it Othello's syndrome (delusional jealousy), although Cain's doesn't seem all that delusional, since God was showing obvious favoritism toward Abel. Sibling rivalry doesn't exist as a diagnostic category. I call it "human nature".

Biologist E.O Wilson tells us inThe Meaning of Human Existence, that prehistoric humans (or maybe even pre-human hominids), developed separate modules for the selfish impulses of the id and the societal norms of the superego. Cognitive psychologist Stephen Pinker, likewise, tells us that the brain is modularized, and most closely approximates the Judeo-Christian model of competing tendencies for good and evil, and the Freudian model of id vs. superego. (The Blank Slate, p.40.) Whether you call it sin, mental illness, or human nature, aggressive anti-social impulses seem to be built into enough of us that we need to be careful what we do or say, and have laws and police officers to help keep us in line. Saying we're all sick doesn't get us far, since we don't have the psychiatric resources to handle us all.

You might think it would be productive to get to the root of violence by correcting these primitive impulses. I think it would be futile, since priests and preachers have been trying it for millennia to no avail, and psychologists and psychiatrists haven't done much better--not that it isn't still worth trying. (Every little bit helps). Cain had only a rock--an "inanimate object"-- for a weapon, and only one potential victim other than Adam and Eve. I agree that getting rid of rocks would have been a challenge, except maybe for God. Think of the possibilities if Cain had an AR-15 and a modern population to shoot at! Given a choice between reforming Cain or taking away the AR-15 or other means of mass destruction, I'd opt for the latter as more feasible--although Cain might have benefited from some heavy psychotherapy .Face it, Lakey. Your mental health mantra is a dodge to deflect from any serious effort at gun control. With all the hand wringing over human life, thoughts and prayers, and hollow promises of increased mental health resources, you're willing to sit on your hands and watch the slaughter.

 

It would please me if this god to whom people keep referring, would use some of that claimed, inimitable power to finally straighten humanity out to stop the endless slaughter. What has manifested just over MY lifetime has made faith somewhat difficult for me to attain. Well--impossible.

 

LOL!! "Lakey"??? LOL. Isn't that cute. You're letting your emotions get to you again. Sounds like your GUNS BAD!! mantra is more about controlling people then saving lives.

 

Surely your ego can't be that fragile. Sounds like you're desperate to deflect attention from the weakness of your arguments. I do get emotional about dead kids, grandmas, and folks like you who put forward specious arguments that will produce more of them. BTW, I don't think "GUNS BAD". I just think certain kinds of them are more dangerous than beneficial, and they need to be controlled and regulated, the way we license motor vehicles and require safety training.

 

LOL. Oh, I don't know. Maybe, something regarding MENTAL HEALTH SERVICES. For some reason I'm still stuck on the thinking that an object cannot kill. I guess that's just me being old school. Silly me thinking a rock, or a gun just doesn't jump up and murder someone.

 

Objects can't kill, but people can use objects to do it, and some of those "objects" produce casualties on a mass scale. We can't identify perpetrators in advance, potential perps and/or their families might not come in contact with the shrinks beforehand, and legislators who call for mental health funding instead of gun control typically don't put their money where their mouths are--or can't be counted on to leave it there long. Meanwhile, we do have the means to ban ad/or regulate weapons of mass destruction. Ergo, doing the latter makes sense. By all means invest more in mental health, but not as an alternative to gun control. Why is it so difficult for you to grasp these basic facts?

 

Basic---The innocent should not be punished for what the guilty do. My rights to own a firearm of my choice, (if you, or MeAgain, agree with it) is being infringed--- That word seems to ring a bell--- .

 

So you would prefer to simplify and just allow nobody to have guns? I have guns, and they have never killed a human.
In many, if not all, the States the mental health services/funding have dwindled, as well as funding for those in prison. The State Hospitals are shutting down, also crimes are on the rise. Could there possibly be a connection?