It's a shame that the actions of a few are used as an excuse to control the masses.
-
ODT Gun Show & Swap Meet - May 4, 2024! - Click here for info
NRA Statement
- Thread starter zesty
- Start date
Those posting "I wouldn't mind or I wouldn't oppose" this or that being required by "them" don't have a clue as to the door you're opening.
It's sad to read some of this on a pro firearm site. If you give an inch you're sunk. It ain't pretty guys, it is the truth though.
It's sad to read some of this on a pro firearm site. If you give an inch you're sunk. It ain't pretty guys, it is the truth though.
Don't get your panties in a bunch folks. Despite their misgivings they have been one of the oldest and strongest proponents of the second amendment.
So when a state that has some of the strictest gun laws fails to protect their citizens and their children, it is a true reflection of just how the laws fail.
An effective response is allowing school staff to be armed if not mandating it but really that is a states right. The feds could do it through the "commerce clause". Yeah I know WTF does commerce have to do with guns in schools? Look up the "no guns in school zones" act of 1990 that was re-worded in 1995 and prevents guns within 1000 (ft.?/yds.?) of a school zone. The Supreme Court upheld the illegal act but it's their interpretation and opens the door to unlimited "regulation" no matter how far the stretch.
They will likely address mental health awareness and better screening. If they did their homework it should also include mental health screening for at risk youths as early as middle school.
They will more than likely point out that regulation, restriction, prohibition and outright bans do not serve the public well or even work. We all benefit from the legal responsible ownership of firearms and that is far too often ignored or outright rejected.
If anyone has our voice tomorrow it will be the NRA.
So when a state that has some of the strictest gun laws fails to protect their citizens and their children, it is a true reflection of just how the laws fail.
An effective response is allowing school staff to be armed if not mandating it but really that is a states right. The feds could do it through the "commerce clause". Yeah I know WTF does commerce have to do with guns in schools? Look up the "no guns in school zones" act of 1990 that was re-worded in 1995 and prevents guns within 1000 (ft.?/yds.?) of a school zone. The Supreme Court upheld the illegal act but it's their interpretation and opens the door to unlimited "regulation" no matter how far the stretch.
They will likely address mental health awareness and better screening. If they did their homework it should also include mental health screening for at risk youths as early as middle school.
They will more than likely point out that regulation, restriction, prohibition and outright bans do not serve the public well or even work. We all benefit from the legal responsible ownership of firearms and that is far too often ignored or outright rejected.
If anyone has our voice tomorrow it will be the NRA.
I understand it would be impossible for them to require training and leave it at that. But if that (in a perfect/imperfect world) was all they required, could you really object? You can never have enough training and most already take it.
I believe that the awesome rights of the second amendment, have awesome responsibilities that should not be forgotten.
Yes I think she bears responsibility, with the facts in evidence right now.
If you own a gun YOU are responsible for its security. PERIOD.
Yes I think she bears responsibility, with the facts in evidence right now.
If you own a gun YOU are responsible for its security. PERIOD.
No worries!
The hard work has already been done sir. The profile of the mass murder is typically a young adult/teen male. Well guess what? Not everyone needs an evaluation. We don't have the resources.
But.... What has the military done to reduce the risk of a soldier snapping? Well it's called a pre-deployment screening prior to departure and re-deployment screen when back home-prior to release. These screens can and have identified folks wanting or needing help who were at risk. Does it prevent all risk, no but it captures quite a few that if no action occurred could have went very badly.
I conducted literally thousands of these and when the flags went off down range that soldier was disarmed and escorted to a professional mental health counselor. It was yet another tool to reduce risk and it was relatively cheap. The same type of screening could be given middle/high school students every year to help identify at risk youths. Education counselors screen and if flags went off then a 72 hour referral to mental hygiene specialist would result. State/Federal law could/would justify this.
Last edited:
What I think of when I hear psy check I mean the FBI checking to see if you have any history of mental illiness listed in your medical files. I think it would be over the top to think they would make everyone go see a doctor before allowing them to own a gun. I could see them putting limits on the amount of 4473's that you could fill out in a given month. Again at this point it's all just talk but this is what I would like to see in place.
Who knows what they are going to do though...
Who knows what they are going to do though...
If you ever told your doctor you were "down, Depressed, feeling out of it" , ever prescribed anti-depressant for any reason do you think you would pass a government evaluation?
What if they took a look at some of the avatars here or post you made even in jest?
How do you answer the question "Why do you think you need a gun?" and not get labeled paranoid?
What if they took a look at some of the avatars here or post you made even in jest?
How do you answer the question "Why do you think you need a gun?" and not get labeled paranoid?
