Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Mental illness, mass shootings, and the politics of American firearms (2015)

ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

371–380 of 1001 posts

Re: Mental illness, mass shootings, and the politics of American firearms (2015)

#371

Post by YATA2 »

tomrod wrote: post #133
bifrost wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Its because buying a gun is a civil right. Smoking is not. That said, the 21yo requirement may be unconstitutional as well.

I've noticed your eight comments in this thread to date are fairly declarative but aren't well founded or sourced, simply assertions and often appear to be incorrect as responding comments have shown. Clearly, you and I both support the second amendment. However, we should recognize when our support of certain associate claims aren't well founded. Bearing arms and being part of a well-regulated militia are American c…

>Bearing arms and being part of a well-regulated militia are American civil rights granted by the Bill of Rights. Purchasing those arms isn't a civil right.

"Voting in elections is a civil right granted by the Bill of Rights. Access to a polling station isn't a civil right."

That's effectively what you're saying. Rights enshrine access. Things like poll taxes, voter ID, etc. have all been declared unconstitutional because they infringe upon your right. Banning purchasing arms falls in the exact same category.

Re: Mental illness, mass shootings, and the politics of American firearms (2015)

#372

Post by School-Cotton »

mahastore wrote: post #286
freediver wrote: post #2

I sincerely hope this does not descend into a flamewar. We can't have discussion about this in an intellectually stimulating way in congress, we can't have this discussion in the media, we obviously can't have this discussion on social media so HN is the last bastion of hope. It is a multi-faceted problem with a lot of complexity. The fact stands that USA has a school shooting problem [1] unlike any other country in…

>> Also any argument like "mental illness" or "ease of access to firearms" needs to explain why the same does not apply to the rest of the world - Well Afghanistan people have access to lot of guns , lots of it and maybe even tanks. But they don't go to school that much. And in Serbia the population is thinly spread across vast swatches of ice. Not exactly LA. Lets simply stop talking and just bring a bill to buy bac…

Serbia is dominated by Belgrade, a dense city with population 1.7 million.

I second the sibling commenter in thinking you got it confused with Siberia.

Re: Mental illness, mass shootings, and the politics of American firearms (2015)

#373

Post by robswc »

krnlpnc wrote: post #79

What if guns were treated similarly to cars? Mandatory training, License w/ renewals, registration w/ renewals, insurance mandatory, yearly inspection mandatory, etc. Personally I feel people should be able to defend themselves while at the same time deterred from stockpiling and accessing mass casualty capable arms.

Seems all this would do is to convince these killers to use cars... which have proven more than capable of killing just as many people as a gun.

Re: Mental illness, mass shootings, and the politics of American firearms (2015)

#374

Post by chmod600 »

tomrod wrote: post #132
jonp888 wrote: post #40

As a foreigner, I do not see it as productive to seek any explanation or expect any reaction when yet another news story like this comes along. It's clear that this is the way Americans wish to live, and it is their perogative to do so.

Way more than half don't want to live like this. We live in a broken system dominated by a minority of states.

No post body was provided.

Re: Mental illness, mass shootings, and the politics of American firearms (2015)

#375

Post by simon1ltd »

softcactus wrote: post #219
bifrost wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What you are suggesting is illegal. Its illegal to license a right. We shouldn't penalize the hundreds of millions of legal gun owners in the US because we're unable to catch psychopaths before they kill people.

This is part of why a sensible discussion cannot be had. "Shall not be infringed" has become axiomatic to many gun owners. Disclaimer: I am a gun owner. I like guns very much. Here's the 2A in full: "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed." I am not a historian but I believe that this quote from James Madison in…

Except the National Guard are actually part of the Army, Navy and Air Force.

"The National Guard is a state-based military force that becomes part of the reserve components of the United States Army and the United States Air Force when activated for federal missions."

It may be organized by state, but it's a federal force.

The 2A exists to give people tools to fight the government (or support it), it's not a gun fetish, it's literally a tool to empower citizens. If you doubt that people armed with rifles, shotguns, and semi-automatics can overcome the Worlds Biggest Armed Forces(tm), then look at the most recent example: Afghanistan (repelled the US -and- the USSR).

Re: Mental illness, mass shootings, and the politics of American firearms (2015)

#376

Post by scollet »

nulluint wrote: post #44

This is a great time to make “Minority Report” a real thing with precogs catching criminals before they can act.

Minority Report was an argument against such practice because there is no possible interpretation of its success.

It can only fail.

Re: Mental illness, mass shootings, and the politics of American firearms (2015)

#377

Post by quantumwannabe »

elementalest wrote: post #319
beloch wrote: post #83

Canada is the U.S.'s neighbour and is probably closer, culturally, than any other nation. Gun ownership is also high in Canada. In terms of guns per capita, the U.S. is #1 by a long shot, but Canada is #7 [1]. In Canada, guns owned per capita is one third of what it is in the U.S.. Canada also has mass shootings. The annual deaths from mass shootings per capita in Canada is 0.032, which is about one third that of the…

Interesting. When compared to places like Australia, where guns are highly regulated and barely anyone owns a gun, such that there have been no mass shootings for 35 years, the solution really is obvious.

That is blatantly not true. There have been several mass shootings in Australia such as the 2002 Monash University shooting and the 2014 Sydney hostage crisis since Port Arthur, which inspired the modern Australian gun control system. Port Arthur was also 25 years ago, not 35. Australia also only had a handful of mass shootings before Port Arthur; mass shootings have never been a major issue in Australia.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_massacres_in_Australia

Re: Mental illness, mass shootings, and the politics of American firearms (2015)

#378

Post by temp8964 »

josephcsible wrote: post #365
temp8964 wrote: post #346

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But you need multiple steps including the driver’s test to get a driver’s license, then you can drive. In this recent shooting, it’s obvious the shooter got his guns way too easily. I am pro-gun but I think you should be required to have a gun license first before you can buy a gun. And a mental health test and safety test should be passed to get the license.

Basically anyone with a pulse can get a driver's license, it's almost impossible to lose one permanently, and even people caught driving without one often only get a slap on the wrist.

I don’t think you can get a driver’s license in one step shop. It usually requires you bring documents and wait in long lines and schedule a test and take the test on a different day and go back wait in long lines. There’s no way you can get a driver’s license with a pulse.

Re: Mental illness, mass shootings, and the politics of American firearms (2015)

#379

Post by coinbasetwwa »

Aeolun wrote: post #366
jstream67 wrote: post #324

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nobody was talking about reducing access to cars after that guy ran over a ton of old folks in Kenosha a couple months back. In fact no one is talking about it at all as he does not fit the correct political narrative

I always hear this argument, but it’s like people forget what the primary purpose of guns and cars is. If the primary purpose of cars was to drive over people then they would be banned. This is why you can own a car, but not a tank.

You can legally own a tank though..

Re: Mental illness, mass shootings, and the politics of American firearms (2015)

#380

Post by coinbasetwwa »

bjt2n3904 wrote: post #165
krnlpnc wrote: post #79

What if guns were treated similarly to cars? Mandatory training, License w/ renewals, registration w/ renewals, insurance mandatory, yearly inspection mandatory, etc. Personally I feel people should be able to defend themselves while at the same time deterred from stockpiling and accessing mass casualty capable arms.

What if cars were legislated like guns? Mufflers would be illegal. If you are driving between states, you need to check to see if your driver's license is accepted by each state you go through -- and some counties. Adjustable car seats are illegal. Automatic transmissions are illegal. Building your own car would be illegal. If your truck is too short, it's a felony. Unless you call your truck a car, and never put any…

I needed this, thanks man.
Post reply on HN