They are all questions you should be asking yourself if you’re applying critical thinking to the situation.
Now you want to violate HIPPA laws? Employers can do criminal background checks. Will their search be able to include people on SSRIs? There’s be a database of them now, since that’s the only way to enforce not selling guns to them.
Paddock had plenty of time. He could have reloaded 10 bullet clips over and over. His attack was more deadly because he had a better plan.
Under so-called “red flag” laws anyone can be imprisoned and have their civil rights revoked based on an accusation. No proof needed. No evidence needed. If they weren’t a threat before they lost their job, had any children taken away and maybe had all their pets die of malnutrition or thirst they will be after all that. Prior to a Supreme Court decision in the early 70’s it was easy to have anyone thrown into a mental institution; these heinous laws mark a return to those dark days must be fought on every level. Stay vigilant to what is going on in your state legislature. Colorado’s law doesn’t even have provisions regarding false accusations. The very concept of these laws overturns 200 years of jurisprudence. The implications of letting them go unchallenged go FAR beyond firearms.
People who have been adjudicated mentally defective already come up on the national background check - this is, if the states are diligent with regard to keep the database current. The key here is “adjudicated.” That requires some evidence, some proof. Not just an accusation by a disgruntled family member, co-worker, or jilted ex.
That’s fine…adjudicate it, be diligent. Laws are fallible human constructs that need to be re-examined from time to time to correct problems in society. There is a trade off between absolute freedom and law and order…it is a careful balance with no right answer.
Perhaps you feel a mass shooting or two each week is a fair price to pay for your unobstructed right to own firearms regardless of your mental state, criminal history, etc. The majority of the country (something like 75%) feels we need to tighten things up a bit after all this.
Marcus, you are predictable…right on schedule with the ad hominem attack. While I’d prefer to stick with the issue and it comes across as juvenile, don’t worry, you won’t hurt my feelings.
Wow, that’s laughable that you think that is an ad hominem attack. Calling it that lets you hide and avoid discussing the faulty reasoning.
Now you’re back to advocating for laws that already exist.
Just, saying, but HIPPA laws are already violated when it comes to tracking vaccinated kids and adults and if SB276 passes, they’ll be violated to have the entire medical record of a child who applies for a medical exemption pulled, reviewed by a state agency, and put into a database (which will no doubt eventually be compromised).
So apparently we’re willing to violate HIPPA to keep track of vaccination status, why not mental health?
To be clear, I’m not saying this is ok–I’m definitely opposed to SB276, vaccine databases, and I think that having a mental health DB could discourage people from getting help, but the violations already happen legally, and if this is going to be the case, I’d be more as worried about an SSRI patient with a gun than with someone with Measles.
“Perhaps you feel a mass shooting or two each week is a fair price to pay for your unobstructed right to own firearms regardless of your mental state, criminal history, etc.”
I have never claimed or even insinuated such a thing.
We need to ban assault knives! 
Glad to hear that we agree on something . If that’s the case you should be ok with giving up certain rights or privileges to decrease the odds or lethality of mass shootings in the future. I am 100% pro-second amendment but would gladly give up my right to bump stocks and 100 round drum magazines (in the same way I’m fine with not being allowed to own automatic weapons). It is a simple calculation of risk vs reward. The devil is in the details, but let’s finally take meaningful action.
Banning those items while completely ignoring much greater causes of death shows it’s about emotion and not a logical approach to saving lives.
Most of all let’s make sure we don’t take actions which are far worse than the problem we are trying to deal with - and might well exacerbate it. Actions like “red flag” laws.
That’s literally the history of government and how it got so big. Oh, we messed that up. We will fix it with more government. The government never saw a problem they didn’t want to fix with:
Anyone who pays attention to their track record would realize it’s a bad idea.
I’m actually interested, can you show me the nations with the “smallest” governments. I’m curious who is the most efficient.
What’s funny is while you may disagree with #1 and #2, it does make sense that they should go together, right?
Like, it does not make sense to tax less but still have more government. Hmmm who likes to do that?
The best way is track government spending as a percent of GDP.
Countries who collect less than 20% of GDP in taxes grow GDP twice as fast as those collecting over 40%.
If you want to measure efficiency, then look at spending and stated goals. Many programs have the opposite impact of their goal. That’s horrible efficiency. You can look at infrastructure projects that come in at 3-6x more than the planned budget. That’s horrible efficiency.
This almost deserves it’s own thread. NBC ceased to be a serious news organization years ago but now they’ve gone completely, totally, absolutely round-the-bend/bonkers/three fries short of a happy meal/ batshit CRAZY!!
Someone mentioned food as a root cause…
A story MSM will make sure you never know about.
Real heroes. Real tragedy. Zero BLM outrage.
That’s really sad 