The Gun Control Debate Thread

[boozeman]

Even the far left leaning ACLU was against this, JFC you're a mouth breathing retard
https://www.aclu.org/blog/disability-rights/gun-control-laws-should-be-fair

Be honest with yourself though.

This was not knocked down because people care about the rights of mentally ill people.

 

[jsmith6919]

Be honest with yourself though.

This was not knocked down because people care about the rights of mentally ill people.

This had nothing to do with actual mental cases, it was blocking any senior citizen who had problems managing their money by themselves

 

[boozeman]

1. We make it work with courthouses so gtfo with this bs

Courthouses are populated by hundreds of children en masse in a short period of time? Well how about that.


Look it might work at Sunnydale Elementary population 200, but it is not going to be feasible in a school like Parkland with a population bigger than some community colleges and a sprawling campus.
2. I'm ok with paying more taxes if it's clear this is what it's going for

3. Again I'm ok with paying more taxes if it's stipulated it goes to teachers who get certified to carry(they should def get a pay raise for doing this)

All my kids are out of school but I(and I'm sure most pro-2A) have no problem paying more if it's earmarked for this.

Easy to say now when you have no idea of the scope of the expense and the ripples involved to implement effectively.

So it is not as "simple" as you imply.

The simpler initiative is something you really don't want to consider.

 

[jsmith6919]

Courthouses are populated by hundreds of children en masse in a short period of time? Well how about that.


Look it might work at Sunnydale Elementary population 200, but it is not going to be feasible in a school like Parkland with a population bigger than some community colleges and a sprawling campus.
2. I'm ok with paying more taxes if it's clear this is what it's going for


Easy to say now when you have no idea of the scope of the expense and the ripples involved to implement effectively.

So it is not as "simple" as you imply.

The simpler initiative is something you really don't want to consider.

Simpler initiative? If you are implying a semi-auto ban then there is nothing simple about that. You will be looking at tens of thousands of Waco level standoffs across the country

 

[boozeman]

You will be looking at tens of thousands of Waco level standoffs across the country

Wait, so the issue is pissing off the militia idiots?

In all seriousness though, I am not pretending to know the reaction, but if pissing off a bunch of yahoos is a trade off to keeping kids safe or making it not a risk to go to a church, a movie or concert.

And BTW, the initiative I was referring to was not an outright ban. Read my post before that with other suggestions.

 

[boozeman]

This had nothing to do with actual mental cases, it was blocking any senior citizen who had problems managing their money by themselves

I don't think it is that simple:

Trump Nixed Gun-Control Rule

By D'Angelo Gore
Posted on October 6, 2017

[HR][/HR]

Q: Did President Donald Trump repeal a rule that aims to block some people with mental disorders from buying guns?
A: Yes. The Social Security Administration is no longer required to submit the names of certain mentally disabled beneficiaries to a federal agency that conducts gun background checks.
FULL QUESTION
Is it true that President Obama passed a bill that prohibited mentally ill people from purchasing a gun and that President Trump rescinded this bill?

FULL ANSWER

The deadly mass shooting in Las Vegas has again brought attention to legislation signed by President Donald Trump that eliminated a Social Security Administration reporting requirement regarding beneficiaries deemed to have a mental impairment.

FactCheck.org readers have asked about the measure, and comedian Jimmy Kimmel referenced it during the opening monologue of his nightly talk show on Oct. 2.

“President Trump … spoke this morning, he said he was praying for those who lost their lives,” an emotional Kimmel said. “You know, in February, he also signed a bill that made it easier for people with severe mental illness to buy guns legally.”

The late-night host was referring to H.J.Res. 40, which became law on Feb. 28.

That joint resolution didn’t affect all “people with severe mental illness,” as Kimmel’s comment may have suggested. It rescinded a Social Security Administration rule requiring the agency to report to the National Instant Criminal Background Check System disability applicants unable to manage their finances due to a mental health condition.

