The more "bad guys" have guns, the more guns "good guys" will buy. And it follows that more people will be shot. And that's a good thing.

You see, it's actually a rather clever plan to improve the image the public has of drunk drivers.

It is a fool's errand to attempt to distinguish those who are fit from those who are unfit.

Especially when no effort is made to disarm anyone whose status has manifestly changed for the worse.

Let's just admit that guns in the hands of the public is a costly indulgence we cannot afford.

are a danger to others if they own a gun?
If so by your definition I am a danger to you!
I think you are contributing to the amount if misinformation about mental illness.

Moreso to themselves.

At least, statistically.

depression is treatable and people live with depression everyday and funtion as well as anyone. "Sane" people are as dangerous to others as anyone with depression.
I live with constant depression and I pride myself in knowing that I funtion as well or better than anyone. We all will have a point in our lives when we will suffer from depression.
What we do here is talk out our asses so often about mental illness. There are the anti anti depressant folks, the you can treat yourself folks, the happy pill folks and there are those who know.

And I say this as a non-gun owner with no intentions to own one either. That's a scary proposition to me, that there would be a vast database of citizens medical issues.

I think, as you do, that a database listing individuals treated for depression (which would number in the millions -- how effective could that possibly be?) or other medical issues (I am excluding the cases - already mandated by law - of persons who have made overt threats of violence and are supposed to be reported by psychologists/psychiatrists as it is) is a bad idea. And it would discourage treatment. There is already a huge stigma in this country; listing persons who seek assistance on a database adds to the stigma. A database listing citizens' medical issues could also be easily abused, and would be an invasion of our privacy in terms of medical treatment.

More so, actually. Nobody should be able to own a gun without being able to account for it, 24/7.

Massive paperwork, Insurance, Classes... And once a year, each and every weapon should be presented for inspection.

This wouldn't eliminate these kind of shootings, but it would cut them way down.

Freedom isn't free.



(Nobody is invited to read your NRA issued bullshit cards to me. You will be ignored)

drive it any where I want on my property, I can do the same with a firearm? That is less regulation than there is now. Are you sure the analogy is correct?

(I have several vehicles on our ranch that we drive that have NEVER been registered/insured!)

Seriously, Where is the flow chart that takes you guys there?

Goodbye.

massive whole in your argument by comparing it to vehicles? Just say you want X, Y and Z and leave out the "just like vehicles" part that actually undermines your argument.

Not that hard really ......

You have to take a test. Make it somewhat more of an ordeal to prove you can be responsible with the gun.

The self defense need is really kind of out there - you're as likely to actually use a gun in successful and correctly determined self defense as you are to be victim of a terrorist attack.

Mental health history could be part of it but not fatal to gaining the license. Of course someone would challenge it as burdening the Second Amendment, but that would develop case law and work it out. The state does have an interest in fewer guns.

Remove guns from cops, secret service, fbi, etc and so on - since, apparently, people don't need guns for self defense (until they do).

Try being an elderly person living alone in a bad area and in bad health - no way you could handle someone breaking in and beating on you. And the cops won't get there until later to take a report.

If you don't want a gun, don't buy one. Less than one percent of people with them use them to harm others.

Nobody has guns. It doesn't seem to have led to attacks on the elderly.

I don't usually picture elderly people in bad health handling guns very well, in any event. Much more likely to have an accident.

why would you think they don't?

It was a Federal Universal License with no opt-out. The exact same requirements would apply for every state, city, town and county. Absolutely No Exceptions, none. That means once I have my license, I can move anywhere, and I can take my gun there. The local authorities anywhere can't say shit. Anyone in very anti-gun cities like NYC, Chicago or DC passes the licensing test, they can have a gun. And, yes if would be specifically for self and home defense. Not target shooting or some other excuse.

Big difference. Where rights are involved, the onus should be on the state to prove why you should be denied your rights.

then that is the analysis that will happen.

that's crazy talk

You come and go, you come and go.

A very delicious desert in Turkey.

Who's askin'?


and I lived in Greece for a year....they make it too

so there

I imagine it'd be very gritty and dry if you tried eating it.

Just wait until you see what happens.

I keep having these reoccurring dreams of finding gold treasure and trading it to the aliens for positions of power


call me a dreamer

get entered into the "system."

That big database that gun dealers, insurance companies, and employers can access?

There may only be a few bad apples that try and then go berserk upon failure.