• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

7-year-old girl shot and killed at MI soccer practice by ‘paranoid’ man with CCW

Status
Not open for further replies.

richiek

steals Justin Bieber DVDs
dvydb58athsqyakzf2g8.jpg


http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/michele-fiore-gun-christmas-card

'murica, at its finest, disgusting country. Truly the shittiest first world nation.

Edit: this is unfair, I know there are many reasonable Americans that are pro gun laws reform. It's just frustrating seeing this shit again and again.

Tell me that little boy is holding a toy gun.

He's not, I'm guessing
 

Maximus.

Member
Once again, some people do need to own guns. I know farmers who have bolt action rifles to kill dangerous wild pigs/boars (Australia) to protect their livestock/property.

But that's a very specific situation. And very different to the guns you can get in the US.

A lot less powerful. A lot harder to get.

I don't think guns should be banned from everyone, the situation you presented makes sense. I am talking about in general. Carrying it to a soccer game, for instance.
 

Sianos

Member
this is crazy to me. in what other countries is home defense a legitimate reason for owning a gun? You can buy a hunting rifle here in sweden, and probably in most other european countries but you'll never get a license to buy a gun for home defense.

it's such an absurd and idiotic idea, far away from anything resembling reasonable unless you are living in a lawless 3rd world country.

I can see a justification for it - not one I personally agree with, but one that is at least defensible on paper. Similarly, I don't think civilians are the people to be dealing with invasive species, but I can at least see the rationale.

Here's the thing about mental illness and guns. People's mental health changes. So you may be a completely mentally stable individual when you buy the gun, but because the U.S. requires no continuing checks for gun owners, there is absolutely no oversight regarding people whose mental health status changes.

1 in 4 adults experience some form of serious mental illness in a given year. Many people will experience some form of mental illness over their lifetime, with major depression being the most common.

Mentally ill isn't necessarily something you are or you aren't; for many people it is a transitory condition. For others, it's chronic. But even when discussing the forms of chronic mental illness, many of them don't appear until people are in their thirties. It's a common time for mood disorders and schizophrenia to crop up, in men in particular, because their brains have on finally stopped changing.

So the responsible gun owner at twenty-five might be the guy who thinks meter maids are controlling his mind, and go on a shooting spree. As long as there's a feeble, one-time check to see if you've been forcibly committed, and no follow up, we'll never successfully deal with the juncture of mental illness and firearms that have caused so much tragedy.

Finally, as always, remember that the vast majority of mentally ill people will never commit an act of violence, that most violent crimes are due to factors other than mental illness, and that the person most endangered by a mentally ill person having a gun is themselves.

This is why license renewals and tying mental and physiological health check-ups to them are critical to the plan.

Additionally, I think psychologically testing can do more than identify mental illness - it can also identify psychological risk factors like personality disorders and hateful attitudes that are indicative of heightened risk of violent action against innocent people.
 
Those who sell guns to people who commit these atrocities need to start being prosecuted. It's the only way gun sales will start to drop.
 

Htown

STOP SHITTING ON MY MOTHER'S HEADSTONE
This country has turned to shit.

Maybe in the sense that we pay more attention than we used to, so we see shit more. Or maybe in the sense that the rhetoric has gotten more polarized, but if I'm not mistaken gun violence is flat or actually down over recent years.
 
I don't think guns should be banned from everyone, the situation you presented makes sense. I am talking about in general. Carrying it to a soccer game, for instance.

Yeah I agree, I know what you meant :)

Perhaps the law could be changed so that at all times, the firearm must either be locked in a safe at home or in a lockable firearms case in the motor vehicle during transport?

I think that would be a nice change.
 
So to summarize, who is being blamed here, the mentally ill or gun owners? Because statistically the mentally ill are more often a target of violence than violent themselves and gun owners are for the most part benign.

The issue here is mental illness needs more attention, respect and understanding and gun culture needs more attention, consideration and re-evaluation.
 

