I need a prescription for antibiotics, but can buy all the ammo I want. Something's wrong there.
Guns may not kill people, but cRaZy people with guns do. Before anyone is permitted to own a gun, he should be forced to undergo a mental health evaluation. That should be updated every five years. If a person observes irrational behavior by a person who bears arms, he should be able to petition for seizure of that person's weapons until an evaluation is performed. If the complaining party is wrong, he should be required to pay for the evaluation.
I respect that you may feel safer with a gun. But the rest of us will feel safer if we we know you're not nutz.
Also, no one should be able to carry in any government building. Right now, our state law is impotent to prevent lunatics from barging into town halls with weapons. That needs to change.
MOLON LABE
ReplyDeleteThat's exactly what I propose. Guns need to be taken from the cRaZies.
ReplyDeleteIt is dangerous if mentally ill person is carrying gun. It is right to have Gun control laws that prevent the mentally ill from owning/purchasing guns similar to those in place that prevent convicted criminals from purchasing guns.
ReplyDeleteNewspapers should be required to have their reporters have mental evaluations done before they are allowed to report the "news".
ReplyDeleteYou are obsessed with this woman to the point of needing your own evaluation. You want us all to go through hell because of your personal pissing match with this woman. An already overburdened bureaucracy and mental health system must be brought to the breaking point so you can get your pound of flesh.
The two of you should be locked up in Thunderdome, "two enter, one leaves". Then the rest of humanity can be spared this ongoing battles of the crazies.
Give it a rest Bernie. It is getting very old.
I did not mention you in the body of my post, or in the comments. If you consider yourself a mentally ill person who needs an evaluation, good for you.
ReplyDelete" Before anyone is permitted to own a gun, he should be forced to undergo a mental health evaluation."
ReplyDeleteAt least 4 Amendments in the Bill of Rights be damned, right?
How about IQ, history, economics and history tests before you can vote?
This kind of thinking is exactly why the smarter guys put the RIGHT to keep and bear arms 2nd on the List.
Preemptive government screening is never going to happen.
Never...gonna...happen. NEVER.
-Clem
Bernie, this is a bit OT, but is this a picture of you in the old days before you lost weight and got hair implants?
ReplyDeleteThe two biggest NRA mouthpieces, Ted Nugent and Wayne LaPierre both have mental health diagnoses that kept them out of Vietnam. They say they want to keep the mentally ill from having weapons, but they obviously don't mean it.
ReplyDeleteBernie,all you need is "standoff distance".We see it all the time . People problems will get worst as we over populate with knuckleheads.We see it all the time. People in operation of vehicles that should not be. THE hell with the rights of citizens,is one thought. FACT IS Responsible firearms possession = less crime and abatement of issues overall. Your photo is unclear what you message is here. A fat guy in a jock with a mullet? All the pistols and a like model machine pistol. Ha, he can't hit anyone at 50 yards. I don't like people with this attitude any more than you.What is the remedy?
ReplyDeleteShootings like that in CA are extraordinarily rare. Far more people die each year from complications of breast augmentation surgery than do in mass shootings. Where people get shot most often are where guns are banned or heavily restricted. Nuts and bad guys and bad guys who are also nuts will find a way to kill, if predisposed to do so. Mezzakooky is a perfect example of this. Do you honestly think she'll ever be disarmed? She's already demonstrated she's batshit crazy and has absolutely no respect for legal authority. It's better for good people to be ready to neutralize her, rather than wring hands when laws and confiscation ultimately and predictably fail. Prohibition made alcohol abuse and associated crime worse. Prohibition of drugs has made abuse and associated crime worse. Where guns are prohibited, violence has worsened. The new mobsters have harder to pronounce names than Capone and Kelly, but the results are the same. I don't own a gun and have never shot anything more dangerous than a water pistol. I just read the lessons of history, so to not be forced to repeat them. And be careful about the nut in your life. No amount of law can keep us safe from her. I wish it could. But it can't.
ReplyDeleteAnon 6;47 Well said;absolutely true,each word. It's better that a citizen can neutralize.....on the money ,Texas bell tower ,prime example. Dial 911 and hold your breath !Can't wait this long can you? Responsible and well trained and disciplined firearms owners would not violate rules any more than a Roman Catholic would desecrate the HOLY BIBLE. Memorial Day ,going to cemetery shortly. God bless you all.Gotta go.
ReplyDeleteI hear ya Bern, but
ReplyDelete1. 3 of those killed were killed by this kid with a knife. Should we blame the National Cutlery Association;
2. As Clem points out (and I rarely, if ever agree with Clem) the RTKBA is a CIVIL right, enshrined in the constitution. You're essentially arguing a prior restraint of said right. Won't pass constitutional muster. Nor should it.
Want to modify the 2nd Amendment? Amend it, via the mechanism provided for in the Constitution.
Every nut should own at least one gun and all the ammo he/she desires. This is America. We can always have memorial services light candles and reach closure until the next incident
ReplyDelete"...forced to undergo a mental health evaluation.."
ReplyDeleteOne should be forced to undergo a mental health evaluation before they can purchase one or any of the following (these have all been used to kill people too) (1) a car or other motorized vehicle, (2) swords (3) all knives of any kind (4) baseball bats wood or aluminium (e) ice picks (6)2x4 pieces of wood and so on. Fact of the matter is that law abiding citizens of this country are allowed to own firearms. Its a right. I would say that mental evaluations are needed before some are allowed to express themselves using free speech. The gun debate is boring and tiresome. Perhaps more people should start carrying guns and learn how to properly use them through training and we might have a more polite society? Just saying.
"A well-regulated Militia,..." Why can't the gun activists read? Well-regulated. Montesquieu, whose writings are the foundation of the Declaration and the Constitution, uses the phrase, "well-regulated," often to describe the role of government in sustaining a stable society free of chaos or tyranny. He understood the tension between a pure Democracy and a representative government of some kind (even a benevolent Monarchy). But the gun activists read the amendment as they see fit -- namely something to protect access to their toys. If one spends some time in the Oxford Dictionary of English Language to examine the history of the word, "militia," he or she might reconsider what "well-regulated" might have meant to the writers of the amendment.
ReplyDeleteThis has always bothered me because that phrase must have been put there for a reason.
Lets have all truck drivers tested before getting behind the wheel. Those are some real nut jobs.
ReplyDeleteGet a mental health evaluation when you are 12 years old. It stays with you the rest of your life just like a social security number. Bad evaluation....no gun permit and no gun. Simple enough. Oh, it may be uncostitutional to force everyone to have a mental health evaluation. Ain't it someting how that damn consitution always gets in the way.
OOPS Constitution....
ReplyDeleteDon't worry. Obama is coming with his black helicopters for all of our guns!!!
ReplyDeleteBernie,
ReplyDeleteYou sure stepped in it this time, haven't you?
Words are like bullets, you can't take them back once blogged.
Should bloggers be evaluated before they are allowed to blog?
Watch what you wish for...
Acting eratically? Petition the court because you see someone acting eratically?
ReplyDeleteThen there would be a line out the door to remove all weapons from Ron Angle
Be careful what you wish for
"Shootings like that in CA are extraordinarily rare."
ReplyDeleteThey are becoming less rare. Movie theatres, grade schools and even a municipal building one county away. It is actually becoming common.
Anyone who wants to own a gun should have an evaluation. It should be updated every five years, too.
"1. 3 of those killed were killed by this kid with a knife. Should we blame the National Cutlery Association;"
ReplyDeleteNo. Think about it. Three with a knife. 4 with a gun, and 13 wounded. That's why crazy people should ot be allowed near guns.
"1. 3 of those killed were killed by this kid with a knife. Should we blame the National Cutlery Association;"
ReplyDeleteNo. Think about it. Three with a knife. 4 with a gun, and 13 wounded. That's why crazy people should ot be allowed near guns.
Yes, I support a Protection From Gun Nut Act. If someone is acting erratically by, say, threatening to kill a borough council president or fantasizing about shooting other people, I would argue that his or her guns be taken away upon petition until an evaluation id done. if it is determined that the gun nut is normal and not bat shit cRaZy, the cost of the evaluation is on the complaining party.
