Nov 2023 Mod notice:
There may be other, more specific, threads about some aspects of US politics, but this one tends to act as a hub for all sorts of related news and information, so it's usually one of the busiest OTC threads.
If you're new to OTC, it's worth reading the Introduction to On-Topic Conversations
and the On-Topic Conversations debate guidelines
before posting here.
Rumor-based, fear-mongering and/or inflammatory statements that damage the quality of the thread will be thumped. Off-topic posts will also be thumped. Repeat offenders may be suspended.
If time spent moderating this thread remains a distraction from moderation of the wiki itself, the thread will need to be locked. We want to avoid that, so please follow the forum rules
when posting here.
In line with the general forum rules, 'gravedancing' is prohibited here. If you're celebrating someone's death or hoping that they die, your post will get thumped. This rule applies regardless of what the person you're discussing has said or done.
Edited by Mrph1 on Nov 30th 2023 at 11:03:59 AM
If you want to make a new thread about guns and gun control, bring it up in this thread
. Waiting on what there might be said there.
As it stands, since it's applicable to current US politics, it's still here.
@ Ace: We shouldn't do it because it doesn't do anything appreciable other than make it harder for law-abiding citizens. The punishment comes down on the large majority rather than the significant few who are not law-abiding citizens or in reasonable mental health.
Again, the comments have not understood the concept of Due Process in the United States, which includes the right of patients to not accept healthcare that they don't want Unless they have already presented a clear and immediate threat to themselves or others. And not before.
Glove and Boots is good for Blog!![]()
So is Abortion but where not supposed to talk about that here.
Look the last few pages can be summed up like this:
Person 1: Owning guns is a right.
Person 2: No, its a privilege.
Person 1: No, it's a right!
Person 2: It's a f*cking privilege!
Person 1: Freedom Hater!
Person 2: GUN-NUT!
Its an endless cycle that's going no where, and rapidly becoming less civil with every post. Best to just end the discussion.
And I said the question was rhetorical, so why did you answer it?
edited 21st Dec '12 8:55:05 PM by DeviantBraeburn
Everything is Possible. But some things are more Probable than others. JEBAGEDDON 2016Newt Gingrich: GOP faces 'bleak future' without a major political overhaul
Senator McConnell: Best outcome for Obama is ‘for taxes to go up on everybody’
Petition against Obama birth control rules reaches the Supreme Court
edited 21st Dec '12 9:16:49 PM by DeviantBraeburn
Everything is Possible. But some things are more Probable than others. JEBAGEDDON 2016We can talk about abortion Deviant, and we have. In fact, when last we discussed it Maxima Starship was posting in the thread and it was remarkably civil for such a hot topic. And we are being civil right now. We've refrained, so far, from insulting each other.
@Devil: That's the freaking point. To make it harder, particularly for those that might be mentally ill-equipped but otherwise don't have a history. Guns are dangerous, and should not be handed out like candy. Which, essentially, they are. I'm not looking to keep people from hunting. I'm looking to keep guns out of the hands of wing nuts. It's not a punishment to go through a process to be deemed mentally fit. It's more equivalent to the driving test, and the fact that if you're legally blind you're not allowed to drive. It's a sensible precaution, not a punishment. That's what a requirement and gun control law is. Precaution. Punishment is prosecuting you for doing something wrong.
You'd think I was suggesting that we then arrest people for being mentally unfit instead of simply not giving them the license for the gun.
Aaaand, Congress is done for the year so I'm pretty sure our taxes are all going up anyway now. The Republicans have missed their boat on that.
edited 21st Dec '12 9:20:36 PM by AceofSpades
That's punishment. Law-abiding citizens already go through a check for psychological fitness and criminal history. If NICS is not up to date, then fix that and make it up to date.
By adding in a psychiatric check in order to get a gun, you are now asking them to give up one right for another. And that's not how it will ever work.
