Lewiston shooting

[Pakuni]

You make a very good point, Burrow. Freedoms are not absolute. People known to be mentally unstable and dangerous shouldn't have access to guns. Or knives. Or cars. He should have stayed institutionalized. He shouldn't have  had the freedom to roam the streets. Do those who favor policies making it almost impossible to keep people like him take any responsibility? Nope. They wash their hands and blame the gun. Easy Peasy.

OK, let's treat guns like cars.
Before shooting, a person must undergo a weekslong training and safety program and then pass both a written and practical test.
Gun owners will be required to acquire a license which must be renewed periodically.
All guns must be registered with the government annually, and owners must pay a yearly fee to the state and local government to own a gun.
All sales and transfers of guns must be registered with the state.
Owners must purchase liability insurance for each of their guns.
Works for me. You in?

Which policies make it almost impossible to keep people like him?

[Not all scoop users are created equal apparently]

Said nobody

say one thing and vote another is saying that.

[The Lens]

Why doesn't this happen in other comparable countries?

Why doesn't this happen in other comparable countries?

Why doesn't this happen in other comparable countries?

Why doesn't this happen in other comparable countries?

[Uncle Rico]

Why doesn't this happen in other comparable countries?

Why doesn't this happen in other comparable countries?

Why doesn't this happen in other comparable countries?

Why doesn't this happen in other comparable countries?

American exceptionalism

[Jockey]

Why doesn't this happen in other comparable countries?

Why doesn't this happen in other comparable countries?

Why doesn't this happen in other comparable countries?

Why doesn't this happen in other comparable countries?

Other countries don't have republicans.

[Jay Bee]

Other countries don't have republicans.

^^^ ban ze

[TSmith34, Inc.]

American exceptionalism

Sometimes you just have to sacrifice children at a bowling alley on the altar of Freedom.

Sorry if you don't like that, commie.

[TSmith34, Inc.]

OK, let's treat guns like cars.
Before shooting, a person must undergo a weekslong training and safety program and then pass both a written and practical test.
Gun owners will be required to acquire a license which must be renewed periodically.
All guns must be registered with the government annually, and owners must pay a yearly fee to the state and local government to own a gun.
All sales and transfers of guns must be registered with the state.
Owners must purchase liability insurance for each of their guns.
Works for me. You in?

Which policies make it almost impossible to keep people like him?

[shoothoops]

26 times.

[TSmith34, Inc.]

Why doesn't this happen in other comparable countries?

Why doesn't this happen in other comparable countries?

Why doesn't this happen in other comparable countries?

Why doesn't this happen in other comparable countries?

Lens: Why doesn't this happen in other comparable countries?

Gun nuts: Mental health!

Everyone: Is America the only country with mental health issues?

Gun nuts: .............

[jesmu84]

The guy should have tried that in a small town

[Lennys Tap]

OK, let's treat guns like cars.
Before shooting, a person must undergo a weekslong training and safety program and then pass both a written and practical test.
Gun owners will be required to acquire a license which must be renewed periodically.
All guns must be registered with the government annually, and owners must pay a yearly fee to the state and local government to own a gun.
All sales and transfers of guns must be registered with the state.
Owners must purchase liability insurance for each of their guns.
Works for me. You in?

Which policies make it almost impossible to keep people like him?

I'm actually in agreement with this.

How do you feel about the involuntary commitment process? Do you think we may have gone too far protecting the freedoms of those who have exhibited that they're dangerous to themselves and/or others?

[Uncle Rico]

I'm actually in agreement with this.

How do you feel about the involuntary commitment process? Do you think we may have gone too far protecting the freedoms of those who have exhibited that they're dangerous to themselves and/or others?

Yes

[Pakuni]

I'm actually in agreement with this.

How do you feel about the involuntary commitment process? Do you think we may have gone too far protecting the freedoms of those who have exhibited that they're dangerous to themselves and/or others?

Honestly, I don't have a good answer for that. It's definitely possible, and I would guess probable;, but I'm not well educated when it comes to involuntary commitment process or policy changes.
Some quick Googling finds that several states in recent years - Cali, Oregon, NJ and Pennsylvania among them - have taken steps to reform the process. That would seem a recognition of flaws, right?

[lawdog77]

I'm actually in agreement with this.

How do you feel about the involuntary commitment process? Do you think we may have gone too far protecting the freedoms of those who have exhibited that they're dangerous to themselves and/or others?

List by state:
https://www.treatmentadvocacycenter.org/grading-the-states

[JWags85]

Yet another beauty of the f-ing broken two party system that often forces people into seemingly one issue voters, when in reality most people are anything but.

[Jockey]

I'm actually in agreement with this.

How do you feel about the involuntary commitment process? Do you think we may have gone too far protecting the freedoms of those who have exhibited that they're dangerous to themselves and/or others?

It was never about protecting freedoms. It was about protecting money.

It's always about the money - as any sports fan should know.

[MUBurrow]

How do you feel about the involuntary commitment process? Do you think we may have gone too far protecting the freedoms of those who have exhibited that they're dangerous to themselves and/or others?

Lenny, I'm really glad you brought this up.  I've been adjacent to a couple involuntary commitment proceedings, and in my experience, a family member is often the petitioner for a person's own safety but faces an uphill climb.  Courts and testifying medical professionals are often hesitant to commit someone, and will only do so for the shortest possible period to get past an immediate threat.  As sad as that sounds, it makes a lot of sense.  Involuntary commitment is the only way someone can be detained without being accused of a crime, so from a civil liberties or government overreach standpoint, its as serious as it gets. 

What bums me out (though based on your earlier posts, I don't think we disagree) is that we're so reluctant to impede the right to bear arms that our solution to protect society is pivoting to making it easier to commit someone.  "Well we have to assume everyone has ready access to guns all the time, so we need to lower the standard for when someone 'poses a danger' to themselves or others." The commitment process could certainly use some improvements, though I think most of those are financial/personnel related rather than problems with the legal standard.  The issue is whether there is quiet drift of the definition of immediate danger because of our insistence that everyone be armed to the teeth all the time.

[Lennys Tap]

Lenny, I'm really glad you brought this up.  I've been adjacent to a couple involuntary commitment proceedings, and in my experience, a family member is often the petitioner for a person's own safety but faces an uphill climb.  Courts and testifying medical professionals are often hesitant to commit someone, and will only do so for the shortest possible period to get past an immediate threat.  As sad as that sounds, it makes a lot of sense.  Involuntary commitment is the only way someone can be detained without being accused of a crime, so from a civil liberties or government overreach standpoint, its as serious as it gets. 

What bums me out (though based on your earlier posts, I don't think we disagree) is that we're so reluctant to impede the right to bear arms that our solution to protect society is pivoting to making it easier to commit someone.  "Well we have to assume everyone has ready access to guns all the time, so we need to lower the standard for when someone 'poses a danger' to themselves or others." The commitment process could certainly use some improvements, though I think most of those are financial/personnel related rather than problems with the legal standard.  The issue is whether there is quiet drift of the definition of immediate danger because of our insistence that everyone be armed to the teeth all the time.

Burrow

All good points. Always enjoy a back and forth with you.

[Lennys Tap]

List by state:
https://www.treatmentadvocacycenter.org/grading-the-states

Interesting, lawdog. No (or none discernible to me) correlation between being a blue or red state and handling (or trying to) the problem effectively.

[MU82]

The new Speaker went on Hannity last night and said he has absolutely no interest in strengthening any gun-safety provisions.

Because of course not.

[Jockey]

The new Speaker went on Hannity last night and said he has absolutely no interest in strengthening any gun-safety provisions.

Because of course not.

The only thing worse is the Maine Democrat who said he now supports restrictions on assault rifles. He didn't care when kids were getting mowed down across the country, BUT now that it happened in his district it is suddenly a priority. A true douche canoe in the proud Scoop tradition.

[MU82]

The only thing worse is the Maine Democrat who said he now supports restrictions on assault rifles. He didn't care when kids were getting mowed down across the country, BUT now that it happened in his district it is suddenly a priority. A true douche canoe in the proud Scoop tradition.

You know what? Whatever it takes.

This kind of thing is pretty common. A homophobe suddenly becomes supportive when one of his kids comes out of the closet. An entertainer or athlete who never was charitable suddenly gets active in cancer or heart research when a parent or child gets afflicted. A person who shrugs off drunk driving joins MADD after a family member gets killed by a drunk driver. And, yes, a gun-rights advocate finally sees the light after someone she loves gets gunned down by someone who never should have had access to a firearm.

So yeah, douche canoe. But at least he's now a douche canoe doing the right thing.

[JWags85]

You know what? Whatever it takes.

This kind of thing is pretty common. A homophobe suddenly becomes supportive when one of his kids comes out of the closet. An entertainer or athlete who never was charitable suddenly gets active in cancer or heart research when a parent or child gets afflicted. A person who shrugs off drunk driving joins MADD after a family member gets killed by a drunk driver. And, yes, a gun-rights advocate finally sees the light after someone she loves gets gunned down by someone who never should have had access to a firearm.

So yeah, douche canoe. But at least he's now a douche canoe doing the right thing.

I'm pretty forgiving of those sort of people in regular life.  They are usually ambivalent to dismissive, not outrightly antagonistic or hateful or whatnot.  It's often human nature to be blind/short sighted/etc to things that don't directly affect you.  But politicians? It's literally their job to see the whole picture, be representative and proactive for their constituents, not just their personal self.  But so many of them have no interest in doing so or just flat out choose not to

[Pakuni]

The only thing worse is the Maine Democrat who said he now supports restrictions on assault rifles. He didn't care when kids were getting mowed down across the country, BUT now that it happened in his district it is suddenly a priority. A true douche canoe in the proud Scoop tradition.

What good does it do to condemn someone like this? Would it be better if he hadn't had a come to Jesus moment?
You're never going to win hearts and minds if your first instinct is to label those you convert to your side as douche canoes.