ReplyDelete"Lets have all truck drivers tested before getting behind the wheel."
ReplyDeleteThey are licensed, and it is done periodically.
The "well-regulated" phrase in the 2d AMENDMENT is to me a tacit recognition that some type of control is needed. Back in the days when the NRA believed in responsible gun ownership instead of whoring for gun manufacturers, they would have supported this.
ReplyDelete"One should be forced to undergo a mental health evaluation before they can purchase one or any of the following (these have all been used to kill people too) (1) a car or other motorized vehicle, (2) swords (3) all knives of any kind (4) baseball bats wood or aluminium (e) ice picks (6)2x4 pieces of wood and so on."
ReplyDeleteAs there is a rational basis for testing, those have been regulated. You can't drive without a license. If I see someone is mentally impaired and it is affecting his driving, I can notify PennDOT and they will force the driver to undergo an evaluation. Bad example.
As for knives and swords, you do know they are regulated, don't you? Ever hear of prohibited offensive weapons? Walk around with a switch blade or ninja toys and see how far you get.
Ice picks are for picking ice. Baseball bats are for hitting balls. Guns exist for one and only one reason - to kill. Lunatics should not be allowed to own or carry them. Maybe when one of these shoots your little child, you'll think differently.
Children have rights, too. The right to live trumps every other right, even the right to own a gun.
For anyone who hadn't seen his videos on Youtube before they removed them:
ReplyDeletehttp://gawker.com/the-bizarre-youtube-video-blog-of-alleged-ucsb-shooter-1581087159
This was truly one cRaZy S.O.B. with anger issues at being a virgin at 22 and he had a God complex. His original intent was to wipe out an entire sorority house of "beautiful women" before continuing on the town. Luckily nobody answered the door when he knocked.
Daddy should have paid for a hooker for this guy.
I watched one of the videos. It is easy to say now that we should have known. I actually thought he was kidding around at first. I would like to know who out there is going to defend that insaniac's right to have a gun. My point is we should do everything in our power to prevent people like that person from ever owning or using a firearm. I don't care if a sane person walks around with a bazooka. But people like him should not be allowed near guns. Unfortunately the way our walls are written we can't stop it.
ReplyDeleteLets start having mental evaluations for knive owners, baseball bat owners, rope owners, razor blade owners, blunt object owners, car owners, anyone with a cellphone, or access to social media...those kill too.
ReplyDeleteLets not forget spoon and fork owners...crazy nonstop eaters cause death.
But not for teachers, no , we definately dont need those. Teacher to student sexual abuse is on the rise, and we really need to start tacking this...somehow...
if I see a teacher acting eraticlly, I'll petition the court for a mental eval.
I think the only person in serious need of a mental eval is the owner of this blog
I've already addressed this argument and pointed out why it is nonsense. Repeating the argument just demonstrates your own unwillingness to actually think. You'd prefer to make anonymous personal attacks.
ReplyDeleteIt's interesting to note, that practically all of these events are the result of some crazy psychotic loner that wants to commit suicide and take a bunch of innocent people with them. It's also interesting to note, that many of these sick individuals are taking psychotrophic drugs to help them cope with their dillusions and sense of inadequacy. Any sane individual on the right or the left, would agree that crazy people should not have guns. The problem is, more gun laws will not solve the problem. Even your suggestions Bernie are not practical. The same doctors that presecribe the drugs to treat these people will be the ones determining who is sane enough to carry a gun? These do not accept responsibility now for the drugs they prescribe for these people. Also, not guns in townhalls? That would be effective as gun free school zones. How many massacres have we witnessed over the last few years where that law didn't work. It wasn't that long ago that the nut job in Monroe county shot innocent people at a township meeting by using a high powered rifle from the parking lot. A no gun policy there would have been done alot to prevent that one. At least now, if township commissioner or local officials should to carry a concealed firearm to protect themselves from angry or dillusional residents, they can still carry to protect themselves. It's time people take responsibility for their own safety and understand what the constitution and particularly the 2nd stands for rather than legislating and gaining a false sense of security in more feel good laws.
