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

901–910 of 1001 posts

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

#901

Post by pc86 »

AnIdiotOnTheNet wrote: post #734
colechristensen wrote: post #224

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We have to start by giving less attention to these events. We have to start by being kind to the people who need it most and are often the most difficult to be kind to. You can’t just create a way to think of people who do things as some sort of “other”, we are all human and capable of similar things given the wrong circumstances.

We have given relatively little attention to all the times someone has driven their car through protesters, but it still keeps happening.

A third of the country thinks those protesters probably deserve it (regardless of what they're protesting). I'm not sure the analogy holds for 8 year olds.

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

#902

Post by mrguyorama »

curiousgal wrote: post #497
Aeolun wrote: post #389

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If enough people actually cared about this, then you’d have people marching on the capitol, like after a certain president was not re-elected. If people haven’t gotten motivated enough after literally decades of this shit, I find it really hard to blame the law.

> If enough people actually cared about this, then you’d have people marching on the capitol, like after a certain president was not re-elected. THANK YOU! Say what you will about those supporters but the fact they went that far to support something they believed in (albeit dumb honestly) is admirable. Meanwhile the people with actual good values are just sharing senators' edgy tweets thinking that makes a difference…

No post body was provided.

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

#903

Post by wilsonnb3 »

second--shift wrote: post #828

My hot take on the issue: Don't regulate the guns per-se; regulate the bullets. An adult (only adults should be shopping for ammunition?) must take end-to-end responsibility and ownership of each bullet the purchase, and subsequently fire. You own the bullet from the time you take it home to the store to the time it comes to rest after firing out of a gun. The guns, other than as a mechanism for firing bullets, are n…

Do you have a source on the parents owning the guns and bullets?

Everything I have read indicates that he purchased the guns and ammo himself, legally, shortly after his 18th birthday.

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

#904

Post by FireBeyond »

fredgrott wrote: post #659
librish wrote: post #89

It's time we start legislating based on empirical evidence instead of lofty ideals. Yes, if everyone was responsible perhaps it would be OK for all of us to own firearms. But so many people are utterly irresponsible, and guns make that irresponsibility lethal. People should safely store their fire-arms, but they don't and guns get stolen and sold illegally, or used by their teenage child. People shouldn't point a gun…

Some points of interest: -60 percent or more US states have no gun registration, I know as I live in Indiana which changed to a no gun registration state despite objections from their own citizens and cops. -Among religious right guns are seen as a male status symbols -Can we cure this economically by requiring liability insurance in addition to gun registration? It work by, if you have a past history of danger signs…

> Among religious right guns are seen as a male status symbols

There's a (already fairly 'culty') church here where every adult male wears a pistol to church.

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

#905

Post by mrguyorama »

bifrost wrote: post #81
EugeneOZ wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As a foreigner, I have an impression that americans can buy a gun at 18, but cun buy a cigarette at 21. Maybe I’m wrong, but still... Call me an “old-timer” but I do think you could use better psychological tests before letting them buy a gun.

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

The 2nd amendment does not actually say anything about purchasing. It could be 100 % satisfied with all sorts of kooky schemes that meet the letter of the law.

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

#906

Post by dang »

zionic wrote: post #381
Aeolun wrote: post #353

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think in this context it is used more to refer to something that ‘has functionalities that no civilian would ever need’.

Quoted post unavailable.

Please don't take HN threads further into flamewar hell. It's not what this site is for, and it destroys what it is for.

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

Edit: I had to ask you about this just recently: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31389412. I'm not going to ban you right now because you've mostly been posting good comments, but please fix this or we'll end up having to.

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

#907

Post by lliamander »

yardstick wrote: post #266
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.

What limits, if any, does the 2nd amendment or the rest of the constitution place on the type of arms? Eg should you be allowed to use - pistols? - rifles? - machine guns? - explosive / armour piercing bullets? - grenades? - nuclear bombs? - chemical weapons? - biological weapons? Basically I’m asking where is the line drawn. Because I don’t think the constitution sets such limits, no distinction for weapons of mass…

The idea seems mainly that the average person could be armed to the same degree as a standard infantryman. I think that setting that as an upper-bound could be reasonable. However, during the period of the American revolution, private citizens also owned warships with canons, so it's hard to say where the actual constitutional limit actually is.

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

#908

Post by groggo »

wyager wrote: post #649
librish wrote: post #89

It's time we start legislating based on empirical evidence instead of lofty ideals. Yes, if everyone was responsible perhaps it would be OK for all of us to own firearms. But so many people are utterly irresponsible, and guns make that irresponsibility lethal. People should safely store their fire-arms, but they don't and guns get stolen and sold illegally, or used by their teenage child. People shouldn't point a gun…

> It's time we start legislating based on empirical evidence instead of lofty ideals. I would take anti-gun people more seriously if they actually paid attention to what this entails. For one, anti-gun enthusiast would stop going on about "assault rifles", because only around 200 people a year in the US are killed by rifle homicides. It's totally negligible. Less frequent than blunt instrument homicides. Yet, that's…

random mass shootings are so horrific that we should do something to make them less lethal. Even if focusing on hand guns instead would statistically save more lives.

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

#909

Post by mrguyorama »

pc86 wrote: post #900
christophilus wrote: post #709

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Gah! I can’t edit my comment, but evidently, this “mental health” thing is a Republican talking point. Let’s see if they put their money where their mouth is. (I doubt it.)

I don't know about you but I don't particularly care if my opinions happens to be talking points for one side or the other. This seems like a very [misguided] partisan concern.

The concern is that it's usually used as a deflection: "You shouldn't take our guns away because it's actually because of mental health" but then they take no steps to improve people's mental health.

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

#910

Post by rubyist5eva »

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.

"why doesn't my country just let me stomp all over the rights of people that don't want to live like me"
Post reply on HN