mikeymedic1984 Posted May 4, 2013 Share Posted May 4, 2013 Dwayne, this is the first time I have uttered shut it down, but the reason is simple --- 22 pages of response have been offered and another 22 pages will not change either position's mind. Seems like a waste of time to me, but I could be wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chbare Posted May 4, 2013 Share Posted May 4, 2013 It's apparently not a waste of time to other people however. In addition, the dialogue has been pretty respectful in spite of some people having diametrically opposed view points on a subject involving the interpretation of a fundamental right in the United States. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aussiephil Posted May 4, 2013 Share Posted May 4, 2013 I have many guns and enjoy hunting and utilizing them for sport with friends. I am all for more stringent gun laws as long as I can keep mine as long as I am of sound mind. I am for mandatory waiting periods, more intensive background checks, and psych testing. What is the advantage in performing psych testing. I have said it before & will say it again, it is not an exact science, therefore, you bring me your psychiatrist who says you are sane & competent, & I will match you with one who says you have a mental illness or at the very least a mental disorder. Moreso is who is gonna be the first psychiatrist to put his neck on the line & say person x is sane, & 3 months later they use the weapon that was allowed to be purchased to use it for its intended purpose & then pleads insanity. Or you go for your psych testing & get declined because of it, you will sue because you want your guns for hunting & sport with friends, now you have no guns & a stigma that your crazy. Who is gonna be that shrink. Mental Health is too wide open to try to use it as a part of licensing. Who determines what mental illnesses can & cannot have a firearm? what degree of mental illness? I have one question for you to answer honestly scubanurse, & you should be able to answer if you take a complete history from your patients, How many of your patients, as a percentage (approx.) are on some form of antidepressant? The answer, sadly is quite high, so my supplementary question to you is should these people, who have a diagnosed mental health issue/illness, be precluded from gun licencing? Would you trust them with a gun? If you trust them, because they are medicated, how about a schizophrenic who is medicated? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1EMT-P Posted May 5, 2013 Share Posted May 5, 2013 While I sympathize with families and victims of violent crime. As an EMS provider with twenty plus years of experience I can tell you that I have seen lots of violence over the years and in most cases there was either a behavioral health issue or a substance abuse issue that lead to the violence. So before we go taking away people's civil liberties and civil rights I think we need to look at the real issues including the lack of access to affordable behavioral health and primary care services and a lack of funding for things such as programs for at risk youth, grants to hire more school counselors, grants to hire more police officers in schools, drug abuse and mental health education programs for communities, families and schools and improved disaster education and response programs for communities and schools. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Just Plain Ruff Posted May 6, 2013 Share Posted May 6, 2013 While I sympathize with families and victims of violent crime. As an EMS provider with twenty plus years of experience I can tell you that I have seen lots of violence over the years and in most cases there was either a behavioral health issue or a substance abuse issue that lead to the violence. So before we go taking away people's civil liberties and civil rights I think we need to look at the real issues including the lack of access to affordable behavioral health and primary care services and a lack of funding for things such as programs for at risk youth, grants to hire more school counselors, grants to hire more police officers in schools, drug abuse and mental health education programs for communities, families and schools and improved disaster education and response programs for communities and schools. But taking away the guns is the easiest route. The rest costs a shit load of money and with this Sequester, "aint nobody got time for that"!!!!!!! 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ERDoc Posted May 6, 2013 Author Share Posted May 6, 2013 Mikeymedic, I disagree that this needs to be shut down. When I started it I was concerned that it was going to turn into a screaming match between sides but I am impressed by the members of the City and it has been kept very civil and very productive. I don't think anyone will ever convince the other side to change their views, but that is not what this country is about. We are about compromising and coming to an agreement with the other side to come up with a plan that is not perfect but represents as many as possible (though I think our govt has forgotten about this). Bullets, you only site what happens in a very limited portion of one of the more progressive states (PA). Do you really think there are such regulations in more conservative states? The problem with a lot of these arguments from the pro-gun side (as a whole, not on an individual basis as our members here have shown) is that they see it as black or white. You either want to allow my guns or you want to take them all away. I think there are very few that want to take away ALL guns (yes, there are some). I don't think that is reasonable or constitutional. There are some weapons that anyone outside of the military just has no need for. We can regulate cars relatively easily and they have a function other than killing. Why can't the same be done for guns. The problem with registering is the fact that we have gone without it for so long and no politician is looking beyond the next four years. If we start a registry now, decades from now, I think most guns would be registered. It just takes time. Background checks may be superficial, but they can be done. There is no reason a legitimate dealer can't find out if someone has a felony conviction. Any felonies, sorry, no gun for you. There is also no reason there can't be a similar registry of people with a history of violence. The database doesn't need to contain the details just a simple, "This person has a violence related conviction/hospital stay, they get no gun." We have a sex offender database that offers lots of details , why can't something similar be done for violent individuals? No solution is going to be perfect but there are ways to minimize the gun related morbidity and mortality. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
island emt Posted May 6, 2013 Share Posted May 6, 2013 Doc is correct: This has for the most part been an exchange of views in a civil manner. Background checks are just that. A review of a persons past criminal history to see if they should be allowed to possess a firearm capable of killing others. If you have convictions for assault or domestic violence or repeat drunk driving then NO you shouldn't be allow to possess firearms. It really is that simple Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DwayneEMTP Posted May 17, 2013 Share Posted May 17, 2013 If nothing is learned, or practiced here other than debating in a civilized, respectful way, then the thread has paid it's own way in triplicate... 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ERDoc Posted May 18, 2013 Author Share Posted May 18, 2013 If nothing is learned, or practiced here other than debating in a civilized, respectful way, then the thread has paid it's own way in triplicate... Maybe if those damned ignorant conservatives stopped fighting with the damned whiny liberals we could all sing Kumbya 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DwayneEMTP Posted May 19, 2013 Share Posted May 19, 2013 Maybe, but one side would demand to sing it in C minor, the other in D and it would turn into a brawl... :-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts