Posted on 02/23/2018 6:40:51 AM PST by davikkm
The Left does not want to stop massacres, they only want to use massacres to solidify their tyranny and control.
Trump is offering solutions, they will not accept that.
My prediction is that he will propose building a federal data base of the mentally ill and criminal records created to use in the background check process AND, we can also start locking up crazies away from our general population again too.
We have to get a hold on crime in this country, it is way, way out of hand.
Trump looks for logical and effective solutions, not just power grabs like the Left does.
MAGA
And there you go.
What I said in my last post before I read what Trump said.
He is over reacting. This is result of the Mass Media, China collusion, propaganda front. For as long as the Chinese can not round up the majority of weapons they fear invading the U.S.A. But the mass media is in the pocket of Kruschev communists.
Beer summit?
Look for any new gun control laws to land up in the fed courts.
Good analysis.
I would add more age restrictions. I did not even know about the difference between buying a handgun and a rifle. Its silly, but if you make the exemptions for taking gun safety class and passing (a real class, not a questionnaire) and for military personnel. this is not a hill we should die on.
Now, about teachers carrying. of course the solution is to let teachers carry if they have a license but the license then becomes the problem. I live in Ca, no way they will give those licenses. The other thing about teachers is that all teachers do not have the fortitude to actually step into the hall way when a shooter is firing at them. I would add that simple CC license is not enough, conflict class and target practice are mandatory too.
By better background checks, what some mean is a check of things like internet posting which may give a different viewpoint of the individual.
The background check for a security clearance involves being interviewed and interviewing one’s neighbors and friends. This would be telling if applied to the Parkland shooter. So I would permit an escalation of the review if the individual was initially found to be in a questionable area. BTW, I am not sure what would be the tip off, but being expelled from school would be one thing I would wonder about. There are other markers and I would appreciate that the individual should be able to appeal.
“There is a legal definition for mental illness just as there is for felony. If you’ve been adjudicated as mentally defective...”
I wrote about how the term “mentally disturbed” is not well defined. You came back with the terms “mental illness” and “mentally defective”. Are those two terms the same as “mentally disturbed” as rexthecat used it? Would rexthecat agree? Would enough people agree that “mentally disturbed”,” mental illness” and “mentally defective” mean the same thing that we can have a discussion without more confusion?
The Mayo Clinic says “Mental illness refers to a wide range of mental health conditions — disorders that affect your mood, thinking and behavior. Examples of mental illness include depression, anxiety disorders, schizophrenia, eating disorders and addictive behaviors.” ( https://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-conditions/mental-illness/symptoms-causes/syc-20374968 )
Should someone with an eating disorder be denied the right to keep and bear arms? How about an addicion to nicotine? Or Twinkies?
You write that “There is a legal definition for mental illness just as there is for felony” so please provide a source for the legal definition for mental illness. And note that while there may be a definition for felony, what’s included or excluded as a felony can be changed at the whim of the lawmakers. Also, if I recall correctly, homosexuality was once included as a mental illness/defect/disorder (whatever) by the American Psychriatric Association but they changed that. My understanding is that body dysmorphia still is...unless you think you’re a different gender.
The whole thing needs to be tied down tighter if we are going to take action to deny rights based on it. If it is already tied down tightly enough in strictly legal terms we need to discuss it in those terms, not in generalities.
“This is about enforcing laws that are already on the books and that almost everyone agrees with, not about creating new laws and restrictions. “
I’m not sure everyone understands or agrees with that.
I very much agree with you, however, keep in mind, the founding fathers in all their wisdom did put provisions in the Constitution for amending. The 2A CAN be amended...I don’t want it to be, and believe it won’t be, but understand it can be done. Heck, alcohol was prohibited by Constitutional Amendment at one time. And not that long ago, relative to the age of our country.
I think people who are on psychotropic drugs should not have access to guns. However that right should only be suspended until the person achieves stability. Maybe three separate doctors confirming or something like that.”
All the serial shooters have been Muslims or Democrats. We know that many Muslims raise their children full of hate and rage. Apparently many Democrats raise their children to be full of hate and rage.
There should be a much longer and more in-depth background check of Muslims and Democrats.
There are no doubt many new enraged youth being spawned as their libtard parents are constantly spewing hate to their children.
“He’s negotiating.”
Right, and also misdirecting. Ever since he announced, he has used this strategy of confusing the left about his policy positions and philosophies on various issues.
Shall we attack him for being too religious or not religious enough? Shall we attack him for being too rich and successful, or accuse him of exaggerating his wealth and filing bankruptcies? Should we accuse him of warmongering against Russia or being too chummy with Putin?
Should we say he’s a right wing extremist, or try to separate him from his base by saying he’s a closet liberal? Is he too free market or too protectionist? Is he an evil genius or a harmless clown?
As a result of his constant misdirections, the Left has no idea how to brand him. They try so many different angles that they come off as reactionary, inconsistent and just flat out wrong, time after time. They come off sounding childish and immature.
One day he says they should outlaw bump stocks (which is impossible by the way since they can easily be improvised with a block of wood and some duct tape) - and the next day he’s saying we should arm teachers. So which is it? Is he pro 2nd or pro gun control?
It’s fun to watch this POTUS play cat and mouse with the leftist press.
All I can say is that if you want to know what Trump’s real position is, the last thing you should go by is what he says within earshot of the MSM.
Wait until the definition of Mentally Disturbed includes Trannies.
Can’t think of a more Mentally Disturbed group of People, except for Democrats and Liberals.
The “beer summit” was Joe Biden undoing the racism that spewed from Obama’s mouth.
“[Not] all teachers do not have the fortitude to actually step into the hall way when a shooter is firing at them.”
Of course not.
But some do.
And the attacker doesn’t know which.
So the scenario changes from “fish in a barrel” to “attacker may not survive past first shot”. That’s a proven (not 100%, but very high) deterrent.
Yes, subsidize training, equipment, etc for any teacher wanting it.
The advantage of TEACHERS being armed (even just a few) is they’re among the targets.
Guards, as we just saw, may not want to jump in.
I’m concerned about the teacher having the ability to get OUT - by stopping the threat directly.
The imperative is having SOMEONE in the school be armed, having a basic reason to fight back, and ability to.
If CA refuses, then it’s their choice to stand aside watching resident school kids die, while other states arm their teachers and protect their kids.
That’s why we have _states’_rights_. And RKBA.
“I would add more age restrictions.”
I’d like to see some rationale for age restrictions. Why 18? Well there seems to be a consensus that that’s the age of majority, when one can enter contracts, get married without permission, vote, etc.
So then why 21 for liquor, tobacco, handguns and now maybe rifles? Why not 20 or 22? Why not 25 since you have to be that age to get into Congress? Why not 26 since they decided you could stay on your parents health insurance plan till that age? Why not 17 since you’re in the militia at that age?
I want to see the thinking behind all the age restrictions.
“...what some mean is a check of things like internet posting ...”
Like we do here on FR?
By the way, what’s your real name, address, phone number, and
Social Security number? I haven’t read all your posts but I have no doubt someone somewhere wants to contact you about them.
.
Trump has just given the left what they desired most: A guarantee that he will be a one term president!
.
.
Count on it!
This cannot turn out well.
.
.
Mentally disturbed is exactly what our Deep State handlers want.
Those people are used to get assassinations done.
Remember Loughner down in Tucson that took out the judge that was getting in Obama’s way?
They catalog them for future use.
.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.