Htown

STOP SHITTING ON MY MOTHER'S HEADSTONE
Yep I know. But if someone commits a murder with a gun YOU sold them, YOU should be held accountable. Implement that law and watch how quickly gun shops start shutting down.

That's a really stupid idea.

It's like holding a supermarket responsible for selling a six pack of beer to somebody who went out and killed somebody while driving drunk a week later.
 

commedieu

Banned
Yep I know. But if someone commits a murder with a gun YOU sold them, YOU should be held accountable because you sold it to them. Implement that law and watch how quickly gun shops start shutting down.

I know you're angry, but realistically...

We just need government officials to be in the "pockets" of the people. This whole issue is a lobbying one. How do American's get their politicians back?

Crowd Funding?

Its a simple solution. If the Gun Lobby couldn't muscle around our politicians, we'd be like any other country re:gun regulation.
 
I know you're angry, but realistically...

We just need government officials to be in the "pockets" of the people. This whole issue is a lobbying one. How do American's get their politicians back?

Crowd Funding?

Its a simple solution. If the Gun Lobby couldn't muscle around our politicians, we'd be like any other country re:gun regulation.

Yes, but also realistically, gun lobbying isn't going to change. It's one of the biggest - if not the biggest - lobby in the world. If you introduce additional levels of accountability (which I think would be more likely to be pushed through the Senate), at least something would happen in the right direction.
 
Another life taken because the rights of the violent are more important than the rights of the innocent.

RIP

And once again I'm heartbroken thinking of the world my little girl is growing up in. Can't even play a soccer game and be a child anymore without fear that some shithead will end you.
 
That's a really stupid idea.

It's like holding a supermarket responsible for selling a six pack of beer to somebody who went out and killed somebody while driving drunk a week later.
And that's exactly what happens when supermarkets sell to underage people who get in accidents. And guess what? It actually pushes them to be more accountable in who they sell to because there are real ramifications.

That's fine if you disagree with the idea. I've said my peace.
 

railGUN

Banned
And that's exactly what happens when supermarkets sell to underage people who get in accidents. And guess what? It actually pushes them to be more accountable in who they sell to because there are real ramifications.

That's fine if you disagree with the idea. I've said my peace.

Underage being the key differentiator.
 

appaws

Banned
The point is that the data isn't there because they are legally barred from researching it.

You can't prove it because congress banned research on it at the behest of the NRA.

This is false. Research is NOT banned...it is just not federally funded through the Centers for Disease Control. Those who want to roll back individual liberty are free to go out and fund all the "research" they want.

And comments like this are why I rarely bother to argue with anti-gun itypes on Gaf.

I have tried. And I have found some very earnest and quality back and forth with some anti-gun posters. Usually though, it quickly goes to just insult time.
 

iamblades

Member
I doubt a gun backback program would work. They would have to offer a fair value for each gun bought back rather than scrap prices. Australia's worked because there wasn't even a fraction of the amount of guns bought back as there are guns in the US.



You don't think the NRA doesn't like it when someone from the anti-gun side starts advocating for all guns to be banned and forcefully taken?

There are plenty of gun owner that doesn't side with the NRA and is for increased gun control but they are not going to side with a side that is advocating for all guns to be banned and forcefully taken and at times calling all gun owners are murderers.

It is also the same for the anti-gun side, the non-extremes are prevent from siding with the gun owner side due to the extreme gun owner side that has the backing of the NRA. There are not only 2 sides but the extremes on both sides makes it seem that way. That's how the NRA wants it and why nothing continues to be done.

I said in the San Bernadino thread, that if you want a gun control law to get passed these days, you are going to have to give something in return.

I think many if not most gun-owners would readily trade guns being easy to get for less restrictions on the type of gun they can own or where they can take it.

Universal background checks for all gun purchases in exchange for not committing a felony when you drive through DC with a couple spent cartridges in your trunk that you missed when cleaning? Sounds like a deal. Registration of semi-autos in exchange for nationwide CCW reciprocity? That is an actual compromise, not the 'we only want to ban scary military guns' that is so common. Unfortunately it is far more difficult legislation to craft because of all the different jurisdictions involved.

Trading licensure and registration for more freedom for gun owners who go through the process to become licensed to own what they want might work, and might result in a more free society for everyone (which IMO is what should be the ultimate goal of governance). Banning guns won't work vs. the largest block of single issue voters who are completely dug in on this issue.
 

grumble

Member
It really isn't appropriate to attribute the actions of an individual to an entire group, regardless of your political beliefs. This is an unfathomable and unforgivable crime but one guy is not representative of an entire group no matter how convenient it is to pretend otherwise.

Uh that is called the no true Scotsman fallacy. While yes the majority of ccw holders are responsible, the point of this story is to understand the dangers that the permit poses.

To help with gun control:

1: require that all applicants have a requirement to apply for a weapon using a rigorous process that is handled centrally and not at point of sale. Make it take a month to eliminate impulsive purchase.

2: require regular and ongoing evaluation of gun owners for mental and physical health to account for things like mental illness.

3: require that all firearms he registered and be able to be presented to police both annually and on demand. Firearms not being able to be shown should be a serious crime.

4: there should be a good and secure system to destroy firearms.
 

Htown

STOP SHITTING ON MY MOTHER'S HEADSTONE
And that's exactly what happens when supermarkets sell to underage people who get in accidents. And guess what? It actually pushes them to be more accountable in who they sell to because there are real ramifications.

That's fine if you disagree with the idea. I've said my peace.

And why do you think it doesn't happen when they sell to people of legal age who get in accidents?
 

Easy_D

never left the stone age
I don't know that that's the case. I mean, sure, the president goes on TV, some people talk about this in the news... but... that's it.

I mean the actual people, like on GAF, I feel people are getting consistently more and more tired of this shit and that will start leaking out into the mainstream eventually, there are many people who think guns suck dick, but there's this loud minority of idiots who make people think it isn't worth making a big fuss over.

Things always look extra grim before they start to turn for the better and I think we're reaching a boiling point.
 

DECK'ARD

The Amiga Brotherhood
This is false. Research is NOT banned...it is just not federally funded through the Centers for Disease Control. Those who want to roll back individual liberty are free to go out and fund all the "research" they want.

And the NIH as well, after a study which found carrying a gun makes you 5 times more likely to be shot.

Do you agree with this NRA sponsored ban as well?

Or is gun violence not a disease nor a health issue? Just something to be completely ignored unlike alcohol, smoking, cars, and anything else gun ownership is compared to in shooting threads.

If you were an animal, you'd be an ostrich.
 

Piggus

Member
Why is someone suffering from delusions allowed to buy a gun? How did this happen?

The only "mental health" check you have to pass is a yes or no question on the background check form, and getting a CCW just requires a training class. It's total bullshit and makes me sick that we make it so easy for people that clearly have issues to get their hands on guns.

Uh that is called the no true Scotsman fallacy. While yes the majority of ccw holders are responsible, the point of this story is to understand the dangers that the permit poses.

To help with gun control:

1: require that all applicants have a requirement to apply for a weapon using a rigorous process that is handled centrally and not at point of sale. Make it take a month to eliminate impulsive purchase.

2: require regular and ongoing evaluation of gun owners for mental and physical health to account for things like mental illness.

3: require that all firearms he registered and be able to be presented to police both annually and on demand. Firearms not being able to be shown should be a serious crime.

4: there should be a good and secure system to destroy firearms.

These are good suggestions and somewhat similar to going through the Class III NFA process to acquire certain types of "banned" weapons.
 

railGUN

Banned
Ok, railGUN. I'm just trying to come up with actionable ideas that keep children from being murdered. Keep doing your thing.

