ChatterBank2 mins ago
Us Gun Laws
http://
'Sane' people can be unpredictable , of course .
However i would have thought that if you suffer from mental problems , the probability is increased among that group of people , acting to the detriment of others, by owning a firearm .
Is this a case of the new Administration wanting to repeal everything that the Obama administration enacted ?
Seems that way to me .
What's your view ?
Answers
1 to 15 of 15
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by Bazile. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
This quote from the piece caught my eye -
"But Republican lawmakers argued that the regulation reinforced negative stereotypes that people with mental disorders are dangerous."
I would argue that this is not actually true.
People with mental disorders are not, be default, dangerous, no argument there.
However, people with mental disorders and guns, are obviously dangerous, it takes no brains whatsoever to see that.
This is not about de-stigmatising the mentally ill by allowing them to have guns, it is about pandering to the right-wing voters who empower Republican Senators and the President, to ensure that such empowerment can be guaranteed going forward.
As to the second part of your OP - I think the Trump regime is only interested in dismantling the aspects of Obama's legislation that either disadvantages right-wing voters and business owners, or legislation that those same groups simply don't like.
I could respect - if obviously not agree with this naked pandering to the all-powerful NRA, if it were not dressed up in some seriously flawed nonsense about empowering mental ill citizens, when the only empowerment that are receiving is an addition set of opportunities to kill other citizens, or get themselves killed.
If that's President Trump's idea of 'forward thinking' - he'd better hope that none of the newly empowered mentally deficient citizens decides maybe he should not be around to do any more damage.
"But Republican lawmakers argued that the regulation reinforced negative stereotypes that people with mental disorders are dangerous."
I would argue that this is not actually true.
People with mental disorders are not, be default, dangerous, no argument there.
However, people with mental disorders and guns, are obviously dangerous, it takes no brains whatsoever to see that.
This is not about de-stigmatising the mentally ill by allowing them to have guns, it is about pandering to the right-wing voters who empower Republican Senators and the President, to ensure that such empowerment can be guaranteed going forward.
As to the second part of your OP - I think the Trump regime is only interested in dismantling the aspects of Obama's legislation that either disadvantages right-wing voters and business owners, or legislation that those same groups simply don't like.
I could respect - if obviously not agree with this naked pandering to the all-powerful NRA, if it were not dressed up in some seriously flawed nonsense about empowering mental ill citizens, when the only empowerment that are receiving is an addition set of opportunities to kill other citizens, or get themselves killed.
If that's President Trump's idea of 'forward thinking' - he'd better hope that none of the newly empowered mentally deficient citizens decides maybe he should not be around to do any more damage.
Canary - //This obsession with the Second Amendment seems a feature of Right Wing politics in the States. //
Sadly, for all its sophistication and culture, there remains an aspect of the American psyche that insists on retaining that 'frontiersman' mentality, that a man is not a real man unless he is armed to be able to protect his homestead.
Quite how long it will take for such backwoods (backwards!) thinking to dissipate from the gene pool is anyone's guess, but legislation like this is never going to help.
Sadly, for all its sophistication and culture, there remains an aspect of the American psyche that insists on retaining that 'frontiersman' mentality, that a man is not a real man unless he is armed to be able to protect his homestead.
Quite how long it will take for such backwoods (backwards!) thinking to dissipate from the gene pool is anyone's guess, but legislation like this is never going to help.
TTT - I am not aware of the details regarding any legislation President Obama tried and failed to implement, but his stance on gun laws was well known - I can only assume that his failure to move even slightly in terms of restricting guns would fall foul of your perception that the majority of the voting public thinks that the right to bear arms remains a good idea.
Of course the flaw in that view is that everyone who thinks having a gun is OK also thinks that they are safe and capable of having and using a gun. That kind of thinking gets people shot dead on a daily basis.
Of course the flaw in that view is that everyone who thinks having a gun is OK also thinks that they are safe and capable of having and using a gun. That kind of thinking gets people shot dead on a daily basis.
we should stop concerning ourselves.The US stance has always been incomprehensible to civilised people. The US gun lobby will say that the reason atrocities happen is because there are not enough guns. So every new born child must be issued with an RPG launcher, hand gun and Uzi 9mm at birth, then they will all be safe. Stop trying to reason with them, you cannot.
1 to 15 of 15
Latest Posts
Quizzes & Puzzles3 mins ago
ChatterBank6 mins ago
Body & Soul7 mins ago
Attempted Robbery In Cape Town
ChatterBank7 mins ago