ReplyDeleteWait Bernie maybe We need to get evaluations before buyimg chemicals for our pools and fertilizer for our lawns after all if I'm going to take anyone out I certainly am not going to stand in front of YOu one easily place explosive made out of any of these items can take out alot more than 10 or 20....????
ReplyDeletealways watching
2:22, you can't be watching that closely. The government has imposed significant restrictions on the purchase of ammonium nitrate, one of the more volatile substances used in fertilizer. It is also tracked. There are numerous restrictions in place on many of the materials that could be used for bomb making. It is still possible, but gets harder every day.
ReplyDeleteThe first and foremost obligation of any government is to protect its citizens. That is not accomplished by arming maniacs who mindlessly chant "molon labe" or fantasize about killing local government officials.
Federal and state gun laws already exclude hundreds of thousands of people from acquiring and possessing firearms. In fact, even seemingly innocuous crimes disqualify people. A PFA disqualifies people, even if there was no violence invloved. Same with a DUI, same with a marajuana conviction. As the list of prohibited people gets bigger, so does the black market.
ReplyDeleteIn Chicago, where its almost impossible to have a gun, the gun crime is sky high.
Inner cities also have a very high propensity for illegal firearms. The more you restrict, and the more you eliminate who can buy legally, the greater the market becomes for illegal guns. The more you add restrcitons, the higher the pool of people who have them illegally.
Its not all that different from the war on drugs. Take a look at prohibition...no one listened. Its now legal, and even more deadly than guns. Adding more hoops doesnt solve anything.
Yeah it does. It prevents cRaZy people from killing the rest of us. If you want to prance around with a Bushmaster, knock yourself out. But the lest the rest of us should expect is that you are sane, and have the papers to prove it.
ReplyDeleteAre you capable of arguing the point, or do you just want to attack people like the cRaZy persons you want to protect?
ReplyDelete""A well-regulated Militia,..." Why can't the gun activists read? "
ReplyDeletewell...we can. so can the Supreme Court, which pretty much upheld our interpretation-that it's an individual right.
Let's put it a different way.
If the second amendment were written thusly:
"A well-read electorate, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and read Books, shall not be infringed"
would yo really be arguing that the right to keep and read books was only held by registered voters?
I hate it when anti-gun activists read the amendment as they see fit...
i still can't get past the prior restraint issue Bern.
ReplyDeletenot so long ago, homosexuality was termed a mental illness by the AMA. I'm not comfortable taking rights away from a whole bunch of people (and I mean all civil rights. Unlike Democrats, I like the 2nd Amendment. Unlike Republicans, I like the rest of the Bill of Rights too) based simply upon a medical classification.
It doesn't matter how you or I read the Second Amendment. What matters is how the Supreme Court reads the Second Amendment. The Supreme Court has already interpreted the "well regulated militia" phrase to include the right of individuals to bear arms inside their own homes. The Supreme Court has also ruled however that reasonable restrictions can be placed upon the ownership and use of firearms. One eminently reasonable regulation would be to require mental health evaluations of any person who wishes to own or use a firearm. Under state law a person who has been committed is ineligible on a firearm. I would propose expanding on that. The Second Amendment does not give crazy people the right to bear arms. I have seen enough of these stupid shootings.
ReplyDeleteI would rather see a person improperly denied to he right to a firearm because of a bogus mental-health evaluation than see another crazy person on a rampage.
ReplyDeleteThey will make sure guns get in the hands of known criminals¿ There is the acts of the disappering guns from various crime sceens were people are defending themselfs with the same force as somone of the locally crimanal element that is allowed to grow and prosper under the watchful eyes of officials¿
ReplyDeleteAs an American citizen I can only pray that our forfathers words to print can never be misconstrewed¿
redd
patent pending
4:53pm.
ReplyDeleteThe founders did not write what you are using to deflect, did they? They wrote, "A well-regulated militia."
8:55am
You and I are can perhaps regulate ourselves as individuals, but that is not the intent of that phrase. The militia is a group and around that time, it was a controlled group to be regulated/controlled by the people through the constitution (Check the Oxford Dictionary, please). Therefore, the people can determine regulations while still not infringing on the right to bear arms. And frankly, I think the court is wrong on this one just as they have been wrong in the past (do you want me to cite the numerous times they have acknowledged that the world change?) I'll respect there current opinion, but I certainly hope the NRA finally comes to its senses, as it seemed to do a generation ago.