The rule applied to “a narrow group of people who have been determined by the Social Security Administration to lack the capacity, on the basis of a mental disorder, to manage their affairs, specifically their benefit payments,” wrote Lindsay Nichols, federal policy director for the Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence, in testimony to Congress in February 2017.

First, let’s look at how the background check system — which was launched in November 1998 — works.

Under federal law, individuals “committed to any mental institution” or “adjudicated as a mental defective” by a court, board, commission or other lawful authority are prohibited from purchasing or possessing a gun.

Adjudicated as a mental defective means people who — “as a result of marked subnormal intelligence, mental illness, incompetency, condition, or disease” — lack the mental capacity to manage their own affairs, or are a danger to themselves or someone else. It also includes people found insane by a court in a criminal case, or found incompetent to stand trial, or not guilty by reason of lack of mental responsibility.

States can report those individuals to the NICS database used by federally licensed firearms dealers to screen for prohibited gun buyers. As of Dec. 31, 2016, there were more than 4.6 million active records in the NICS database for people with “adjudicated mental health” issues, according to FBI data.

When a customer applies to buy a gun from a federally licensed firearms dealer, the seller initiates the required background check by phone or online. NICS then runs the would-be gun buyer’s name and other identifying information against several nationally held databases to determine if the applicant is legally permitted to buy a gun. In addition to mental health records, those databases contain criminal records, court records (such as warrants and protection orders), as well as immigration and naturalization records if the applicant is not a U.S. citizen.

The dealer can complete the sale if there is no match for the applicant in the system. But if there is a match, the gun purchase can be delayed for up to 72 hours while examiners review the case and determine if the person is indeed prohibited from purchasing a weapon.

The SSA’s final rule, which was issued in December 2016, was created to comply with the reporting requirements mandated by the NICS Improvement Amendment Act of 2007, which was signed into law in January 2008 by President George W. Bush. The law required federal agencies to report individuals prohibited from acquiring guns to the NICS.

After the 2012 mass shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School, President Barack Obama issued a presidential memorandum advising the Justice Department to make sure that federal agencies were complying with the 2008 law by reporting relevant records to the national background check system.

As of December 2015, more than 3.5 million people were receiving benefits because of a mental disorder, according to Social Security’s annual report on the disability insurance program. Not all of them would have been reported to NICS for inclusion in its database – only those who met certain criteria.

The Obama administration estimated that the reporting requirement would cover “approximately 75,000 people each year who have a documented mental health issue, receive disability benefits, and are unable to manage those benefits because of their mental impairment, or who have been found by a state or federal court to be legally incompetent.”

Trump opposed the rule, the White House said, because it “could endanger the Second Amendment rights of law abiding citizens.” Other critics of the SSA’s rule included the National Rifle Association and the American Civil Liberties Union, two groups that are usually on opposite sides on gun-related issues.

In a Feb. 20 blog post, Vania Leveille, ACLU senior legislative counsel, and Susan Mizner, ACLU disability counsel, wrote that the rule was unfair and ineffective. “The thousands of Americans whose disability benefits are managed by someone else range from young people with depression and financial inexperience to older adults with Down syndrome needing help with a limited budget. But no data — none — show that these individuals have a propensity for violence in general or gun violence in particular.”

The rule included a method for affected individuals to petition for the ability to obtain a gun, provided they could demonstrate that they posed no threat to the public.

And even with the repeal of the reporting requirement, it’s possible that some beneficiaries with mental disorders would be reported to the NICS by another agency, Nichols told us by phone.

A total of 47 states have laws requiring or authorizing the reporting of some mentally ill people either to the NICS or a similar state database, according to the Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence. That includes 16 states that require the reporting of individuals who have been “appointed a guardian because they lack the capacity to manage their own affairs.”

There is “some overlap” in the reporting, Nichols said, but no one knows how much.


​

 

[jsmith6919]

Wait, so the issue is pissing off the militia idiots?

In all seriousness though, I am not pretending to know the reaction, but if pissing off a bunch of yahoos is a trade off to keeping kids safe.

