Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
8 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies

Voltaire2

(13,038 posts)
2. Is there any evidence that this person was "mentally challenged"?
Mon Nov 6, 2017, 07:11 AM
Nov 2017

Or the previous white guy with a gun? Or the one before that? The problem is not "mentally challenged" people have access to guns, the problem is people have access to guns that are designed to kill large numbers of people.

 

Thor_MN

(11,843 posts)
4. It's not a zero sum game. Multiple problems can simultaneously exist.
Mon Nov 6, 2017, 07:16 AM
Nov 2017

And portions of problems can be fixed. There need not be one solution that fixes every aspect of every problem at once.

Voltaire2

(13,038 posts)
7. and the evidence that restricting "mentally challenged" people, whatever that means,
Mon Nov 6, 2017, 07:27 AM
Nov 2017

from gun purchases would be effective is what?

 

Thor_MN

(11,843 posts)
8. Sorry, not going to argue on your terms. There are multiple problems, not just one.
Mon Nov 6, 2017, 08:22 AM
Nov 2017

And they can be fixed individually, and even partially.

A favorite ploy of gun rights people is to insist that any potential solution fix all aspects of all problems at once. It isn't worth doing unless it fixes absolutely everything (mostly because they appear to want to do nothing).

"Will it stop ALL mass murders? No? No good, can't be done." That's the line of people who are either afraid that their firearms are in danger or profit from sales of firearms. These people will argue to death against anything that could possibly restrict firearms in any manner. No point in arguing against them, so I generally avoid it.

 

Lee-Lee

(6,324 posts)
5. Actually even the ACLU supported that move
Mon Nov 6, 2017, 07:18 AM
Nov 2017

It wasn’t actually a measure that block people who were mentally ill. It was one that blocked people who had another person designated their representative payee for Social Security no matter why they did so, with no due process.

And in this case there is zero evidence that it would have affected this at all, so bringing it up in relation to it is dishonest nonsense.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»So sad that "oh so great"...