I'd agree the court got that wrong, too, but they are the deciders. I'm just a bottom-feeding blogger.
ReplyDeleteSorry for the "there" instead of "their."
ReplyDelete"...and have the papers to prove it."
ReplyDeleteVhere are zee paperz, old man.
Zee paperz, vhat show u is not un crazy, mach schnell!
-Clem
Half of the people who were killed were killed with knives. Between knives and his car he killed or injured just as many people as he did with guns. This was also in Kalifornia, the beacon on a hill of gun control. The problem is people not inanimate objects.
ReplyDeleteDo you bother reading the comments or are you interested in only what you have to say? At 10:05, in response to the exact point you are making now, I pointed out three were killed by knife, 4 by gun, and 13 people with gunshot wounds. Guns are far more destructive. As if you didn't know.
ReplyDeleteBecause you and your crazy girlfriend hare each other =, I have to have "papers". You are nuts. You need an evaluation as much as she does. My constitutional rights are less harmed by that woman than nut jobs like you who want to solve your own problems by denying me my constitutional rights.
ReplyDeleteGo away you crazy little man.
Your personal attack is the refuge of those who lack the intelligence to argue with just the slightest bit of logic. Just as you need "papers" to drive or get antibiotics, you should have them before being issued something whose sole purpose is to kill.
ReplyDeleteGo back in History and you will find that the "Militia" was made up of civilians who "owned their own guns". The government didn't provide these people with guns. The militia was made up of farmers, cobblers, blacksmiths, etc. and they provided their own weapons.
ReplyDeleteOut of curiosity, if I were to form a militia, would the government provide my militia with guns? Just curious.
While I agree a plethora of chowderheads who own guns should not own them (as seen by the mental midgets in this thread), I agree with 7:30 AM. A Constitutional Amendment is needed but no Congress would ever attempt such a thing in this current political circus.
ReplyDeleteWho is the Militia? It is you and I you friggin idiot. That is what the 2nd amendment is all about. You and me and the right to bear arms.
ReplyDeleteWhy don't you READ the post you are referring to before exposing yourself as the ignoramus you undoubtedly are? YOU are the reason dumb people should not own guns. You are unable to use critical thinking skills and react out of emotion - like a child.
Federal and state gun laws already exclude hundreds of thousands of people from acquiring and possessing firearms. In fact, even seemingly innocuous crimes disqualify people. A PFA disqualifies people, even if there was no violence invloved. Same with a DUI, same with a marajuana conviction. As the list of prohibited people gets bigger, so does the black market.
ReplyDeleteUnless I go to Ag Hall and buy an AR15 from a gun show, numb nuts. Enough already.
Nuts are not going to obey ANY law. Why is this so difficult to understand? Pass a million of them and call people chowderheads if it makes you feel better. At least you'll feel better.
ReplyDeleteCriminals will ignore gun laws, but a mentally disturbed person might be stopped.
ReplyDeleteDriving is a privilege and not a right. You don't have to take anti-biotics if you don't want to. Having a gun is a right, a constitutional right. You fascists want to take them away.
ReplyDeleteThe sole purpose of a gun is not to kill, it is defense. You have a gun as a deterrent to someone who wishes you harm. Most legal gun owners have never used their guns to hurt anyone. You have let your personal life cloud your judgment on this issue., You have no credibility. Just because you "think" or "feel" someone is crazy you can't demand everyone give up their constitutional rights.
Your feud with this woman is your problem don't drag the rest of us into it with your nonsense about "papers". It makes you sound as loony as her.
The rest of the country
First you have the gang bangers killing themselves over turf, drug money, lack of job prospects, whatever. I think this correlates with the war on drugs driving up the price and our dumb trade laws. There have been over 85 murders in Philadelphia just this year – no one gives two shits about these folks (sad to say). I would bet the percentage of the weapons used being legally obtained and registered is very low for this group and no additional gun laws are going to help.
