Originally Posted by bravesnumberone
Does Diane Feinstein currently have a bill on the table banning weapons? Does it stand a snowballs chance in hell of passing?
What graph?
Does Diane Feinstein currently have a bill on the table banning weapons? Does it stand a snowballs chance in hell of passing?
What graph?
Again, with people who execute these mass shootings, the problems go way beyond gun laws and guns being accessible to them. Much deeper issues at play.
She failed back after the Sandy Hook shootings. Not sure if it actually was voted on. But I thought your question was "is there anyone proposing it?" The answer technically is yes. Will it pass? No, largely because anything that hurts a big lobby in this country probably won't pass, at least without some altering.
Is the solution scolding people to be responsible?
There are people that propose a lot of stuff. That is why we have an elected Congress . Dysfunctional as it is --
I'm saying just passing the tougher gun regulations doesn't change a human culture of violence toward one another, doesn't account for environment, all kinds of stuff. Do things like the death penalty and mandatory minimum sentencing keep people from doing bad things?
But the fact that this guy was able to buy a gun was a problem. Guns make these types of things a lot more easy.
I wonder how amenable this congress would be to restoring mental health care funding to the federal level or re-opening the public mhc facilities that have been closed over the past decades?
Ditto the kind of record-keeping that would make background checks and screening for gun ownership more than a feel-good measure.
I agree with you, bravesnumberone, but I don't see any of those things happening, either.
I probably shouldn't even bring this up, but mental health care is largely a private-sector business now, which means "no insurance, no care."
If only there were a way to insure that everyone had access either to health insurance or affordable care . . .
There are a lot of (supposedly) smart people in Washington. I would think they could come up with a way to make mental care more easily accessible, and I'm positive that would help in any kind of background check.
For the record, I'm not wholly against background checks, depending on the details. The mental health thing is tricky. IMO it's one of those things where the individual (or at least the people around him) has to want help. Is lack of access to mental health the biggest issue there, or simply not seeking out the help that's out there?
Both -- without insurance it is next to impossible to get treatment. People with a Bi-Polar condition or manic depression more often than not are incapable of holding down a job. How would they be insured? How do we identify those not in the system be it from lack of funds or just as bad the stigma of mental illness.
Witnss the blow back the First Lady got from trying to curb child obesity. If that is the gauge I am not at all optimistic anything happens
there are provisions in the Affordable Care Act.
"(supposedly) smart people" good line
The amount of gun violence in gun free zones is staggering.
So is the inevitable ex post facto suggestion that the 2nd Amendment Fairy would have swooped in and protected every mass shooting victim from harm.
Last edited by Julio3000; 09-23-2013 at 06:05 PM.
I was just making a comment - do you disagree with it?
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote