Las Vegas mass shooting going on

[jgoens]

Originally Posted by KenB925

There are many problems, not likely to be solved in OT on a car forum...but we try!

[/B]

I disagree--OT in car forums is monumental to how things get done in this country.

[fravel]

Originally Posted by Flying Ace

The problem with your analogy on owning a fast car is that the car doesn't have a primary purpose of killing people/animals.

Yeah, and driving is a privilege, whereas owning firearms is a right.

If anything, there's fewer valid reasons to be able to own a fast car than there are for owning a gun.

[jgoens]

Originally Posted by atam1980

Normally I'd agree with you, but one of my close friends was one of the 59 that died. As of now, police still have no motive and we're all still left wondering what she died for. His death wasn't closure at all.

My condolences--obviously you will have a different view on this.

[jgoens]

Originally Posted by fravel

Yeah, and driving is a privilege, whereas owning firearms is a right.

If anything, there's fewer valid reasons to be able to own a fast car than there are for owning a gun.

Kind of a matter of opinion. Reasons for a gun would be protection and entertainment. Reason for a fast car would be entertainment and..here's the grasping at straws part---having a powered car allows easier access to high speed freeways. Both have validity and one thing in common. Oh, and a fast car increases penis size, whereas a gun increases testicles size.

[KenB925]

Originally Posted by jgoens

Oh, and a fast car increases penis size, whereas a gun increases testicles size.

I have proof that this is an untrue statement...sadly as I have a very fast car and lots of guns...

[jgoens]

Originally Posted by KenB925

I have proof that this is an untrue statement...sadly as I have a very fast car and lots of guns...

Ouch! That's not giving yourself props.

[KenB925]

Originally Posted by jgoens

Ouch! That's not giving yourself props.

I've got enough to get the job done...actually had to have things deactivated after the third kid!

Definitely no growth with purchases of firearms or fast cars.

[Hawkeye]

Originally Posted by schoy

How did it lead to less people getting help for mental illnesses? Genuine question; I'm not that familiar with Obama's resolution. All I know is that we've been talking for a long time that mentally ill people should not be getting guns. That the problem wasn't the guns but the people. So Obama tried to implement a stopgap measure (resolution, as opposed to legislation) to tie mental health history to gun purchases. Was it perfect? No. Was it overbroad? Probably. But it was better than nothing, as a temporary measure.

Trump erased it, but never pushed for something better conceived. He's going to face this question now (as well as his pro-NRA stance during his campaign), which is going to temporarily push his tax reform bill to back-burner.

The Civil Liberties Union argued that it would be a deterrent for people that might need mental help from actually seeking help due to the consequences of being labeled mentally unstable. Obama's version would require all people be entered into a database if they ever received any kind of mental help. Whether Trump cared about their thought, who knows, but there were multiple senators that seemed to care about it.

[scostu]

Originally Posted by Hawkeye

Obama's version would require all people be entered into a database if they ever received any kind of mental help. Whether Trump cared about their thought, who knows, but there were multiple senators that seemed to care about it.

Wouldn’t that be a direct violation of HIPAA Privacy Rule ...

https://www.hhs.gov/hipaa/for-indivi...-do/index.html

[Flying Ace]

Originally Posted by Hawkeye

The Civil Liberties Union argued that it would be a deterrent for people that might need mental help from actually seeking help due to the consequences of being labeled mentally unstable. Obama's version would require all people be entered into a database if they ever received any kind of mental help. Whether Trump cared about their thought, who knows, but there were multiple senators that seemed to care about it.

there has got to be middle ground on this, but it's a good start. Let's close the deal on this...where's a deal closer when we need one?

[Flying Ace]

Originally Posted by scostu

Wouldn’t that be a direct violation of HIPAA Privacy Rule ...

https://www.hhs.gov/hipaa/for-indivi...-do/index.html

as mentioned before there is NO SINGLE omnipotent law or right in the country that is more important than another law or right. HIPAA is great in its own right and context, but for other purposes is a determent to other rights and laws. Even the sacred 1st Amendment is not universal.

This country's judicial system is built on a balance of context, intention and rights. Let's hope SCOTUS gets it right.

[Maestro]

Originally Posted by Flying Ace

you bring up very valid points. The laws that will be needed are politically very difficult, mostly due to the gun lobby.

I had mentioned active enforcement of illegal modifications, loopholes in sales and others that I mentioned is needed. There will be no single law that can address all issues.

That said, I for one also want to put a financial perspective on this. Why not treat gun ownership like car ownership? Force insurance onto owners. It's at least one way to force responsible ownership. The only way to have this way is to modify tort laws and allow nearly unlimited (at least initially) liability on firearm sellers and owners.

And to your point, currently, this shooting doesn't fit the mold on either side of the argument. But saying "people will kill because people suck" isn't a valid argument against restricting the way and the ease of how this guy particularly killed people. I'm sure more info will come out eventually. There's also talks on illegal mods of his guns. I haven't seen a mass shooter recently who hasn't made his intentions known to others. There SHOULD be liability on enablers and indifferent people involved.

Here is the difference between cars and guns, driving is privilege, traveling is right, but it not a right to own a car to travel and use resource that all American paid for. Thus the reason you have to pay for a car to register it and insure it.

Gun ownership is right, no one is allow to say you can not own a gun, in many states including NV you have right to stand your ground and kill someone who threatens you and your property.

This it where the argument falls apart for people who do not like guns or understand them.

Here is the interesting things, I have meet a number of people who were against gun, but they never handle one let along shot one. I taken a few of them shooting and guest what most of them got very excite about shooting. Many people do not like guns since they are afraid of a gun until they actual handle one and the fear goes away.

Also there is no gun show loop hole, no gun use for mass murder was ever bough at gun show. Also more private sales happen every day with out issue, All the people i know with guns would never sell a gun to someone they did not know personal. Most gun used in crimes were stolen or someone bought it legally and then gave it to someone else then went to jail because they were convince to buy a gun for someone else. The straw gun sale law did not stop the crime it just put some stupid GF in jail. The gun show loop hole is just political talk to make people think there is an issue which needs fix. I can tell you all guns in my family were either handed down of bought through private sale not through any store. There are lots of people like me who have lots of guns which the government has no idea about and there is no law requiring anyone to tell them.

[Hawkeye]

Originally Posted by scostu

Wouldn’t that be a direct violation of HIPAA Privacy Rule ...

https://www.hhs.gov/hipaa/for-indivi...-do/index.html

I honestly only know the cliff notes. Not fully versed to know if this would have overridden HIPAA (someone else mentioned it was directed at anyone who had a fudiciary handling expenses due to mental incapacity so not sure if that gets by the rule). I just read the pros and cons and what parties were bringing them.

[Maestro]

Originally Posted by scostu

Wouldn’t that be a direct violation of HIPAA Privacy Rule ...

https://www.hhs.gov/hipaa/for-indivi...-do/index.html

Yes it would, and Obama was not for documenting people with mental illness. This was one of the idea put forward that any one who was diagnose with a mental defect they would have to be put into database which ATF could search on background check, and whole group of people went nuts over this idea, all kinds of reason why it was not a good idea came up and non of it had anything to do with keeping guns out of people hands.

[Maestro]

Originally Posted by 1MOREMOD

The problem with mental health is its not a black or white issue. You aren't crazy all your life or not. We all are varying degrees of good and evil and it changes all the time. What if I already have bunch of guns then lose my shit who comes in and makes the decision to take them now? No easy answers.

Your right and I think everyone would agree any person who sets out to kill people for no reason has an issue, serious issue and who get to decide your craze. The other issue is some of the crazy who did bad things were on drugs and the drugs cause the issue.

[1MOREMOD]

Originally Posted by Maestro

Your right and I think everyone would agree any person who sets out to kill people for no reason has an issue, serious issue. and who get to decide your craze. The other issue is some of the crazy who did bad things were on drugs and the drugs cause the issue.

I'm sure he had a reason just not one valid to you or me. Alcohol and drugs aren't an excuse otherwise drunk vehicular homicide could be blamed on drugs and be safer for the perpetrators than being sober legally.

[Maestro]

Originally Posted by 1MOREMOD

I'm sure he had a reason just not one valid to you or me. Alcohol and drugs aren't an excuse otherwise drunk vehicular homicide could be blamed on drugs and be safer for the perpetrators than being sober legally.

I meant drugs prescribe by a Dr, there are lots of Legal drugs that cause people all kind of issues, most times the person just kills themselves, in a few case they take others with them. Think about the guy in the Colorado movie theater. No one want to talk about this guy, there were warning all over the place and this guy complained about his drugs making him feel like he wanted to kill people. No one want to hear this it was the guns fault, all guns must go since drugs your Dr prescribes to you can make you kill people.

[aajjcc]

[JIMT8292]

Just heard someone say that after all these mass shooting Americans do 3 things.

1 Tweet RIPs
2 Lower flags
3 Say lessons must be learnt


With the very greatest respect Americans must be very slow learners as living in the UK no one can understand why a country can keep letting these things happen.

How many of the 22000 people at that event were gun owners?
There was a guy on the news who lost a friend in Vagas and 2 days later he is in a shop buying an AK47 !

These terrible mass shootings don't really seem to shock alot of people anymore, unlike the terror attack in Europe.
If a country is unwilling to address the problem ...

[Lups]

Originally Posted by JIMT8292

Just heard someone say that after all these mass shooting Americans do 3 things.

1 Tweet RIPs
2 Lower flags
3 Say lessons must be learnt


With the very greatest respect Americans must be very slow learners as living in the UK no one can understand why a country can keep letting these things happen.

These terrible mass shootings don't really seem to shock alot of people anymore, unlike the terror attack in Europe.
If a country is unwilling to address the problem ...

I think it was Bill O'Reilly that tweeted that this is the price of freedom.

It's true, us in Europe have a hard time understanding the logic behind the second amendment. We had two school shootings in Finland, and oh boy did we have a chat about guns. The whole approach here is that we don't give a fuck if you want to own a gun for a solid reason, suffer for your hobby because we don't want fucktards having one. Our legislation is also clear on self defence: You can harm a person to save yourself or others but prepare to explain in debth if a gun is involved, and probably say bye bye to your hobby. We have low sentences for crimes since we want the criminals to leave the victims alive. We want our cops to stay alive.

We don't get it, but i think we don't need to either. The cultural difference between Europe and the USA is vast and maybe we should let this go. As horrible as reading news like the latest has been, Bill O'Reilly already said it all.

[erttuli]

Originally Posted by Lups

We have low sentences for crimes since we want the criminals to leave the victims alive. We want our cops to stay alive.

Sentences are low comparatively even if you murder/kill someone. You can get as much time in jail for financial crimes, does not seem reasonable to me?
At least that one knife junkie got what he deserved when he tried to stab a woman in the middle of a highway near Lahti. Sentences are fucked up in Finland honestly. Took 3 shots from the police to get that fucker down.

[mantis]

Originally Posted by scostu

Wouldn’t that be a direct violation of HIPAA Privacy Rule ...

https://www.hhs.gov/hipaa/for-indivi...-do/index.html

you are already entered into a database if you ever been 5150d, stating that you have to be reviewed if you apply for weapons in a certain time frame after 5150.