ReplyDeleteThe second group are the crazies, they are the high profile blaze of glory types. How many of these assholes are on SSRI medication? No one wants to discuss the epidemic of people on these medicines. No one can deal with their problems anymore so take this pill, not working? Take some more? The kid from CA was seeing a therapist since he was 8 YO, WTF! The last few mass shootings have involved people on antidepressants.
Many on this board will not like this suggestion but I believe we need to have a mechanism that reports people on certain meds to the proper jurisdictions. I would also suggest that those under 25 are precluded from owning a semi- automatic long gun and any hand gun. - let the flames begin 'C'
With the dozens or hundreds of gun laws already on the books that have delivered the current state of affairs, the next law passed will surely be the one that works. Your idea is well thought out.
ReplyDeleteI estimate 95% of gun owners are law-abiding citizens who use the instruments for sport or protection, NOT aggression against others.
ReplyDeleteThis 95% also keeps MANY in other 5% from having their way with us. We'll never be able to legislate against bad behavior. If not a gun, it will be something else. maybe even a frying pan.
Nothing wrong with limits on gun ownership, we have much of that already. But, who decides what 'crazy' is? We've ALL been called that at one time or another.
How do we define crazy? We'll need specifics.
Fred Windish
2:04pm
ReplyDeleteInteresting. At least you are willing to foster a discussion of what may or may not work. Thank you.
Claiming a mental problem is a very subjective term. Claiming some medication disqualifies you is silly. How about someone who had a stroke, maybe they won't think straight with all that medication. How about diabetes, that ahs been known to affect thought processes.
ReplyDeleteYou are armchair dictators have one goal, disarm innocent Americans and deny them their constitutional rights.
Go back to your socialist yogurt and leave our rights alone. Did you know that most murders are committed by people who have never been treated for a mental illness. In fact by proportion those who are treated for depression and other issues are less likely to be a threat then the asshole who doesn't takes their medication or does not seek help.
Buy a clue you social engineers. Keep you habnds off our rights.
Yes I am an armchair dictator eating socialist yogurt. I am trying to explain something to you. SO stop being a zealot.
ReplyDeleteFirst I am libertarian and pro second amendment, second I did not say all medicines. I want to retain my rights to protect myself from the “gang bangers”.
However, if these high profile events keep occurring they are going to throw all gun owners into the pot.
The media has an agenda, that is aligned with the left and they will play the right as the demons to get mass support for their goals.
Specifically there is a specific class of Meds SSRI’s (Zoloft, Lexapro, paxil) One theory is that we as a society over-prescribe this stuff and if you go off it well you go off.
Google SSRI and mass shootings – a few but not all examples.
Sept. 17, 2013: Washington, DC – Aaron Alexis – Trazodone. 13 Dead (including perp), 8 Wounded.
Dec. 14, 2012: Newtown, CT – Adam Lanza – According to the search warrant records from the police department, “prescriptions” were found in the Lanza home. He was reported to have been autistic and a majority of the drugs prescribed for this are psychiatric drugs. 28 Dead (including perp), 2 Wounded.
July 20, 2012: Aurora, CO – James Holmes – Police found prescriptions in Holmes’ name in his apartment for Zoloft and Klonopin. 12 Dead, 70 Wounded.
Oct. 12, 2011: Beach, CA – Scott Evans Dekraai – Trazodone and Topamax. 8 Dead, 1
Wounded
Sept. 6, 2011: Carson City, NV – Eduardo Sencion – Had been taking psychiatric drugs since his teens and several of the drugs were switched just months before the shooting. 5 Dead (including perp), 7 Wounded.
July 7, 2011: Grand Rapids, MI – Roderick Dantzler – Reported to have stopped medication for “Bipolar” before the shooting. 8 Dead (including perp), 2 Wounded.
Apr. 17, 2009: Middletown, MD – Christopher Wood – Antidepressants Bupropion (Wellbutrin), Amitriptyline (Elavil), Nortriptyline (Pamelor) and the antianxiety drugs Zolpidem
(Ambien) and Alprazolam (Xanax). 5 Dead (including perp), 0 Wounded.