And BTW, the initiative I was referring to was not an outright ban. Read my post before that with other suggestions.

Ok, I did miss that post of yours, my bad. I wouldn't object to raising the age requirement, I might even go farther than you and say 35. The rest though I have problems with.

Also I did not mean militias, I personally know hundreds of people with what non gun owners would consider arsenals that would not give them up without a fight

 

[jsmith6919]

I don't think it is that simple:

Trump Nixed Gun-Control Rule

By D'Angelo Gore
Posted on October 6, 2017

[HR][/HR]

Q: Did President Donald Trump repeal a rule that aims to block some people with mental disorders from buying guns?
A: Yes. The Social Security Administration is no longer required to submit the names of certain mentally disabled beneficiaries to a federal agency that conducts gun background checks.
FULL QUESTION
Is it true that President Obama passed a bill that prohibited mentally ill people from purchasing a gun and that President Trump rescinded this bill?

FULL ANSWER

The deadly mass shooting in Las Vegas has again brought attention to legislation signed by President Donald Trump that eliminated a Social Security Administration reporting requirement regarding beneficiaries deemed to have a mental impairment.

FactCheck.org readers have asked about the measure, and comedian Jimmy Kimmel referenced it during the opening monologue of his nightly talk show on Oct. 2.

“President Trump … spoke this morning, he said he was praying for those who lost their lives,” an emotional Kimmel said. “You know, in February, he also signed a bill that made it easier for people with severe mental illness to buy guns legally.”

The late-night host was referring to H.J.Res. 40, which became law on Feb. 28.

That joint resolution didn’t affect all “people with severe mental illness,” as Kimmel’s comment may have suggested. It rescinded a Social Security Administration rule requiring the agency to report to the National Instant Criminal Background Check System disability applicants unable to manage their finances due to a mental health condition.

The rule applied to “a narrow group of people who have been determined by the Social Security Administration to lack the capacity, on the basis of a mental disorder, to manage their affairs, specifically their benefit payments,” wrote Lindsay Nichols, federal policy director for the Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence, in testimony to Congress in February 2017.

First, let’s look at how the background check system — which was launched in November 1998 — works.

Under federal law, individuals “committed to any mental institution” or “adjudicated as a mental defective” by a court, board, commission or other lawful authority are prohibited from purchasing or possessing a gun.

Adjudicated as a mental defective means people who — “as a result of marked subnormal intelligence, mental illness, incompetency, condition, or disease” — lack the mental capacity to manage their own affairs, or are a danger to themselves or someone else. It also includes people found insane by a court in a criminal case, or found incompetent to stand trial, or not guilty by reason of lack of mental responsibility.

States can report those individuals to the NICS database used by federally licensed firearms dealers to screen for prohibited gun buyers. As of Dec. 31, 2016, there were more than 4.6 million active records in the NICS database for people with “adjudicated mental health” issues, according to FBI data.

When a customer applies to buy a gun from a federally licensed firearms dealer, the seller initiates the required background check by phone or online. NICS then runs the would-be gun buyer’s name and other identifying information against several nationally held databases to determine if the applicant is legally permitted to buy a gun. In addition to mental health records, those databases contain criminal records, court records (such as warrants and protection orders), as well as immigration and naturalization records if the applicant is not a U.S. citizen.

The dealer can complete the sale if there is no match for the applicant in the system. But if there is a match, the gun purchase can be delayed for up to 72 hours while examiners review the case and determine if the person is indeed prohibited from purchasing a weapon.

The SSA’s final rule, which was issued in December 2016, was created to comply with the reporting requirements mandated by the NICS Improvement Amendment Act of 2007, which was signed into law in January 2008 by President George W. Bush. The law required federal agencies to report individuals prohibited from acquiring guns to the NICS.

After the 2012 mass shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School, President Barack Obama issued a presidential memorandum advising the Justice Department to make sure that federal agencies were complying with the 2008 law by reporting relevant records to the national background check system.

