DefenderAO

Eulogies or lives saved. You have no material issue with these sociopaths so let it ride as it's monitored. Meanwhile, you're a Red Flag guy who might ask me in 8 pages what I would do to actually make a difference.

Fascism takes guns from people and serve despots. Then kills dissenters as they rule through tyranny. So, your realistic solution is reactivity. Guns are not coming off the street anytime soon. Sociopaths are posting threats now. Let's just wait and see more sheep get slaughtered... You have something better than that?

You're trying desperately to make it personal because this issue pervades your life. I know it is not easy as, I believe, you stated prior. I assure it's not personal. Mental illness is not bound by gender, race, or creed. And dealing with the fruit of the sickness will only yield bad fruit again.

I proposed an option. When does your monitoring solution yielded action? I hope it's before a burial ceremony.

It actually is a refreshing, cooling respite from your contemptuous cauldron... as you ironically liken my position to fascism, desire to save "just one more life," then champion Nazi disarmament measures. What lives do you really care about? The groups you favor or all life? You're not getting all the guns off the street tomorrow. Today, I posted admitted sociopaths threatening innocents. What's your move? The first was to point out a loner that wasn't violent. What's the realistic play to save lives now?

The mental health system needs complete reform. The people in power today are unfit to do so. I'm not sure there's been a recent administration to handle it.

WaPo's biased article on why Red Flag laws are not an infringement on due process is not the footing I'd call authoritative. At what point does monitoring these mentally unwell become action in your reality?

Right. Like the Nazi's that threw people into gas chambers and ovens after disarming them. Except the exact opposite. The density...smh. You're the same one who posted death penalty for anyone involved with guns. You may be at a point you embrace rage-fueled arguments more than truly cogent solutions.

So, Red Flag laws are Constitutional? You want to protect the document, these people, or possible victims? They're not a threat enough for you? Do you want action or like to banter in a DU football forum? If I posted a similar link of some fake Christian white kid, would you have the same tone? And, for the record, evil white kids in this vain should be handled no differently.

You're reading what you want to read. Not what was said. These people are mentally ill. Their mental illness has manifested, or yielded, gender identity issues. I've identified possible sociopaths and mentally unwell. You proposal is to protect them and take the inanimate tool they hold. The inability to recognize evil, take appropriate measures, and understand the need to protect against it...defend what is good, is astounding. The law abiding would give up their guns before the sociopaths do. "Just one life." The lone point we agree. Except, your measures wouldn't to do anything you say your heart desires.

Immediately detained without bail. Investigate their networks and those people. If any risk to the innocent, detained. Then, through a fully reformed mental health system, rehab them. They do not leave until fully changed as defined by your overhauled system. So your proposal is wait and see if they break a law? Then, when they do, come back to the forum and complain about loss of life, conservatives, and guns? You have your answer so shouldn't need to ask me gain. Reactivity is death in this scenario. Proactive measures, focused on those willing to so brazenly share their moral and mental ineptitude, is critical.

It's good you don't make policy. Your stated prejudice against religious groups/spiritual people (cultists) is palpable contempt. The people in the link are mentally ill. It manifests in gender dysphoria. I suspect your lead-in analysis of the lone non-violent already had mitigated life loss. He/she isn't seemingly violent. Since the focus is saving lives, not calling out the loner that is likely no threat, you state the inanimate tool is the problem, not the sociopath wielding it. Utterly astounding.

Archy has posted data where you've made shooting-related statements that were untrue. Have you reviewed them as data drives the most informed and best decisions on a very complex subject.

The people in the link are mentally ill. In this case it seems to have manifested in gender dysphoria. The most recent shooter, was/were, was a transgender. Tell me what prospective, unhinged mass shooting classes are special or exempt. When thinking soundly and not clouded with contempt, I suspect you'd say none are exempt. Zero. What would you do here? You trumpet "not one more life!!" Here it is in front of you. They've taken no action yet. What's your move? You all want action and less platitudes. Here it is. EDIT: With no effort I found a real example of something that should be handled RIGHT now. Show me a similar example of a male, female, any race...I'd say the same thing.

I told you it's difficult. Completely overhaul the mental health system. Let's put you in action - what would you do with these people today? You want action? I know what I'd do. What's your play?

TX and Mexico - Eric Holder and Fast and Furious comes to mind. Is that the type of Federal involvement you're advocating?

People don't want to be made into sheep. The vast majority have a morality not to kill. They'd follow the law. Criminals don't.

How does an AWB solve Chicago's absurd gun problem? Register pistols, the weapon of choice for shootings? I support stronger penalties, but that is not a pre-empt. Too reactive.

Now, what groups are the ones depressed? Is it a conservative Christian problem? What cultural issue does the US have other countries do not?

Here's a start. When are these people getting arrested and rehab'ed in a high security cell?

I'd like to hear your side. Confiscation? Preemptively imprison gun cultists? (hyperbole, of course). It's not an easy answer or we may have implemented it.

Evil exists. Defend good. Let's avoid petulant name calling and lazy labels.

The intent was not a musket, it was just the latest weapon commensurate to what/who they were fighting. It's not musket thing, it was a use-what-is-on-par-to-the-other-side thing. And things are highly regulated now. No full auto (full auto serves very little practical purpose and is largely a waste), regulated silencers (AR's and guns shoot, unsuppressed, at around 165-170 decibels; a suppressor cuts that down to around the hearing safe threshold of 140 dB) etc. I'm really good with practical regulation, but I think we differ on the focal genesis? I would start at mental health reformation (not evolving it, true overhaul). Then, I'd look at the data on where the plurality of crimes happen, from who, using what. But even then, some of the strictest gun law cities in the country have the worst gun crime rates. Then I'd look at the 150 million ages 20-54 right now, the 88 days in 2023 they've all had to go on a mass shooting spree (with more guns ever in the country at any time in our history), and see what also makes sense for them as ones who realize evil exists and would like a very viable means to protect themselves and those around.

The plurality, if not majority, of shooting is where a pistol is used and has become a norm in certain cultures. Those countries don't have those cultural issues. A part that makes America such a great place (diversity) is also part that holds a truth there is a deep cultural issue that uses handguns for terrible ends. Secondly, you could say that not all liberal policy is directly, or tangentially, related to issue at hand. Fiduciary and fiscal policy, liberal vs conservative, may not tie in as a tenet that solves anything here. I think it's too high level to say "country x = more liberal = less violent." Australia and Sweden have significant rape issues. We'd both say we're not okay with rape, mass shootings, burglary etc. Given the thread is gun control, it's the proper focus to talk about guns. But looking at related issues (violent crimes, mental health, human condition, policy) is valuable. Net: I believe there is a culture issue in America where gun violence animates from. I believe it makes sense that, the country with the most volume of guns, and culture issues other countries might not contend with, has poor statistics here. However, violent crimes and humanity depravity exist everywhere whether a gun ever existed or not.

We'll use this case as an example. It seems like she was already flagged in the system. What protocols did they keep on her to be closer to a potential problem? Stepping back, there's a cultural issue in big cities that have a huge violence problem where handguns are used in most shootings. I mentioned earlier I believe public housing and perpetual government handout policies exacerbate the issues we see from that culture. I don't think anyone has a great policy answer. It's easier to say what won't work than what will. Stepping further back, there are about 150 million people in the country ages 20-54. To date, there have been 88 days in the calendar year. That is 150 million * 88 days (billions) opportunity where someone from age 20-54 can go on a mass shooting spree. How can you parse out the mentally ill from this group? Why punish 149,9xx million in this group for issues the minority mentally ill have?