In response to:

Why Are You Opposed To Ending Violence?

5thDegreeInSight Wrote: Jan 13, 2013 11:13 AM
Remember also that the Aurora shooter passed up several theaters showing The Dark Knight Rises much closer to his apartment than the theater he chose. The difference? None of those theaters were posted against concealed carry. The evidence disclosed thus far shows that this highly intelligent but deranged individual planned this assault meticulously. So the choice of site was not a coincidence. In the 1950s and early 1960s before the "Rights of the Mentally Ill" movement this guy would have been institutionalized with the symptoms he showed to the university. 270million guns 20K nuts - and the left goes after the guns - seems much more doable getting the nuts in treatment and off the street.
3204 Wrote: Jan 13, 2013 4:15 PM
3204 Wrote: Jan 13, 2013 4:15 PM
3204 Wrote: Jan 13, 2013 4:15 PM
Donjindra Wrote: Jan 13, 2013 1:00 PM
"Allowing a mad dog (which may well be done any more because we're disarmed) to roam around biting everyone is foolish."

Who is going to make that determination? What parameters are they to use? This may sound good in theory put I doubt it's viable in practice.

"It is also truly inhumane to allow these people who are not able to care for themselves to become street persons."

Street persons don't carry assault rifles. It's a different issue.
Vic156 Wrote: Jan 13, 2013 12:41 PM
But... But... it's inhumane to restrict the freedom of these people. At least that is the liberal mantra. BFS! They (not all) but enough, are mad dogs. Allowing a mad dog (which may well be done any more because we're disarmed) to roam around biting everyone is foolish. It is also truly inhumane to allow these people who are not able to care for themselves to become street persons. Good intentions lead to he 11
Jay Wye Wrote: Jan 13, 2013 11:53 AM
It appears that some of your anti-gun ilk DO believe that such "mental testing" CAN determine if a person is "safe" to allow firearms. I've seen several people suggest that very thing.
Donjindra Wrote: Jan 13, 2013 11:34 AM
"In the 1950s and early 1960s before the "Rights of the Mentally Ill" movement this guy would have been institutionalized with the symptoms he showed to the university. "

You have a much more favorable opinion of our mental health professionals than I do. Personally, I think we've grown up a little from the 50s and 60s. We no longer think psychiatry is capable of determining who is dangerous and who is not, or how to "cure" those who are.

There’s an epidemic in this country, something that has or will affect all of us in our lives. And the government needs to act to protect us from those who may do us harm. This plague is particularly felt in schools. The children must be made safe.

President Obama, bravely speaking out against this horror, said, “We have an obligation to ensure that our schools are safe for all our kids.” Amen, Mr. President. Amen.

The best course of action to protect as many of our citizens, particularly children, as possible is to place sensible restrictions on...

Related Tags: Media and Culture Guns