As of December 2015, more than 3.5 million people were receiving benefits because of a mental disorder, according to Social Security’s annual report on the disability insurance program. Not all of them would have been reported to NICS for inclusion in its database – only those who met certain criteria.

The Obama administration estimated that the reporting requirement would cover “approximately 75,000 people each year who have a documented mental health issue, receive disability benefits, and are unable to manage those benefits because of their mental impairment, or who have been found by a state or federal court to be legally incompetent.”

Trump opposed the rule, the White House said, because it “could endanger the Second Amendment rights of law abiding citizens.” Other critics of the SSA’s rule included the National Rifle Association and the American Civil Liberties Union, two groups that are usually on opposite sides on gun-related issues.

In a Feb. 20 blog post, Vania Leveille, ACLU senior legislative counsel, and Susan Mizner, ACLU disability counsel, wrote that the rule was unfair and ineffective. “The thousands of Americans whose disability benefits are managed by someone else range from young people with depression and financial inexperience to older adults with Down syndrome needing help with a limited budget. But no data — none — show that these individuals have a propensity for violence in general or gun violence in particular.”

The rule included a method for affected individuals to petition for the ability to obtain a gun, provided they could demonstrate that they posed no threat to the public.

And even with the repeal of the reporting requirement, it’s possible that some beneficiaries with mental disorders would be reported to the NICS by another agency, Nichols told us by phone.

A total of 47 states have laws requiring or authorizing the reporting of some mentally ill people either to the NICS or a similar state database, according to the Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence. That includes 16 states that require the reporting of individuals who have been “appointed a guardian because they lack the capacity to manage their own affairs.”

There is “some overlap” in the reporting, Nichols said, but no one knows how much.


​

You're using someone I've never heard of that is supposedly a fact checker with 80 followers?

 

[boozeman]

You're using someone I've never heard of that is supposedly a fact checker with 80 followers?

You are being unfair to poor D'Angelo.

The article comes from https://www.factcheck.org/

I know it is not as reliable as repeated echo chamber stuff from Twitter, but hey.

 

[jsmith6919]

You are being unfair to poor D'Angelo.

The article comes from https://www.factcheck.org/

I know it is not as reliable as repeated echo chamber stuff from Twitter, but hey.

Yes, how dare I use that far-right source the ACLU

 

[jsmith6919]

You are being unfair to poor D'Angelo.

The article comes from https://www.factcheck.org/

I know it is not as reliable as repeated echo chamber stuff from Twitter, but hey.

Or if you prefer here's that other right leaning source Vox

https://www.vox.com/the-big-idea/2017/2/6/14522132/gun-control-disabilities-republicans-nra-obama

 

[boozeman]

Yes, how dare I use that far-right source the ACLU

The ACLU has its own nutjob element to it anymore. When they start cite the Huffington Post as news to support their stance, I laugh.

It just happened to align with the NRA for once this time.

 

[bbgun]

a mad rush to blame everyone but the shooter

 

[boozeman]

a mad rush to blame everyone but the shooter

And that falls into the shoulder shrug "welp, can't stop bad people from doing bad things" stance.

Fact of the matter is, if you make something harder and more time consuming or expensive, it cannot hurt.

If it comes down to making a sociopath have infinite patience, I am all for it.

 

[jsmith6919]

The ACLU has its own nutjob element to it anymore. When they start cite the Huffington Post as news to support their stance, I laugh.

It just happened to align with the NRA for once this time.

Yep this guy with 80 followers posted an article I agree with so I'll take his word over those notorious far-right institutions the ACLU and VOX

I expect more from you Booze

 

[boozeman]

Yep this guy with 80 followers posted an article I agree with so I'll take his word over those notorious far-right institutions the ACLU and VOX

I expect more from you Booze

I am more interested in balance. I don't give a shit how many followers the writer has if who he is writing for has some semblance of impartiality.

Actually, I am kind of disappointed in you taking up with the lefties like ACLU and VOX simply because they once align themselves with the topic.

