45acp wrote on 04/18/13 at 08:45:54:


Dude the newtown shooter, the theater shooter etc etc were all law abiding citizens before they shot up crowds. Maybe one or more had other issues of breaking the law. They got out and went on their killing spree.
I can easily see a few clowns who need guns confiscated ... they have depressive and a good long list of law breaking behavior and yet they run around armed. If there was a record of all these guns - the cops would have pulled out the "list" and got them guns out of his hands.


Dane Allen wrote on 04/18/13 at 08:42:11:



Says who ? no one who owns 1000's of rounds of ammo and several guns - the Newtown shooter is not a democrat. Neither is his mommy.

I'd make the case gun nuts are hardcore republicommunist ... we just need to confiscate guns from republicommunists ... unless you want to be drowned in communism. obviously Communists want the rest of the gentry to be unarmed. So what you said follows from that.

Cool.
Srinath.

Quote:


She was a teacher, a registered democrat and a member of the teachers union.

Quote:


No you wont, first of all the term "hardcore repulicommunist" is something you made up from your fantasy dream world.

Second, marxists want guns confiscated and those are democraps

Third, I've destroyed this foolishness in the first two points and this is to let you know that so we are clear.

republicommunist? Makes as much sense as Islamo-fascist.

Srinath -
Law abiding before they went on a shooting spree?  Maybe.  But certainly  and obviously mentally disturbed to anyone who really looked at them.
If we'd go back to the old days went people like this were locked up in mental institutions, that is the real solution.

Srinath -
Actually it was the liberals in Congress about 30 years or more ago who pushed thru a stupid piece of legislation called the Mental Patients' Bill of Rights.  I'm not an expert in this field of law at all.
But the act made it virtually impossible to lock someone up unless he/she was or became a physical danger to either others or himself.
In the old days, the standard was much looser and we locked them up for a few days on suspicious behavior, and then they were examined by a shrink.  If the medical diagnosis was mental illness of sufficient gravity, they stayed locked up and were treated.
Problem was, and correctly seen, that in those days back in the 1950s and into the 60s, the science of treating mental illness was far from being as good as it is today, so many people literally stayed in the institution for their entire lives.
But today, treatment advances would make that a far less often occurrence.  Of course, some mental patients can never be treated successfully, and will need to stay in an institution for life.

Jerry Eichenberger wrote on 04/18/13 at 10:30:43:


30 years ago ? Carter ? anyway, who has a monopoly on stupid ? I however in today's environment can see the supporters for this program being democrats and the opposed being the TEA.

Worse yet say we do this, and 5-6 years down we have corralled a few 1000 and we have had a year without a mass shooting ... can you imagine what a "big waste" it will be called by that generation of the TEA.

Either way you look at it its a huge expensive govt program. I cant imagine it getting implemented even in today's environment. Gun control is cheaper, not as effective and going to have lots of unintended consequences ... but its almost negligible cost.

Cool.
Srinath.

Dane Allen wrote on 04/18/13 at 10:44:29:



Owwww if that makes you feel better you can say that to yourself.
Cool.
Srinath.