Video & Multimedia
Related: About this forumPic Of The Moment: Poll: Public Overwhelmingly Supports Sensible Gun Control Measures
Polls show strong support for new gun laws
Follow @demunderground
Cetacea
(7,367 posts)But we can thank our media for that number. Thank you, President Obama, for rightfully citing the fact that the mentally ill are far more likely to be VICTIMS of crime.
Yes. Glad as I am that we're finally moving forward on gun control, I'm very uneasy about all this focus on people with mental illness. It's not accurate and it seems calculated to shift focus from the real problem -- which is the GUNS.
Cetacea
(7,367 posts)I hear this over and over. Hardly anyone quotes the fact that they are no more violent than the rest of the population.
I guess it will be easier now to simply shoot the nuts, since none of them will be able to defend themselves against the sane.
neffernin
(275 posts)It should be those who need Mental Health support or something of that nature.... which is surprisingly much of the country. Instead of singling out the few who are actually ill, we should be concentrating on building a better support system for everyone in terms of mental health.
Cetacea
(7,367 posts)Does "mentally ill" as used in the debate/law include people who want to see a therapist for depression or anxiety? Phobias? Anger issues?
HuckleB
(35,773 posts)klook
(12,170 posts)my dear, sweet, mentally ill uncle might still be with us.
AAO
(3,300 posts)If you are well-adjusted to our society, you are mentally ill, because our society is mentally ill.
The people we need to watch out for is those that would never admit they have any problems.
Cetacea
(7,367 posts)and it's a good point. Now we tend to blame individual segments of society rather than look at the entire picture. Amurka is number 1!
eqfan592
(5,963 posts)In fact, the level of nonsense increases dramatically as the support level drops (and 58% support a ban on all semi-automatic weapons? That alone spiked my bullshit-o-meter).
samsingh
(17,601 posts)thetonka
(265 posts)if there was more of a conversation about firearm characteristics, including some consensus on terminology.
Most of what I have read makes it clear that a lot of people do not understand the terms "Assualt rifle", "Semi-automatic" and "High-capacity". If these terms are not better defined there will never be a common ground or consensus on gun control laws.
Every single hunter I know uses a semi-automatic rifle, and assuming "high-capacity" is anything over 6 rounds many have high capacity magazines.
In fact, while the caveat that these gun control laws are not going to infringe the right to bear arms the reality is the lack of understanding and consensus on terminology would mean this rifle will be illegal.
Ruger
How do the gun control supports expect to get enough support when they can't even have a conversation without confusing the .22 rifle above with this.
Colt
The reality of it is the gun nuts and anti-gun nuts are laughing at each other, and just making things difficult.
baldguy
(36,649 posts)If gun nuts had spent any effort at all to reduce gun violence & it's causes, instead of doing everything they could to ensure the problems that cause gun violence are exasperated.
The trivial minutia of firearms design is infinity less important than one innocent life. Deal with it.
thetonka
(265 posts)Your attitude in that posts is one of blaming the gun nuts and the guns. How does this help?
As long as both sides are yelling emotion and ideology based rhetoric at each other nothing will happen, nothing will improve, and tragically there will be more shootings and there will be more dead. As both sides continue to yell and scream about solutions they want, instead of solutions based in fact and reality, there is no conversation about real improvements, real solutions.
It's the state of the union, argument is more important than conversation, grandstanding is more important than solutions, ideology and platforms are more important than root cause analysis.
My problem with all this is the unbelievable time and resources wasted on the fighting that could be applied to real solutions that people can live with. It pisses me off when people find their ideology and platform more important than reality and solutions, regardless if it is a "no guns" or "guns for all" ideology or platform.
baldguy
(36,649 posts)While the Guns Over People party that you're shilling for yell & scream & whine & cry over any attempt at any level for any type of real, reasonable, rational gun con control.
You are on the wrong side of sanity, morality & history, my friend.
thetonka
(265 posts)baldguy
(36,649 posts)Zippy.
azureblue
(2,152 posts)a practical exam - to get your permit,
you must tear down and reassemble your weapon.
you must demonstrate safe handling of the weapon during the test. that is, if you put your finger inside the trigger guard for any other reason but to fire it, you fail.
you must demonstrate marksmanship, proportional to the weapon you are getting a permit of. But this test will begin with (without a scope) hitting a target at 40 feet with a handgun, and 70 feet with a rifle,m with two shots. Two chance to hit it - miss you, you fail
AlbertCat
(17,505 posts)....you must repeat this every 4 years.
Thav
(946 posts)Polls don't mean a thing, they're just numbers. Duh.
Smilo
(1,944 posts)I question:
How do you know someone has a mental illness?
What degree/type of mental illness will be acceptable/unacceptable?
What happens when a gun owner becomes mentally ill?
We can't have a knee jerk reaction to "oh those mentally ill" - can a psychiatrist call the police and say he owns a gun and is mentally ill, or does that go against dr-patient privilege? [They are able to call the police when there is evidence of a danger to self, or danger to others - just owning a gun doesn't mean that there is danger involved.]
Also, it is worrying that more people want to ban semi-automatic than assault style weapons - is it because they do not know the difference?
Walk away
(9,494 posts)have to wait for a time period before they can buy a gun. Imagine how many American woman are shot during the years after their divorce.
It's a gun. It's not a life support system. People can live without them...in fact...more people do.
Smilo
(1,944 posts)Though as to life support - I think for many its' a crutch because of their perceived inadequacies.
Response to EarlG (Original post)
Post removed
arcane1
(38,613 posts)Ok, maybe not.
Homerja111
(2 posts)My argument is that some find it ok to curtail certain rights if POLLS say its ok, while other polls dont mean squat to them.
uppityperson
(115,681 posts)I don't see anyone here saying it is ok to curtail certain rights simply because polls say it is.
And about that "right to own whatever gun you want"? Tell me more.
Scurrilous
(38,687 posts)valerief
(53,235 posts)Charles Goya
(18 posts)49%.
The nuts that are saying Obama's positions will cause a civil war are contradicted by this poll, in which most moderate Republicans actually favor banning these weapons overwhelming, and even 40% of conservative Republicans favor it.
GodlessBiker
(6,314 posts)wiggs
(7,819 posts)until the gop and TP pissed all over public discourse, reason, and the public option.
If you poll Americans on the issues, dems almost always are correctly positioned to reflect public wishes and expectations. When politics, parties, talking points, propaganda enter into the discussion...voters are much more evenly divided on the issues.
Fire Walk With Me
(38,893 posts)Nice broad brush strokes and ableism :/
Comrade_McKenzie
(2,526 posts)Even on issues with which I disagree.