What is next, you are going to cite Buzzfeed?

Tsk, tsk.

 

[jsmith6919]

I am more interested in balance. I don't give a shit how many followers the writer has if who he is writing for has some semblance of impartiality.

Actually, I am kind of disappointed in you taking up with the lefties like ACLU and VOX simply because they once align themselves with the topic.

What is next, you are going to cite Buzzfeed?

Tsk, tsk.

Yes how dare I cite "the lefties" actually agreeing on an abuse of due process

 

[boozeman]

How the alleged Florida shooter escaped years of warnings
Although he was well known to local police, school and mental health officials, he legally purchased the AR-15 he used to gun down former classmates.

By CAITLIN EMMA, BRIANNA EHLEY and DANIEL DUCASSI 02/15/2018 06:41 PM EST

Politico Magazine

President Donald Trump tweeted Thursday morning that neighbors and classmates should have reported 19-year-old Nikolas Cruz to authorities after he first exhibited disturbing behavior.

But many had done that — over and over and over again.

Cruz, accused of mowing down 17 people at his South Florida high school in one of the nation’s deadliest school shootings, had been barred from bringing a backpack to Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School because he was threatening other students and, after repeated disciplinary run-ins, was finally expelled last year.

Neighbors say he harassed them and police were called to his house many times, the Sun-Sentinel reported. He had also been receiving mental health treatment, but stopped going to the clinic sometime last fall, according to The Washington Post.

Yet despite the fact that he was well known to local police, school and mental health officials, he legally purchased the AR-15 that he used to gun down his former classmates. Cruz slipped through the gaps in a dysfunctional mental health system and a gun background check setup not designed to stop mentally ill people who haven’t been incarcerated or court-ordered into treatment.

"You keep your eyes on those kids who become disconnected — you know, they're out on the fringes,” said Broward County Mayor Beam Furr. “And as a teacher, you try to bring them in to the fold, so to speak, in one way or another."


Federal law prohibits people who have been involuntarily committed for mental illness from buying guns, but that gives a pass to people like Cruz, who, according to media reports, had never been committed to a psychiatric facility or adjudicated by a court for a mental illness, but still exhibited signs of mental disorders.

Policy experts and lawmakers have tried reforming the background check system to include more people, but Trump’s reversal of an Obama-era regulation did the opposite. The rule had required the Social Security Administration to report anyone receiving disability insurance for a mental illness to the FBI’s background check system to prohibit them from purchasing a gun.

“He made it easier for the mentally ill to get guns,” D.J. Jaffe, executive director of Mental Illness Policy Org., said of Trump.

Even when law enforcement officials are contacted about troubled students, their hands are often tied.

"In the work that I’ve done with law enforcement officers, they’re in a tough spot because they want to be helpful but can't do much when laws haven't been broken," said Melissa Reeves, former president of the National Association of School Psychologists and an expert who assists schools in assessing potential threats. "I don’t know what law enforcement officers would’ve done."

Reeves stressed that schools and communities have inadequate resources and the country's mental health system is "broken.”

Schools are often an “easy target for blame,” she said. “They’re expected to do everything while their funding and resources are cut.”

Certainly red flags were missed. Last fall, a bail bondsman in Mississippi said he notified the FBI about an ominous comment left on a YouTube video he had posted about the bail bond industry — “'I'm going to be a professional school shooter.” But federal agents said they were unable to identify the author.

But even if they had, it can be difficult to get people with serious mental illness committed involuntarily, or into treatment if they don’t have a prior diagnosis or a recorded history of problems.

James Holmes, who was convicted of murdering 12 people in the 2012 Aurora, Colo., movie theater shooting, also had never been committed to a mental health facility, though he sought counseling and classmates had raised concerns about him.

“Reporting people doesn’t guarantee they will receive treatment,” Jaffe said. “In this case, [Cruz] had been in treatment and he was allowed to go off. It is very tough to compel anyone who doesn’t have any background of incidents into mandated treatment. American law basically prevents treatment until after dangerousness.”

