What freedom do you lose by better means keeping guns out of the hands of those who already don't have a right to possess guns. Not a fucking one.
I said the dialogue is good. I'm just not there at this point. I may never be. Sure you could keep some kooks from getting a gun but will they be the ones who were going to commit mass murder? Probably not. Needle in a haystack. Those who really want to get a gun, will get a gun. The initial reports in this story, if you remember, were that he got it as a gift. It can't get any easier than that. Not in America, it isn't. That's why we are different. What country on Earth other than ours, has freedom guaranteed in their establishment language. People came here precisely because they wanted freedom from tyranny, in the idealistic sense. And I am not convinced that my being a responsible gun owner will make others the same, particularly if they are mentally unstable.
"A website with a white supremacist manifesto features dozens of photos of Dylann Storm Roof, the man accused of killing nine people at a church in Charleston, S.C., posing with weapons, burning an American flag and visiting Southern historic sites and Confederate soldiers’ graves. It is not clear who wrote the words and who took the pictures, but it traces the evolution of the author’s racist worldview and concludes with a section labeled “An Explanation" Somebody....or lots of somebodies, saw this website. It should have been brought to the attention of authorities or at a minimum, make his parents aware that he has been identified as a potential issue. This dude was going to get a gun, no matter what controls/laws were in place.
We were the first, for sure. And many following international constitutions have been modeled after ours. But ours is getting very old and was designed for the 18th century and fewer new constitution are modeled on it. Friggin' Canada's 1982 constitution seems to be the new model. One study found that the U.S. Constitution guarantees relatively few rights compared to the constitutions of some other countries and contains less than half (26 of 60) of the provisions listed in the average bill of rights. It is also one of the few in the world today that still features the right to bear arms; the only others are the constitutions of Guatemala and Mexico, who share our high murder rates.
My Dad never owned a gun safe and never had a lock to put on his guns. He didn't have to. I always knew where they were but I knew better than to touch them without his supervision. Yes, parents should be legally responsible but if they do their job its not necessary to put their guns in a safe.
The Constitution may be old, that doesn't make it wrong or in need of overhaul. America is different, plain and simple. I really don't want to base what we do on what everyone else does. We set our own standard. That said, here is the kind of approach I would be more interested in seeing deployed on a larger basis. "The LAPD's unusual partnership with the Los Angeles County Department of Mental Health has become a nationally recognized model for police departments. L.A. isn’t the only city to co-deploy officer-clinician teams, but it is the biggest and most robust program in the United States. In 2010, it was designated a national training site, and officers from as far away as Australia have reached out to Lieutenant Garcia. By partnering beat cops with mental health clinicians, the MEU reined in costs associated with frivolous 911 calls. It also connected thousands of individuals with counseling and support, reducing incidences of force used on individuals with mental illness and alleviating the burden on overcrowded emergency rooms and the criminal justice system. Diverting nonviolent offenders to mental health services is ultimately better for their recovery and saves taxpayers money, says Fred Osher, director of health systems and services policy at The Council of State Governments (CSG)." http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/in...for-how-to-police-the-mentally-ill/ar-BBlbJu0 I just get frustrated when the headlines after an incident like So Carolina, are always about race and gun control.
True. I still get a little unnerved taking my kids to the movies. I spend as little time as possible in the mall (I hate shopping anyway), and I avoid large crowds whenever possible. It's those times when my kids are away from me that I know they are vulnerable. There is no such thing as relax or sleep.
I don't go to movies much. I just wait to rent it. I hate the mall but I can buy pretty much anything I need and hardly ever set foot in a mall. I don't like being in a large crowd unless its a sporting event. None of that is because I fear being a victim of random violence. If it happens it happens and the odds are probably as great against it as it is winning the lottery. If you let it control your actions where the hell can you go? In the past there have been mass shootings at a McDonald's in California and a Luby's Cafeteria in Texas. You gonna stay home and eat nothing but delivery pizza? Are you safe at work? Lots of shootings at work places, especially the Post Office.
Mine, too. But I was a child without metal health problems and one who took responsibility seriously. If I had been a problem child or an irresponsible one, my Dad would have locked the guns up. There are a lot of good reasons to do so. Guns are a clear and present danger to small children for one thing. And even responsible older children can have irresponsible and immature friends over. Babysitters, housekeepers, children of your own friends will be in your house, sometimes unsupervised. In this day and age is makes sense to lock up your firearms if there are children that come to your house. It protects you and them as well.
