Gun Control: Don’t Fall for the ‘Mental Health’ Diversion

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Dec 17, 2012 4:23 PM GMT
    http://littlegreenfootballs.com/article/41344_Gun_Control-_Dont_Fall_for_the_Mental_Health_Diversion

    "Take a look around the right wing blogs and news sites, and watch Fox News, and you may notice that there are suddenly a lot of conservatives arguing that the real problem that leads to gun violence is mental illness — and that the solution is “better mental health care.”

    While it’s true that the US does need better mental health care, your first clue that this is a dishonest diversionary tactic instead of a real argument is that the right wingers parroting it are the very same people normally vehemently opposed to any and all government involvement in health care."


    THE AUTHOR, CHARLES JOHNSON, KNOWS RIGHT WINGERS.

    He was one of them before he woke up to the insanity of their arguments.

    LittleGreenFootballs.com is always worth reading for its insights on the Right Wing Lunacy Machine.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Dec 17, 2012 4:28 PM GMT
    What gun control measures does he suggest?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Dec 17, 2012 4:53 PM GMT
    Johnson closes with this thought:

    "To reiterate, better mental health care is an important and worthy cause. But for the right, it has also become a way to confuse and obfuscate the issues in order to hang on to their precious, precious guns."

    THIS WARNING is the only point in his short opinion piece.

    'How to go about gun control' he didn't address here.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Dec 17, 2012 5:10 PM GMT
    http://www.businessweek.com/articles/2012-12-16/a-post-newtown-guide-to-the-gun-control-policy-debate#p2

    A Post-Newtown Guide to the Gun Control Policy Debate


    THIS is a great and short overview of what could work.
  • musclmed

    Posts: 3287

    Dec 17, 2012 6:19 PM GMT
    GeorgeLifts saidhttp://www.businessweek.com/articles/2012-12-16/a-post-newtown-guide-to-the-gun-control-policy-debate#p2

    A Post-Newtown Guide to the Gun Control Policy Debate


    THIS is a great and short overview of what could work.


    I think what he proposes is reasonable.
    However none of which would have prevented this tragedy.

    Just like when Gabby Giffords was gunned down, I heard all sorts of Left winged lunacy that Laufner had links to Right wing groups because that Laufner was white, had a shaved head, and expressed some ambiguous political views and had written Giffords a letter. And we should not forget the blame on Sarah Palin and her "target add". Laufner was severely mentally ill. Likely this individual was. All of these emotional baseless charges are best left to the authors self and hurt the cause they are trying to help by disseminating without any facts to back them up.

    One point about mental illness. Patients often especially schizophrenics have a right to refuse treatment and often do.
    I doubt in this case the family could not afford to have him diagnosed/treated.


    Sort of a tasteless time to bring up partisan politics IMHO.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Dec 17, 2012 6:23 PM GMT
    musclmed said
    GeorgeLifts saidhttp://www.businessweek.com/articles/2012-12-16/a-post-newtown-guide-to-the-gun-control-policy-debate#p2

    A Post-Newtown Guide to the Gun Control Policy Debate


    THIS is a great and short overview of what could work.


    Sort of a tasteless time to bring up partisan politics IMHO.


    So you go and bring up partisan politics. #smh
  • musclmed

    Posts: 3287

    Dec 17, 2012 6:27 PM GMT
    Christian73 said
    musclmed said
    GeorgeLifts saidhttp://www.businessweek.com/articles/2012-12-16/a-post-newtown-guide-to-the-gun-control-policy-debate#p2

    A Post-Newtown Guide to the Gun Control Policy Debate


    THIS is a great and short overview of what could work.


    Sort of a tasteless time to bring up partisan politics IMHO.


    So you go and bring up partisan politics. #smh



    No Christian73 i didnt have to , i count 4/5 partisan slogans
    Right Wing Lunacy Machine, charges of hypocrisy of the right opposing health care reform.
    the referral to 'The Right", Fox News.

    come on, that is partisan. Who is politicizing this other than the OP?

    The kids are not even buried yet.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Dec 17, 2012 6:28 PM GMT
    Christian73 said
    musclmed said
    GeorgeLifts saidhttp://www.businessweek.com/articles/2012-12-16/a-post-newtown-guide-to-the-gun-control-policy-debate#p2

    A Post-Newtown Guide to the Gun Control Policy Debate


    THIS is a great and short overview of what could work.


    Sort of a tasteless time to bring up partisan politics IMHO.