Cruz was receiving mental health treatment until last fall, but the nature of that treatment is unknown.

Getting care in a fragmented and resource-starved mental health system can also be an issue — especially for those lacking decent health insurance.

After other mass shootings, Trump has suggested the need for mental health reform. But just this week, for the second year in a row, his budget proposed deep cuts to the nation’s mental health programs and programs meant to help prevent crime in schools and assist them in recovery from tragedies.

He has also proposed slashing billions of dollars from other social safety nets like Medicaid, which millions of Americans rely on to get mental health treatment, and he’s pushed the repeal of Obamacare, which includes coverage protections for those with mental illness.

Public health experts say Trump’s budget proves the administration isn’t interested in investing in mental health programs, which have been underfunded for decades. The total federal budget for mental health treatment programs in the Health and Human Services Department’s budget is just over $1 billion.

“People have no idea how little investment there is in mental health. $1 billion doesn’t go far in an economy where there is a deficit of $1.6 trillion,” said Paul Gionfriddo, president and CEO of Mental Health America. “We’re not even a rounding error anymore in terms of the new money they put into mental health.”

Gionfriddo said Cruz should have been given robust and consistent treatment long ago at the first signs of trouble.

Schools have a tendency to suspend or, in this case, expel kids with behavioral issues, he said, instead of recognizing the behavior as a symptom of a broader mental illness and connecting them to care.

“It’s symptomatic of the way the system is built,” he added. “It ignores kids with problems. Instead, they get expelled and we wait until there’s a behavioral manifestation of the illness before we do anything.”

Broward County Public Schools Superintendent Robert Runcie acknowledged that schools must prioritize mental health.

“Mental health issues in this country are growing and are a big challenge,” he said, “and it’s something that will need to be addressed within our school systems, as well as in the broader society to make sure these tragedies don’t continue.”

Since the shooting, Runcie said, students "have been reaching out to me … saying that now, now is the time for this country to have a real conversation on sensible gun control laws in this country.

"Our students are asking for that conversation," he said. "And I hope we can get it done in this generation. But if we don’t, they will."

Florida Senate President Joe Negron, a Republican, said that chamber is committed to increasing mental health funding for schools, pointing to $40 million in the Senate’s proposed budget aimed at providing mental health services, and making that a permanent component of the school funding formula.

Asked specifically if it were time to consider new regulations on semi-automatic firearms, Negron demurred.

“My focus is on making sure that lawful citizens who are obeying the law and are entitled to their constitutional rights … have appropriate access to firearms,” he said. "I think the key to me is making sure that individuals who have mental instabilities or other mental health issues, that they don’t have access to firearms, and that we are making the entrances to our schools and the halls and corridors as safe as we can."

There is not yet an equivalent state House proposal.

That approach got a thumbs down from Gay Valimont, who leads the Florida chapter of Everytown for Gun Safety, a group seeking tighter gun control laws.

“We are heartbroken, but we are also done with thoughts and prayers,” she said as she rallied with about two dozen gun control advocates outside the state Capitol. "We are finished with thoughts and prayers. We are mad as hell, because everybody in this building has had the opportunity to change the gun culture in Florida and they have been negligent for the citizens of Florida.”

 

[boozeman]

 

[L.T. Fan]

It would be outstanding to be able to legislate evil intent from society but unfortunately it just cannot be done. There is always a debate as to how it should be done but to my knowledge nothing has been successful in this regard.

Everyone agrees it should be done but cannot agree on how it is to be accomplished. On the matter of firearms the debate continues about whether the ability to own them is in fact the key to solving the problem. Nothing new here except the individuals only accomplish further polarization of political agendas.

It boils down to this. Change the heart of those who would perpurtrate their evil intentions with firearms or other destructive devices or change the way of how to acquire these devices. If anyone can solve it at this level then they will have a following from both sides of a polarized population. Easier said than done.