My thing being living in the real world where completely unreasonable ideas are called what they are. Completely unreasonable. But you keep doing your thing!
 
And why do you think it doesn't happen when they sell to people of legal age who get in accidents?
Because of the assumption of responsibility. That's why licenses are taken away if of-age people are caught driving drunk. That's also why guns should be taken more seriously because by the time someone's used a gun irresponsibly, well, someone is usually dead.

My thing being living in the real world where completely unreasonable ideas are called what they are. Completely unreasonable. But you keep doing your thing!

Why is it unreasonable? Why do you, assuming you're a gun owner, care if the person who sold you the gun is held at least a little bit liable if you shoot someone with it (not in self defense)?
 
Concealed carry is fucked. If you wanna have a gun but its locked up for when you want to go hunting or hit some targets? Cool. If you want to make sure you're one step ahead during the zombie apocalypse? Cool. But you dont need to carry that shit around with you.

Jesus christ this is sad. Poor girl.
 
I have tried. And I have found some very earnest and quality back and forth with some anti-gun posters. Usually though, it quickly goes to just insult time.

I try to keep a level head about this, I really do. But the frequency with which these events occur, the accumulation is breaking peoples' chill, mine included. And given how quickly any debate on even fairly modest gun reform was shut down by opponents following Sandy Hook, I don't blame people for increasingly turning up the volume on the issue.
 

Skinpop

Member
I can see a justification for it - not one I personally agree with, but one that is at least defensible on paper. Similarly, I don't think civilians are the people to be dealing with invasive species, but I can at least see the rationale.
so how do you justify it? there really isn't anything reasonable about it unless you have a confirmed hitman after you and no ability to seek help.

consider this the logistics of it

You keep the gun safe, locked up with ammo in a separate locker. This means you don't have quick access to it.
You keep it on you at all times or in a quickly accessible place for a fast response. This means the gun isn't safe.

Considering you are more likely have fatal home accidents than suffering a home invasion, option #2 is not an option for any rational responsible human being. But #1 is only viable if you have time ability and time to go get it, which you likely don't.

facts

you are more likely to survive by complying with the home invaders. producing a gun and resisting severely increases your risk of dying.

if anyone really wants to get you you'll be at a heavy disadvantage no matter how many guns you have in your house. the invader has the initiative, they can choose time, place, study your behavior and so on.

finally the availability of guns means whoever invades your home is likely to have a gun. that has to be the worst sort of defense I can think of.
 

Piggus

Member
I try to keep a level head about this, I really do. But the frequency with which these events occur, the accumulation is breaking peoples' chill, mine included. And given how quickly any debate on even fairly modest gun reform was shut down by opponents following Sandy Hook, I don't blame people for increasingly turning up the volume on the issue.

I think one thing people have to realize is that everyone here has good intentions with their arguments, even if we disagree on certain things. We all want change, so it's important to not to get too emotional, which understandably is difficult in the face of such tragedy.

Concealed carry is fucked. If you wanna have a gun but its locked up for when you want to go hunting or hit some targets? Cool. If you want to make sure you're one step ahead during the zombie apocalypse? Cool. But you dont need to carry that shit around with you.

Jesus christ this is sad. Poor girl.

If anything the requirements for it need to be waaaaaaaaay more strict and involved. The current process is a bad joke.

Tell me again why we don't need to crack down on who's allowed to own a gun?

We do, but try telling that to our piece of shit congress that bows to the NRA.
 
dvydb58athsqyakzf2g8.jpg


http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/michele-fiore-gun-christmas-card

'murica, at its finest, disgusting country. Truly the shittiest first world nation.

Edit: this is unfair, I know there are many reasonable Americans that are pro gun laws reform. It's just frustrating seeing this shit again and again.

I don't usually get riled up by shit people post on here, and I'm certainly not an apologist for the shittier aspects of American culture (gun culture being one), but I'm trying rather hard to resist the urge to tell you to bugger yourself.
 

TheTurboFD

Member
And then people mock gun owners who said we need better mental health care as well as a mental health check to purchase a firearm. I love how some people think since this one mentally ill CCW holder killed a kid that must mean the millions others are child killers.
 
I think one thing people have to realize is that everyone here has good intentions with their arguments, even if we disagree on certain things. We all want change, so it's important to not to get too emotional, which understandably is difficult in the face of such tragedy.

I can't say I won't let my emotions influence my opinion on this. It's impossible not to. And I'd imagine the same goes for second amendment proponents as well, they have a strong emotional bond as well as what they consider a logical argument. But there is such an extreme element out there on the second amendment side that I can't help but get frustrated at times.

I do disagree with "we all want change" - I know some gun proponents out there want some common sense gun reform, and I understand you're among them, but there is a sizable contingent that's more than happy with the status quo, and the only change they want is for any remaining regulations to be struck down in favor of unfettered, unmonitored, absolute gun access.
 

DECK'ARD

The Amiga Brotherhood
And then people mock gun owners who said we need better mental health care as well as a mental health check to purchase a firearm. I love how some people think since this one mentally ill CCW holder killed a kid that must mean the millions others are child killers.

Who?

This pattern of absolutist statements that were never made is very curious.
 

HardRojo

Member
Where is that thread with the guy who used his CCW inside a restaurant and tried to avoid escalating the situation before drawing his gun? That was a textbook example of someone who can have one, he even put his arms up when police arrived to the scene.
Man, this is such a downer, the mother must be devastated.
 

Piggus

Member
I can't say I won't let my emotions influence my opinion on this. It's impossible not to. And I'd imagine the same goes for second amendment proponents as well, they have a strong emotional bond as well as what they consider a logical argument. But there is such an extreme element out there on the second amendment side that I can't help but get frustrated at times.

I do disagree with "we all want change" - I know some gun proponents out there want some common sense gun reform, and I understand you're among them, but there is a sizable contingent that's more than happy with the status quo, and the only change they want is for any remaining regulations to be struck down in favor of unfettered, unmonitored, absolute gun access.

Trust me, I'm a pro-gun person and I'm frustrated with the pro-gun extremists as well.

As for the second part, I was talking about folks here on Gaf. Those who think nothing should change can go dive off a building.

Where is that thread with the guy who used his CCW inside a restaurant and tried to avoid escalating the situation before drawing his gun? That was a textbook example of someone who can have one, he even put his arms up when police arrived to the scene.
Man, this is such a downer, the mother must be devastated.

He did everything right, but a lot of CCW holders are on a power trip and are constantly looking for reasons to pull their gun. You're not even supposed to hint at the fact that you're carrying unless you absolutely have no other option. The process for getting a CCW needs to ensure that only those who are serious about the training can obtain one.
 

besada

Banned
I'd start with two major changes:
1) I'd mandate that mental illness be treated like physical illness by insurance companies who want to do business with the government, including listing policies on healthcare.gov. That means the same coverage for mental health visits you get for your doctor, and every plan has mental health coverage.

2) I'd require all gun owners to submit to having their background checks re-run every two years. If, in those two years, they fall into one of the categories we won't sell firearms to -- felons, the mentally incompetent, the mentally ill who've been forcefully committed, etc -- then the local police confiscate their weapons.

That'd be a start. A two-pronged approach that deals both with the mental health care crisis in the U.S. and acknowledges that people's capability of handling the responsibility of a firearm changes over time.

There are a ton of other things I think would help, from requiring background checks for private sales, etc., but I'd be happy to get those two. The problem is, none of the people who shout "It's a mental illness problem" seem to actually be willing to put their money where their mouth is. I haven't seen a rush by Republican legislators to increase coverage of mental illness, even though they keep saying it's important, and they are in control of the legislature.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom