I had heard he didn't wait seven days before doing his act. But there's this too(see below). I'm not sure anything will stop these atrocities except maybe more people legally carrying a firearm. I don't think outlawing any type of gun is going to resolve this since the U.S. is a country founded and expanded through violence. Suspect in Boulder mass shooting that killed 10 people bought assault rifle 6 days earlier, according to affidavit
So we can conclude that a waiting period wouldn't have made much of a difference. It may in other cases, but not this one. How come the mental health issue that underlies so many of these slaughters gets so little attention? Left only wants to go on about white supremacists and lack of gun regulation, right only wants to go on about islamists and too much gun regulation. And as with so many things in the US, critical problems disappear in the red vs. blue smokeshow...
It is addressed, some states have red flag laws where they can temporarily or permanently take your firearms away if you are deemed unfit. But besides that, how do you conduct psych exams on every person who buys a gun? How often do you conduct them on the same person? Lastly, how do you implement that? Are there even enough mental health professionals where it would be feasible?
I suppose not. There are other countries with similar firearm legislation - Switzerland comes to mind, which has a similar tradition of self-defense - where these problems practically don't exist. So there's perhaps a greater societal problem in the US that isn't directly linked to firearms, but where shootings are a symptom. Where having a psychologist at every gun shop wouldn't make a difference even if it was feasible. We come back to the idea of arming the population to better defend itself. Breivik completely convinced me on this matter. I think the state is responsible for education, health care, and should be responsible for self-defense. This is a very complicated issue, and deserves to be treated as such, in my opinion.
I don’t believe so - I heard his sister saying he was “playing with a machine gun type gun” a couple of days prior...
The individual states decide how they will issue concealed carry permits and outlaw certain firearms in their states for sale. I'm not allowed to own an AK based on state law. I'm not allowed to carry a concealed firearm because you must meet necessary and proper requirements, such as owning a business or being a firearms instructor. So the federal government is not responsible for much as it stands in my state.
Because that is what was decided. There's a long list of assault weapons you can't own here. On that list besides certain, more popular ARs are also .50 BMG rifles. It's a limited assault weapons ban. But there are many ARs that aren't on that list. While we may be safe in our homes, no one is coming to save you in the streets because the police won't be there for minutes. So you're on your own until they get there. A prime example of this is the exact shooting we are discussing.
How do you keep the politics out of a system like that? Anti gun shrinks vs pro gun shrinks. Will they be held accountable for their decision? Who pays for the hundreds of thousands of psych evals? There are ways around the whole system and antigun rhetoric is fueling it. I can buy all the parts for an ar15 or ar10 aside from the lower reciever, with no background check, no waiting period. I can buy an 80% complete lower reciever also no background check, no waiting period, no serial number, machine it to 100% in less than an hour. All perfectly legal in most states. Most people can't machine it but they can pay someone to setup an automated machine to do so. They are creating a flood of unregistered firearms while trying to control the registered ones. Reloading equipment is flying off the shelves as well. Just like the coathanger abortion, people will find a way.
I own an 80% completed lower. The answer is like you said, people will find a way. No one should be held accountable except the individual who committed a crime. The person who is buying the gun would have to pay, but that option isn't realistic. We don't have enough mental health professionals to fulfill our current needs. So we certainly don't have enough to implement some new gun control system unless there are waiting periods exceeding at least a month.
The mental health issue is such a hard one to tackle. There are some people that won't show you they're a psycho until the day they do the act. They'll play along with all the rules until the moment they don't. There's simply no stopping that kind of thing. For example, the mental health check I went through was completing a box on the application form 16. d) During the past five (5) years, have you threatened or attempted suicide, or have you suffered from or been diagnosed or treated by a medical practitioner for: depression; alcohol, drug or substance abuse; behavioural problems; or emotional problems?Yes/No 16. e) During the past five (5) years, do you know if you have been reported to the police or social services for violence, threatened or attempted violence, or other conflict in your home or elsewhere?Yes/No 16. f) During the past two (2) years, have you experienced a divorce, a separation, a breakdown of a significant relationship, job loss or bankruptcy?Yes/No Seems like a pretty easy system to bypass. I don't know the answer to making things more robust and weeding out the crazy ones. There are a lot of tough questions and issues on that subject.
So if I hear you correct, it's your right to own guns but I don't have right to my own body. Okay, got it.
Last time I checked aborion was legal. Wanna do a body count? You need to read what is written. I said rights should not be infringed. I could care less what you do with your body until it gets within 6 feet of me. I was showing an example.
Yep that did it. I am sure as the upstanding law abiding citizen he was, he would have scrapped the whole idea had it been against city ordinance to own that firearm.