    So you go and bring up partisan politics. #smh


    Does musclemed have a proposed solution?

  • musclmed

    Posts: 3287

    Dec 17, 2012 6:31 PM GMT
    TigerTim said
    Christian73 said
    musclmed said
    GeorgeLifts saidhttp://www.businessweek.com/articles/2012-12-16/a-post-newtown-guide-to-the-gun-control-policy-debate#p2

    A Post-Newtown Guide to the Gun Control Policy Debate


    THIS is a great and short overview of what could work.


    Sort of a tasteless time to bring up partisan politics IMHO.


    So you go and bring up partisan politics. #smh


    Does musclemed have a proposed solution?



    I was commenting on this obvious political bait thread.

    read my initial response. The author seemed reasonable unlike the OP.

    It is hard to recommend a solution until we know what the problem is. Unless you want a emotional and irrational response.

    I believe the problem has to be studied well before any real recommendations can be looked at.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Dec 17, 2012 7:31 PM GMT
    musclmed said
    TigerTim said
    Christian73 said
    musclmed said
    GeorgeLifts saidhttp://www.businessweek.com/articles/2012-12-16/a-post-newtown-guide-to-the-gun-control-policy-debate#p2

    A Post-Newtown Guide to the Gun Control Policy Debate


    THIS is a great and short overview of what could work.


    Sort of a tasteless time to bring up partisan politics IMHO.


    So you go and bring up partisan politics. #smh


    Does musclemed have a proposed solution?



    I was commenting on this obvious political bait thread.

    read my initial response. The author seemed reasonable unlike the OP.

    It is hard to recommend a solution until we know what the problem is. Unless you want a emotional and irrational response.

    I believe the problem has to be studied well before any real recommendations can be looked at.


    The problem is actually very well studied and workable solutions exist! Type in "mass shootings" into Google scholar and you'll get a lot of interesting results. Even more importantly, there's an excellent example [Australia] of legislative change that *worked*: there was roughly 1 shooting/year from 1980-1996 (when the law changed) then NONE since then.

    The Australian solution was to (i) essentially ban semi-automatic and automatic weapons, (ii) enhance scrutiny and training for owners of weapons for hunting and shooting clubs and (iii) buy back all weapons made illegal under (i).

    Could you support a new law based on these principles?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Dec 17, 2012 7:35 PM GMT
    The problem is that the solutions are going to be multipronged, just like in other formerly intractable public health problems like smoking and HIV.

    The Australians have way more sense than us.

    And here's a discussion of assault weapon laws (the American flawed one and the Australian, more successful, one):

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2012/12/17/everything-you-need-to-know-about-banning-assault-weapons-in-one-post/
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Dec 17, 2012 8:36 PM GMT
    q1w2e3 saidThe problem is that the solutions are going to be multipronged, just like in other formerly intractable public health problems like smoking and HIV.

    The Australians have way more sense than us.

    And here's a discussion of assault weapon laws (the American flawed one and the Australian, more successful, one):

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2012/12/17/everything-you-need-to-know-about-banning-assault-weapons-in-one-post/


    And EVIDENCE BASED thinking is key here! icon_biggrin.gif
  • musclmed

    Posts: 3287

    Dec 17, 2012 9:15 PM GMT
    TigerTim said
    musclmed said
    TigerTim said
    Christian73 said
    musclmed said
    GeorgeLifts saidhttp://www.businessweek.com/articles/2012-12-16/a-post-newtown-guide-to-the-gun-control-policy-debate#p2

    A Post-Newtown Guide to the Gun Control Policy Debate


    THIS is a great and short overview of what could work.


    Sort of a tasteless time to bring up partisan politics IMHO.


    So you go and bring up partisan politics. #smh


    Does musclemed have a proposed solution?



    I was commenting on this obvious political bait thread.

    read my initial response. The author seemed reasonable unlike the OP.

    It is hard to recommend a solution until we know what the problem is. Unless you want a emotional and irrational response.

    I believe the problem has to be studied well before any real recommendations can be looked at.


    The problem is actually very well studied and workable solutions exist! Type in "mass shootings" into Google scholar and you'll get a lot of interesting results. Even more importantly, there's an excellent example [Australia] of legislative change that *worked*: there was roughly 1 shooting/year from 1980-1996 (when the law changed) then NONE since then.

    The Australian solution was to (i) essentially ban semi-automatic and automatic weapons, (ii) enhance scrutiny and training for owners of weapons for hunting and shooting clubs and (iii) buy back all weapons made illegal under (i).

    Could you support a new law based on these principles?


    Yes i could support that, I grew up in a City that banned guns in any usable capacity.

    The whole question is what is a semi and automatic weapon definition. I heard on a radio the guy from the Brady organization say a revolver is semi-automatic. That is absurd.

    The question is what do you do with the guns in circulation?

    I wonder if biometric fingerprint scanners could play a role in preventing others from using guns unauthorized?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Dec 17, 2012 9:36 PM GMT
    musclmed,

    Why did you feel I had directed my comment about the "Right Wing Lunacy Machine" at you?

    I am referring to the current blogs on the most important right wing sites:

    RedState.com, HotAir, TownHall.com and Glen Reynold's Instapundit.

    THIS, BTW , IS THE LEAD ARTICLE ON THE SANDY HOOK TRAGEDY ON REDSTATE.COM

    http://www.redstate.com/2012/12/15/fat-jerry-nadler-enters-the-gun-control-debate/

    The title is

    Fat Jerry Nadler Enters The Gun Control Debate

    Do you not find this to be a tasteless politicization?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Dec 17, 2012 9:42 PM GMT
    musclmed said
    TigerTim said
    musclmed said
    TigerTim said
    Christian73 said
    musclmed said
    GeorgeLifts saidhttp://www.businessweek.com/articles/2012-12-16/a-post-newtown-guide-to-the-gun-control-policy-debate#p2

    A Post-Newtown Guide to the Gun Control Policy Debate


    THIS is a great and short overview of what could work.


    Sort of a tasteless time to bring up partisan politics IMHO.


    So you go and bring up partisan politics. #smh


    Does musclemed have a proposed solution?



    I was commenting on this obvious political bait thread.

    read my initial response. The author seemed reasonable unlike the OP.

    It is hard to recommend a solution until we know what the problem is. Unless you want a emotional and irrational response.

    I believe the problem has to be studied well before any real recommendations can be looked at.


    The problem is actually very well studied and workable solutions exist! Type in "mass shootings" into Google scholar and you'll get a lot of interesting results. Even more importantly, there's an excellent example [Australia] of legislative change that *worked*: there was roughly 1 shooting/year from 1980-1996 (when the law changed) then NONE since then.

    The Australian solution was to (i) essentially ban semi-automatic and automatic weapons, (ii) enhance scrutiny and training for owners of weapons for hunting and shooting clubs and (iii) buy back all weapons made illegal under (i).

    Could you support a new law based on these principles?


    Yes i could support that, I grew up in a City that banned guns in any usable capacity.

    The whole question is what is a semi and automatic weapon definition. I heard on a radio the guy from the Brady organization say a revolver is semi-automatic. That is absurd.

    The question is what do you do with the guns in circulation?

    I wonder if biometric fingerprint scanners could play a role in preventing others from using guns unauthorized?


    The definition should simply be based on firing rate and reload time. Quite objectively definable.

    Biometric finger scans are an interesting idea, but the present technology isnt up to it. And looking at the data on mass shootings, a significant number if not the majority owned their weapons legally which suggest they would have had access biometric ally to their weapons.

    Again, you have to look at the EVIDENCE to design such legislation.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Dec 17, 2012 10:39 PM GMT
    yourname2000 saidNo no, guys....OBVIOUSLY, mental health trumps all other concerns. Why, I remember when ONE mentally disturbed would-be Islamic terrorist TRIED to blow up ONE airplane using a liquid explosive, but when he was THWARTED. nothing changed about how the millions and millions of other people board airplanes, because everyone realized he was just mentally disturbed.

    Oh wait, that's NOT what really happened, is it? icon_confused.gif

    liquids.sflb.ashx

    How is it controlling a tube of toothpaste makes us all safer but controlling AK47s doesn't????? icon_eek.gif


    BINGO!!!!!
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Dec 17, 2012 10:48 PM GMT
    yourname2000 saidNo no, guys....OBVIOUSLY, mental health trumps all other concerns. Why, I remember when ONE mentally disturbed would-be Islamic terrorist TRIED to blow up ONE airplane using a liquid explosive, but when he was THWARTED. nothing changed about how the millions and millions of other people board airplanes, because everyone realized he was just mentally disturbed.

    Oh wait, that's NOT what really happened, is it? icon_confused.gif

    liquids.sflb.ashx

    How is it controlling a tube of toothpaste makes us all safer but controlling AK47s doesn't????? icon_eek.gif


    You hit this nail on the head. icon_cool.gif