Glove and Boots is good for Blog!I wish I was making this up.
edited 21st Dec '12 9:36:50 PM by DeviantBraeburn
Everything is Possible. But some things are more Probable than others. JEBAGEDDON 2016I was unaware that the constitution guaranteed the right to acquire dangerous items without psychiatric checks.
EDIT: Why do the coal-paid lobbyists who claim to "fight for Americans against the anti-coal agenda" usually say nothing about the ridiculous health risks the coal industry passes off onto its workers and customers? I can't wait till we replace coal plants with integrated fast breeder reactors across the country.
edited 21st Dec '12 9:40:56 PM by RadicalTaoist
Share it so that people can get into this conversation, 'cause we're not the only ones who think like this.
The right to refuse treatment in non-emergency situations. A psychiatric evaluation against the patient's wishes is an infringement of their civil rights. A patient's competence is assumed until it is adjudicated that they are incompetent.
So in order to exercise a civil right, you must give up another civil right.
Glove and Boots is good for Blog!No it's not a punishment. It's a psychological check by a professional to deem you mentally competent to possess a weapon. It's not forcing long term or even short term psychological treatment on a person. Certainly the health professional can suggest it, but for a gun it's a one time check for only one purpose. It's a service for the public safety, not healthcare. One time visiting a psychiatrist/psychologist does not make it treatment for anything, because it's not like they're there to prescribe anything or do anything else other than determine your competence for thing and one thing only.
A precaution is not a punishment.
At the coal thing: That's ridiculous. Anyway, coal's sort of on its way out as an industry anyway, isn't it? Hell, there's one town I read of that's taking efforts to convert coal workers to working on installing solar panels so that they don't go out of work.
edited 21st Dec '12 9:47:26 PM by AceofSpades
A psychiatric check weeds out those who would abuse their privilege and cause problems.
I don't see a single reason not to do it. Stopping tons of deaths is nothing but a plus. I'm willing to pay more taxes to save a ton of lives. And I'm already strapped for cash, but human life is worth every damn penny.
Quest 64 threadWhich is exactly why forcing a psychological check won't work.
One time check or not, if you are denied, they would have to tell you why you are denied. If you are deemed incapable of handling a firearm, that's it for the rest of your rights as well. You are deemed too dangerous to be responsible for a firearm.
Unless you can tell me why this would not be abused.
Again, due process. You get labeled a criminal or mentally unfit, it never comes off of your record.
edited 21st Dec '12 9:53:43 PM by DevilTakeMe
Glove and Boots is good for Blog!Harry Reid: Boehner wasted a week on a 'futile political stunt' with 'Plan B'
![]()
I don't need to convince you to hand me an AK-47, I can get one myself by going to the store and buying one.
I am all for spending more money on mental healthcare. I am against any situation where I have to either incriminate myself or place my rights in jeopardy in order to exercise one right based on the opinions of one person whose capacity I do not trust and to whom I involuntarily give my freedom.
Glove and Boots is good for Blog!
and I'm of the position that people like you are the sort of people I want to wear a bulletproof vest around :D
No offense. Its just whenever anyone seems to think that their right to whatever guns they want with no background checks or any sort of control on how much ammo or guns they own, yet see nothing wrong with licenses to drive a car, I cant really think ogf a good reason to want that amany guns except to fire it at something.
edited 21st Dec '12 10:03:10 PM by Midgetsnowman
No argument. No Comment.

So because someone "might" slip through the system means we shouldn't do it at all? That is so stupid I have no words for it. Hell, no one at all gets caught when you don't bother to check. And you're basically telling us to do nothing at all. Again, I call bullshit. We don't have to wait until someone invents a magical, perfect defense system to put into something that will help drastically even if it isn't perfect. Waiting for a perfect solution is moronic, so let's put in psychological tests and training NOW.
Yes, guns in this day and age need to be turned into a privilege, if that's what it takes. As it is, our "right" to a gun is treated far more like a fetish by our culture than a responsibility.
That woman should be able to sue for harassment, because that's disgusting. Eesh.