ilovefuzz.com

The thing is that almost all guns are now semi-automatic. I have three guns and the only one that isn't semi is a single shot 3 06 I bought for deer hunting (which I never ended up doing). So it would be down right impossible to change that. I agree we don't need them, but that's just the way it is. When I look at guns, which I haven't in a really long time, 9/10 are semi automatic.

Making gun laws stricter could help and I'm all for it. I'm also for the watch list to a certain respect. I agree with Obama that people who are on Isis websites ought to be monitored for gun purchases. They are fucking terrorists for crying out loud. Fuck their rights.

The recent shooting though had nothing to do with Isis and the media tried hard to portray it that way. It had to do with a self hating man that wanted to hurt other people, which is fucking sad. It's sad that there was no way to stop him, it's sad that his religion made him feel like and outcast for being gay and it's sad that he murdered all those people. He clearly had mental issues.

What needs to be on the gun questionnaire and I say this as a Catholic, is are you affiliated with any religious groups. If the answer is yes, no gun. Bye bye. On the real though, more people kill or hurt others over fucking religion than probably anything else in the world. It's insane and makes me sick.

I've actually considered selling my guns out of hatred for these loose redneck fucks that are all about gun rights and protecting the 2nd ammendment no matter what. I agree with UC and think the Constitution ought to be re-written. Our country is a bunch of backwards ass idiots. I mean, we are trying to prevent people from taking a piss in a public restroom for fucks sake. Just seriously. Fuck this country. It needs to change. I'm so tired of this shit.

If the watch list wasn't shady as fuck I would agree with you.

Chankgeez wrote:Actually, I think the mental health aspect is a large part of what's lacking in the gun control equation.

Well, ok, but (and I'm not jumping on you here, Chank, you're just the closest person to quote) "mental health aspect" is a HUGE gloss on a whole bunch of different issues. Most people suffering from mental health issues are more of a threat to themselves than anyone else, and often without any kind of weapon involved. So if we're gonna get into THAT can of worms, we're gonna have to drill down in ways that I suspect even the mental health profession(s) haven't tried yet.

D.o.S. wrote:If the watch list wasn't shady as fuck I would agree with you.

And half of the fucking people who pull this shit were already on watch lists.

Ok so here's some perspective for you and something I don't like talking about. I'm bipolar, I've mentioned that many, many times. Bipolar people can snap at any time if not taking medication, that is a fucking fact. I used to be insane. Literally insane, and I should NOT have been able to purchase a gun at that time, but I did.

Guess what I did? I stuck that fucking thing in my mouth and fought the urge to pull the trigger for three hours. That's not stable at all, yet no one stopped me from buying it or even questioned me. Thank God I didn't do it, but I did stick a loaded gun in my mouth or to my temple several more times throughout my drinking history.

My point is, had I been given a background check that was proper, they would not have sold me a fire arm. Sure I would have been angry, who the fuck cares? That's my problem.

I think if you have a mental health issue such as I do, there should be a several step process.

Background check.
Pysch evaluation from a phychatrist.
Approval from that doctor when they can determine whether or not you are stable enough to have a firearm.

If you can't go through that, then that's your problem.

damn dude thanks for getting real as fuck. glad your still here.

My mom gave my stepdad's guns to his brother for safe keeping after his last stay in a psych unit.

jrmy wrote:

Chankgeez wrote:Actually, I think the mental health aspect is a large part of what's lacking in the gun control equation.

Well, ok, but (and I'm not jumping on you here, Chank, you're just the closest person to quote) "mental health aspect" is a HUGE gloss on a whole bunch of different issues. Most people suffering from mental health issues are more of a threat to themselves than anyone else, and often without any kind of weapon involved. So if we're gonna get into THAT can of worms, we're gonna have to drill down in ways that I suspect even the mental health profession(s) haven't tried yet.

Yeah, it's a HUGE can of worms. Definitely a big gloss. I was trying to boil it down without getting too far into it. I just meant that you can't really separate it out of the equation.

The ready availability of guns is a major fiasco (and not just for the mentally ill), but it's really not the cause of the problem.

There's really no reason why, if you want to buy a gun, you shouldn't have to wait a week. That, of course, can't have any bearing on private sales, though.

Chankgeez wrote:

jrmy wrote:

Chankgeez wrote:Actually, I think the mental health aspect is a large part of what's lacking in the gun control equation.

Well, ok, but (and I'm not jumping on you here, Chank, you're just the closest person to quote) "mental health aspect" is a HUGE gloss on a whole bunch of different issues. Most people suffering from mental health issues are more of a threat to themselves than anyone else, and often without any kind of weapon involved. So if we're gonna get into THAT can of worms, we're gonna have to drill down in ways that I suspect even the mental health profession(s) haven't tried yet.

Yeah, it's a HUGE can of worms. Definitely a big gloss. I was trying to boil it down without getting too far into it. I just meant that you can't really separate it out of the equation.

The ready availability of guns is a major fiasco (and not just for the mentally ill), but it's really not the cause of the problem.

Well, no. But can we actually solve the cause of the problem? Would it not make more sense to restrict the, y'know, part that involves the thing that actually launches the bullets?

Also jwar, I'm so glad that you didn't pull the trigger any of those times. I've got family members who have bipolar, and struggled. It's a hard road.

Yeah, the problem is unsolvable. You can only minimize it. One way would be, as you suggest, to restrict the flow of weapons that can cause massive harm easily.

I'm not against that part. I'd just like to see some of the other factors involved being addressed more thoroughly. I like to get as close as possible to the root of the problem.

Chankgeez wrote:I like to get as close as possible to the root of the problem.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mM6OIlreneA[/youtube]



Slightly off topic: I maintain that the logic of "if they didn't have guns they would just use something else" to be extraordinarily deceitful when presented as an actual point of discussion.

Chankgeez wrote:Yeah, the problem is unsolvable. You can only minimize it. One way would be, as you suggest, to restrict the flow of weapons that can cause massive harm easily.

I'm not against that part. I'd just like to see some of the other factors involved being addressed more thoroughly. I like to get as close as possible to the root of the problem.

Sure, I'm for that. How 'bout we pursue both!

One other anecdote. A friend of mine was in the army and came back from iraq struggling with PTSD. Didn't want people to worry so he never talked about it or sought help. One day he snapped and pulled a gun on his wife and told her he was going to kill her and then himself. She hid and called the police. There was a standoff. The cops version of negotiations was shooting him several times. He's now paraplegic. There was nothing in his past that would have shown up on even the most strict background check. btw they're still married and raising their kids. Not really trying to make a point or anything, just thought it might be relevant to the discussion.

D.o.S. wrote:
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mM6OIlreneA[/youtube]

I'm not sure I see this as a "problem".

jrmy wrote:
Sure, I'm for that. How 'bout we pursue both!

Pursuing both is a great idea. I just don't like it when the public addresses an issue and then takes the easy way out. Just tackling one aspect of a problem and calling it done isn't really addressing the problem. Neglecting the cause of a problem is asking for trouble somewhere down the road.

Chankgeez wrote:

D.o.S. wrote:
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mM6OIlreneA[/youtube]

I'm not sure I see this as a "problem".

You're the one looking for root causes here, mang.