HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » NRA and GOP have convince...
Introducing Discussionist: A new forum by the creators of DU

Tue Jan 15, 2013, 01:28 PM

NRA and GOP have convinced me..the issue in not guns its mental illness, psych drugs and guns

so from now on to buy guns or ammo, you must submit to blood tests to determine if you are using any psych drugs and be screened for mental illness....everytime you buy guns or ammo.

23 replies, 1150 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 23 replies Author Time Post
Reply NRA and GOP have convinced me..the issue in not guns its mental illness, psych drugs and guns (Original post)
Fresh_Start Jan 2013 OP
MADem Jan 2013 #1
demwing Jan 2013 #4
MADem Jan 2013 #13
Fresh_Start Jan 2013 #14
MADem Jan 2013 #18
Fresh_Start Jan 2013 #21
MADem Jan 2013 #23
msongs Jan 2013 #2
demwing Jan 2013 #7
Fresh_Start Jan 2013 #8
samsingh Jan 2013 #3
siligut Jan 2013 #5
Fresh_Start Jan 2013 #6
Rex Jan 2013 #9
Fresh_Start Jan 2013 #10
Rex Jan 2013 #11
Fresh_Start Jan 2013 #12
Rex Jan 2013 #15
Fresh_Start Jan 2013 #16
Rex Jan 2013 #20
Fresh_Start Jan 2013 #22
IdaBriggs Jan 2013 #17
Fresh_Start Jan 2013 #19

Response to Fresh_Start (Original post)

Tue Jan 15, 2013, 01:32 PM

1. Yes, they should screen for a preponderance of caucasian blood, too, as well as

investigating how many video games the purchaser has played, if they come from a "broken" home, if the parents are emotionally absent, and if they were mocked and derided by their peers in school--anyone who has been given a wedgie or "pants'd" will be denied a permit. Last picked for dodgeball? No gun for YOU!


for the irony impaired.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MADem (Reply #1)

Tue Jan 15, 2013, 01:37 PM

4. I don't think the irony was too subtle

but the humor?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to demwing (Reply #4)

Tue Jan 15, 2013, 01:54 PM

13. Well, I am an old fart and I don't find a lot of things funny.

I see a concerted effort forming to play a "divide and conquer" disruption game, using Sandy Hook/Child Safety, gun control/NRA types, and mental illness as the competing interests.

It's like the right wing game that Rush Limbaugh drags out periodically, where he tries to divide the liberal, pro-choice/pro-equality community by postulating that one day, "they" will come up with a test for a gay gene, and all those "liberal women" will run to get abortions to get rid of their gay fetuses (never mind that logic would suggest that rightwing bigots would be more likely to overcome their professed distaste for termination were that the case...). Anyway, I digress--if I see much more of this kind of shit here, though, I will start to discern a pattern.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MADem (Reply #1)

Tue Jan 15, 2013, 02:02 PM

14. If the statistics bear out other screening needs, than so be it

but I'm laughing because I'm not trying to screen everyone in the US, just the gun seeking part of the US...and create a database of the gun seekers. Maybe agreeing with the right wing on this will actually move us forward

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fresh_Start (Reply #14)

Tue Jan 15, 2013, 02:08 PM

18. The statistics DO bear out those things I mentioned, and more.

Look askance at white males first--they're the problem, if we're going to play a "statistics" game.

Bottom line--we need gun control, and we're going to get it. Anyone who believes they "need" a machine gun to shoot a deer probably would do well to get some psychiatric assistance along with target shooting lessons so that they don't miss the side of a barn when they aim at it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MADem (Reply #18)

Tue Jan 15, 2013, 02:14 PM

21. actuarial approaches make sense

so I don't think its a statistical game...
its pretty much the way the world runs
and its far better than random beliefs.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fresh_Start (Reply #21)

Tue Jan 15, 2013, 02:23 PM

23. We'll just take the guns away from the white people, then, and our problem is solved.

The John Muhamad's and Seung-Hui Cho's are a rarity in the shoot-em-up business.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fresh_Start (Original post)

Tue Jan 15, 2013, 01:35 PM

2. maybe owning guns is, itself, a sign of mental illness. then what? nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to msongs (Reply #2)

Tue Jan 15, 2013, 01:44 PM

7. Really?

I've stayed out of the gun debates on DU for the most part, and while I support a comprehensive regulation of fire arms, comments like yours just make me wince, because it makes people who want to regulate guns look nearly as irrational as people who want to hoard them.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to msongs (Reply #2)

Tue Jan 15, 2013, 01:44 PM

8. we know that is not the case

there are lots of reasons for owning guns....

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fresh_Start (Original post)

Tue Jan 15, 2013, 01:36 PM

3. sounds good

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fresh_Start (Original post)

Tue Jan 15, 2013, 01:39 PM

5. Maybe meth use too?

Meth use can lead to paranoia.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to siligut (Reply #5)

Tue Jan 15, 2013, 01:43 PM

6. yes, meth use would also make sense

and after the results are back in 10 days or so, including checking for legal prescriptions in case the individual is not truthful. You can come back and get your guns/ammo.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fresh_Start (Original post)

Tue Jan 15, 2013, 01:45 PM

9. Is it also guns or not? You list them as a yes and a no in your thead title.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Rex (Reply #9)

Tue Jan 15, 2013, 01:47 PM

10. its the combination of guns with the other items

and conveniently if you screen the buyers for guns and ammo for mental illness and drug use...you hit the trifecta in terms of targetting.
Gun buyers who aren't using drugs and do not have mental illness can still have their guns and ammo.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fresh_Start (Reply #10)

Tue Jan 15, 2013, 01:50 PM

11. But what happens when one of 'them' goes crazy

and shoots up a McDonalds? How will we apply the slippery slope then? What will be the new standard after that?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Rex (Reply #11)

Tue Jan 15, 2013, 01:52 PM

12. who are them? nt

nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fresh_Start (Reply #12)

Tue Jan 15, 2013, 02:02 PM

15. Doesnt have a mental illness or use drugs or own a gun.

You know the perfect type to sell a firearm to at Wal-Mart! What happens then? What is the standard moved to?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Rex (Reply #15)

Tue Jan 15, 2013, 02:04 PM

16. well than we'd have to develop new risk signs

depending on what the information supports.
But if the first baby steps eliminate 20% of the deaths, why is that not a good thing?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fresh_Start (Reply #16)

Tue Jan 15, 2013, 02:12 PM

20. Did not say it wasn't a good idea

I mean it is a horrible idea, but since we are playing 'what ifs'. How do we really know who the person is about to purchase a lethal weapon at the Outdoor Store? Can we really ever?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Rex (Reply #20)

Tue Jan 15, 2013, 02:16 PM

22. we probably can't identify the specific individual

but we can identify a group of individuals at high risk....and thats at least a start.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fresh_Start (Original post)

Tue Jan 15, 2013, 02:07 PM

17. Since this is such an important issue, maybe monthly checks -

AFTER you buy the guns? Just to make sure you don't try to come "clean" for a test, or something?

I mean, Lance Armstrong, blah, blah, blah.

LOVE THIS - who knew the GOP and NRA could have such great ideas?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to IdaBriggs (Reply #17)

Tue Jan 15, 2013, 02:11 PM

19. I know, I think they should be congratulated

the monthly screening will be a bit problematic.
Perhaps all new ammo should have a really short expiration date, you'd have to change the chemical compounds in order to shorten the half-life of effectiveness. but its fun to think about

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread