There have gotta be some studies out there showing an autism/libertarian correlation. Off to Lexus/Nexus!
Good blog on mass shootings
- Thread starter Lone Clone
- Start date
Yes, because the Libertarians and their understanding at how rigged and futile taking a side within the system that is set to go the way it intends to go regardless is the virtue of the autistic.
When you purchase a gun from a gun shop, the paperwork that follows the sale of that gun is pretty extensive. Gun Shops have to provide all the information of who they sold the gun to, the background check that was done, the serial number of said weapon, make, caliber, type, and more. ALL of this gets sent to the ATFE.........So the Govt has a paper trail to every legally sold gun in this country.
Yes, this is very true. If what I'm understanding from Joe's Place is true, it's that he wants a separate paper trail going to the Gun shops to stop the purchase of guns from being bought.
I disagree with that sentiment completely FWIW. Start another paper trail, start another confusing system along with it, that will very likely fail to do it's job. Just as the paper trail you have described has failed over and over.
Wha????
'Drug tests' never were intended to 'stop drug use'. They are used by employers, private entities and the government to screen people applying for jobs, etc. And they are reasonably effective at that, because that is all they are intended for.
Your example here is a 'red herring'. We will NOT stop all people from killing others with guns by simply having an effective 'pre-screening' database; we WILL stop SOME of them, and in particular, we MIGHT stop some of the more mentally unbalanced people from acquiring large weapons stashes.
Drug screening WILL prevent you from getting certain jobs when it cathes you; having mental health/medical/family 'flags' included as part of a gun-registration database could have similar success. But it's never going to be 100% effective. Only confiscating all weapons is going to approach that level of success, but that's really not part of a rational/feasible discussion.
LOL....no, the paper trail works fine.
The problem is, that none of the shooters in CT, CO or OR had any criminal history. Thus, there was NOTHING TO FIND or prevent them from acquiring a weapon. All of those weapons were legally purchased, and NONE of the 'background checks' being proposed by any Presidential candidates would have changed that one bit. They are simply using this most recent incident to fire up their bases politically.
FYI: I'm really not very keen on any of the 'proposed gun control' options ANY of them have made, because NONE of them would have prevented any of the listed mass killings. So, unless someone can propose SOMETHING that is feasible, that is not an infringement of 2nd Amendment rights for law-abiding (and sane) citizens, it's really a waste of time to debate it.
To say that Drug tests weren't intended to stop drug use is laughable. The whole point of it was to ensure they weren't hiring someone who is a regular user of drugs from behind hired into positions that required sound mind.
You say stop some of them, without absolutely no proof whatsoever, that it will or can do that. You also even said, MIGHT.
If it is not going to be 100% effective, than what percentage is going to satisfy you? What percentage do you deem acceptable for the amount of effort, money, time, that this will take?
I agree also that confiscation, is not the answer, and would end up in blood shed throughout this entire country.
The only real answer is humanity itself. When humanity evolves past this recklessness and vicious behavior, then we will have gotten somewhere.
So the paper trail didn't work fine then? It was inadequate is what I think you mean. The mental character of someone is hard to determine and define. A crazy person could very easily show little of that crazy self portion of their mind. That kind of diagnosis by the way, could even more easily be used to hold them from many other things besides guns themselves.
I agree, it's a waste of time to debate this. For now, I'll say good day.
This is the only thing you've written that is correct.
People who USE drugs then DO NOT APPLY to the jobs they know they'll be tested in advance for.
Ergo: they are NOT intended to 'stop everyone from using drugs'. They simply screen the applicants for jobs; that is all they do. No one 'gets turned over to the cops and put in jail' for failing a company drug test. They just get fired or not hired.
Yes, that is precisely what I've been stating.
And between guardians, family members, doctors, etc., there certainly CAN be ways to flag behaviors or people at risk and cross-referencing that with gun purchases or ownership. The CO shooter was batshit crazy and his parents knew it; they had NO IDEA he had been purchasing weapons, but had they known, there may have been an opportunity to intervene. How does that happen? Right now, it can't. The question is, can we construct an informational system that retains basic privacies but also flags things before they occur?
Of course you realize that I never said that it was for the stopping of all drug use? But a way to help put a stop to it, if in fact, that is what was intended.
Of course you can, but you once you do that, you have to take into account the laws that will inevitably, if they do not already, become the basis on how the systems are ran, maintained, and used.
In all reality, the parents could have simply used policies we have now, especially with the watch lists and the push for self-reporting we have now.
Oh yes, the General Welfare. Any common public good or concern, the bedrock of the popular understanding of socialism. Just wait until Blazin sees this, you're in for it. Blazin and libertarians don't like that part of the constitution, but I'm glad you're an ally.
Well socialism is control disguised as welfare. So I think you may need some schooling.
Sure and the constitution says that's what the nation was founded on. Ain't that fun?
As is so often the case with the constitution. It's hard to understand why people consider the FF good writers.
