Gun control debate (merged)

[NorthDallas40]

What is your point? His claims were false.

No. You’re forcing a context that doesn’t apply. Why are suicides relevant in the discussion here?

 

[Devo182]

Idiots are the serious issue. Without them the influence from the internet wouldn’t be anything of concern.

Idiots are not a controllable factor. You can't ban humans from being "idiots". And "idiots" is hardly the right word, but point still.

 

[hog88]

It was an 18 year old kid. Based on what we know it’s probably safe to say he was on his way to becoming that and maybe graduated today. But I’d guess there was someone older molding this behavior. Regardless this kids future is forfeit now by his own hand.

1 million VN bucks says he had been taking an antidepressant or ADHD drug within the past couple of years.

 

[K-town Vol Fan]

He's saying you're predictable simple jack and there's a ton of your stupid bs on this board to prove it. Let me see if I can find the screenshot. LOL

In this case, the shooter was a racist. Can you just say that? Or are you like Ricky and believe racism doesn't exist?

 

[NorthDallas40]

1 million VN bucks says he had been taking an antidepressant or ADHD drug within the past couple of years.

I won’t touch that bet.

 

[K-town Vol Fan]

No. You’re forcing a context that doesn’t apply. Why are suicides relevant in the discussion here?

Its death by a gun

 

[NorthDallas40]

Idiots are not a controllable factor. You can't ban humans from being "idiots". And "idiots" is hardly the right word, but point still.

So it’s the guns fault?

 

[hog88]

Idiots are not a controllable factor. You can't ban humans from being "idiots". And "idiots" is hardly the right word, but point still.

And you can’t ban people from spreading BS on the internet unless you want to scrap the 1st amendment. I would rather work on education and discipline than restrict speech.

 

[NorthDallas40]

Its death by a gun

That isn’t relevant to the discussion at hand and clearly suicide wasn’t included in slice’s comment. This shouldn’t be that hard dude even for you since we’ve pointed this data out over a hundred times on this board. I don’t think suicide by hammer is a prevalent thing yet.

 

[lawgator1]

1 million VN bucks says he had been taking an antidepressant or ADHD drug within the past couple of years.

Should that disqualify him from being able to own a firearm?

 

[K-town Vol Fan]

That isn’t relevant to the discussion at hand and clearly suicide wasn’t included in slice’s comment. This shouldn’t be that hard dude even for you since we’ve pointed this data out over a hundred times on this board. I don’t think suicide by hammer is a prevalent thing yet.

So you think some 20k are killed with hammers every year?

 

[hog88]

Should that disqualify him from being able to own a firearm?

No.

 

[NorthDallas40]

So you think some 20k are killed with hammers every year?

Ok maybe the point of slices post was actually beyond you.

 

[K-town Vol Fan]

Ok maybe the point of slices post was actually beyond you.

Think I found his source.

GOP Rep. Boebert Bizarrely Compares Firearm Killings to Murder by Hammer

 

[NorthDallas40]

Should that disqualify him from being able to own a firearm?

Why don’t we ask why was he just drugged up and cut loose if hog’s assertion is correct?

 

[NorthDallas40]

Think I found his source.

GOP Rep. Boebert Bizarrely Compares Firearm Killings to Murder by Hammer

That has to be it. Sure.

 

[lawgator1]

No.

Then why is it relevant? If a person who is mentally ill at the time or very recently can possess a firearm, then why then why bring it up as a means to dismiss the fact that they had a firearm?

 

[hog88]

Why don’t we ask why was he just drugged up and cut loose if hog’s assertion is correct?

I’ll venture a guess. I will bet his parents were the type that didn’t want to discipline him or be bothered, they let drugs be his discipline and the TV and video games be his outlet.

 

[lawgator1]

Why don’t we ask why was he just drugged up and cut loose if hog’s assertion is correct?

Why not do both? Limit the person's liberty for a period of time to ensure safety and restrict access to firearms during that period

 

[NorthDallas40]

Why not do both? Limit the person's liberty for a period of time to ensure safety and restrict access to firearms during that period

Not saying no but now you’ve touched onto a hornets nest. Limiting an individual’s rights and the means to restoring

 

[hog88]

Then why is it relevant? If a person who is mentally ill at the time or very recently can possess a firearm, then why then why bring it up as a means to dismiss the fact that they had a firearm?

It’s relevant because we have a whole generation of parents that doesn’t want to be disciplinarians, they want to excuse bad behavior for mental illnesses and let medication take their place. Couple that with the attitude of “my little angle can’t experience failure” and you have little ***** like this guy.

 

[K-town Vol Fan]

It’s relevant because we have a whole generation of parents that doesn’t want to be disciplinarians, they want to excuse bad behavior for mental illnesses and let medication take their place. Couple that with the attitude of “my little angle can’t experience failure” and you have little ***** like this guy.

It is hard for me to imagine that any human who actually goes through with something like this does not have some sort of mental illness.

 

[hog88]

It is hard for me to imagine that any human who actually goes through with something like this does not have some sort of mental illness.

Not all mental illnesses are natural. Many are environmental.

 

[K-town Vol Fan]

Not all mental illnesses are natural. Many are environmental.

Agreed

 

[0nelilreb]

Should that disqualify him from being able to own a firearm?

No more than voting or due process .