Mar. 29, 2009: Carthage, NC – Robert Stewart – Lexapro, Ambien, and Xanax. 8 Dead, 3 Wounded.
Dec. 5, 2007: Omaha, NE – Robert Hawkins – On Ritalin and Zoloft since 5 years old. Valium in his system at time of shooting. 9 Dead (including perp), 5 Wounded.
Apr. 16, 2007: Blacksburg, VA – Seung Hui Cho – Cho was prescribed Paroxetine (Paxil) in 1999, which he took from June 1999 to July 2000. The New York Times also reported that, “He also took a prescription medicine. Neither Mr. Aust [Cho’s roommate] nor Mr. Grewal [another student in the same suite] knew what the
medicine was for, but officials said prescription medications related to the treatment of psychological problems had been found among Mr. Cho’s effects.” 33
Dead (including perp), 17 Wounded.
Oct. 2, 2006: Nickel Mines, PA – Charles Carl Roberts –Antidepressants. 6 Dead (including
perp), 5 Wounded.
Mar 21, 2005: Red Lake, MN – Jeff Weise – Prozac. 10 Dead (including perp), 7 Wounded.
July 8, 2003: North Meridian, FL – Doug Williams – Celexa and Zoloft. 6 Dead (including perp), 9 Wounded.
Dec. 26, 2000: Wakefield, MA – Michael McDermott – Paxil, Prozac & Desyrel (Trazodone). Long psychiatric history. 7 Dead, 0 Wounded.
April 20, 1999: Columbine, CO – Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold – Harris was taking Luvox.
Klebold's medical records were sealed. 15 Dead (including perps), 26 Wounded.
"How do we define crazy? We'll need specifics."
ReplyDeleteTricia Mezzacappa
uts are not going to obey ANY law. Why is this so difficult to understand? Pass a million of them and call people chowderheads if it makes you feel better. At least you'll feel better.
ReplyDeleteWith the 2nd Amendment and the current climate, the best we can hope for is to CURB the sales of new guns and to place a social stigma (like smoking) on owning them.
You have a gun as a deterrent to someone who wishes you harm. Most legal gun owners have never used their guns to hurt anyone.
ReplyDeleteBecause this stultifying fear gun owners walk around with is imaginary. No one is trying to do you harm. If it was so dangerous out there, like you children present it, there'd be a hell of lot more gun fights in the streets.
Scared? Get a dog, you freakin' wuss.
ReplyDeleteWith the dozens or hundreds of gun laws already on the books that have delivered the current state of affairs, the next law passed will surely be the one that works. Your idea is well thought out.
With all of these "laws" I can still go to Cabela's RIGHT NOW and buy an AR15 style rifle. The "laws" are bullshit widow dressing written by the NRA. Enough with the smarmy bullshit.
Your point??? Stay away form our constitutional rights with your socialist agenda of smoke and mirrors designed to disarm the American people with propped up letter from so-called professionals.
ReplyDeleteKeep you hands off our guns and our rights Nancy boy.
I wish the gays would stop shoving their penis play down our throats. They have some issues from their childhood.
ReplyDeleteYour point??? Stay away form our constitutional rights with your socialist agenda of smoke and mirrors designed to disarm the American people with propped up letter from so-called professionals.
ReplyDeleteKeep you hands off our guns and our rights Nancy boy.
I'm the nancy boy yet you are the scared child holed up in your trailer park with your gun by your side - afraid of life outside and living in misery and fear. It must be a sad existence.
You sound like Ted Nugent - not a coherent thought in your enormous-sized, bowl haircut covered, cranium.
Go back to Judge Judy viewing, Gomer.
Libetards who have excuses to take guns. To bad the Constitution stands in your way. I live in a huge house on many acres. Stay in your inner city rat infested hovel, you Marxist!
ReplyDeleteCuckoo.
ReplyDeleteIf the Liberals want more gun control fine. Then define mental illnesss and find a way to screen gun purchases. For that...Voters should be screened for their knowledge of history , government and how they contribute to society . That would stop Democrats from hoarding the inner city vote because long term entitlement takers are stupid flunkies. Obama would not be in the Oval Office today if we screened for voter competency.
ReplyDelete