It is necessary to distinguish the right to have weapons in the home, from the right to have weapons and move armed outside one's home. One in the house can have as many weapons as he wants, as long as they are kept in a safe condition. This means that they must not be accessible and the ammunition must be kept in a separate place.
When I say turn armed I don't mean to limit myself only to firearms, or to edged weapons, but any weapon or object that can be used as a weapon. Example if you go around with a hammer or a chef's knife you are considered armed, or if you go around with a brass knuckle, with a sling or, with a bow you are considered armed. Anyone who has a weapon, must have a certificate that is able to use it safely and not be of accidental harm to others.
The public carrying of weapons should be a right only and exclusively for citizens who are not considered dangerous. No citizen who has a diagnosis of mental illness, in particular cluster B mental illnesses, or no citizen who, although he does not have a mental illness, takes psychiatric drugs even temporarily should be able to have weapons in public. The possibility of free port must be given only after a psychiatric visit. Also, those with drug use convictions should also be excluded from the free port.
Anyone with a criminal record for violent offenses should be excluded from the free port. Those who already have a history of crime should have no chance to go around armed.
0
0 Reply
Most Helpful Opinions
Anonymous
(30-35)
1 y
the problem with "crazy" is that what exactly is it? For 5 years, the LEFT has been screaming that every Trump supporter or conservative is "crazy". Should they all lose their right to own guns? They haven't been the ones out on the streets doing billions of dollars of damage to property, attacking random people on the street, throwing fire bombs at ICE offices, or fighting with police.
Gotta be careful with definitions and terms because it's all being used politically.
Are people who chose not to be vaccinated for covid "crazy"? The vax-Nazis have said as much. Should only vaccinated people have the right to bear arms? I don't think so. But once again, vax-Nazis want you to lose the ability to buy FOOD if you haven't been vaccinated. So, what is crazy?
The wanted "red flag" laws so people could report a "crazy" neighbor for having guns, but again, they literally tried to report Trump supporting conservatives as "crazy". No, we the people will not stand for such a thing.
It can't be allowed as a test for gun-ownership because it's being misused and politicized to disarm people for political beliefs. The End.
The problem is that knife is deadlier than a gun (my grandfather told me this and he know what's he's talking about, he's a veteran of war in one of the deadliest branch). and they only used knife. So doing this laws won't change anything cause if people can't have access to gun they use knife (there's lots of mass murder in Asia where they use knife since they can't get gun) though in the US crazy or not laws or not you can get whatever you want on the black market. In France guns are everywhere even though they're forbidden...
0
6 Reply
Asker
1 y
Why aren't there countless knife attacks in countries with strict gun control then? Why isn't the per capita murder rate from knife attacks anywhere close to the per capita gun murder rate?
Your grandfather's reasoning makes as much sense as saying If we stop people from using bombs to murder people they'll use guns, so we might as well let them use bombs. đ
So using your rationale I guess we should have let those people have guns instead so they would have a higher murder rate. Right?
I was just waiting for you to come back with a news story about a few knife attacks. đ But of course you won't post any per capita homicide statistics from knife attacks because they're so low it destroys your argument.
But I'll do the work for you. The United States had 10,537 Gun homicides in 2019, Which on a per-capita basis is 32.9 gun homicides per million people. China had 4,590 knife homicides in 2019, which on a per-capita basis is 3.2 per million. So why are there so fewer knife homicides per capita than gun homicides since according to you if people don't have a gun bill just use a knife? Maybe because what you're saying is idiotic bullshit. worldpopulationreview.com/.../stabbing-deaths-by-country www.statista.com/.../
My God, you must be a Republican or brain dead. Is there a difference?
You're annoying, why would I post something like that when you're actually grown enough to search it on your own like you just proves? (also i'm too lazy to do that dude seriously). And you really think the gun are the problem? If so then America is doomed.
Why would you post facts or statistics to prove your case? I have no expectation of you doing that because your argument that knives are more dangerous than guns is contradicted by evidence, common sense, and is stupid as hell.
I was reading your original comment again and have been coming around to the wisdom of your grandfather about knives being more dangerous than guns. Just imagine if the gunman in the Las Vegas mass shooting of 2017 was throwing knives at the crowd instead. Instead of 61 dead people, there'd be hundreds.
Batshit crazy Marjorie Taylor Greene just said we donât need gun control & that we need god We donât need your god, Marjorie Trailer Grease Your religion is a fraud Your god is a bloated orange Big Lie-spewing psychopath who doesnât give a single damn about anyone but himself.
So, what do you hate more, Christianity or Donald Trump?
Iâm trying to understand. You Lefties tend to make the most bizarre associations.
You all really come off as being completely unhinged when you bring up Trump constantly, by the way. Itâs very confusing, because one will he reading about one thing, then people inexplicably bring up Donald Trump. Like you did.
No one cares about Marjorie Taylor Green by the way. I voted Republican and I donât even know what state she represents. Liberals are just desperate for a scapegoat now that the Orange Man isnât in office anymore, though God knows you all canât stop talking about him even though you claim to want him to go toddle off.
So you went from talking about Greene, to shitting on organized religion, to claiming that people worship Trump, to saying that heâs a psychopath.
And the question was simply, âShould crazy people be allowed to have guns?â
Letâs hope you donât have a gun, because youâre crazy as a retard in a ball pit.
It is possible to agree with a concept but oppose the way someone would implement the concept. And people who may find fault with your approach aren't crazy. Name calling is just something that you do when you don't have a better argument.
Crazy people sometimes kill their children, so we should require everyone either to pass a mental health assessment or undergo a permanent and irreversible sterilization procedure, right? How can you say crazy people are the problem, then oppose laws to keep babies away from crazy people? That's...
0
2 Reply
Asker
1 y
So all red herrings aside, do you think crazy people should be allowed to have guns or not?
Your question misses a key piece to the puzzle: Criminals have access to guns via illegal means. Illegal means outside the law. A mental health evaluation will not stop a criminal from getting a gun. It will stop them from getting it legally, but physically it will not stop them. Look at what good strict gun laws did in Buffalo, which is NONE. All the laws in the world will not stop criminals. It is ACTION that stops criminals, not laws on the books. Before a criminal can stand trial, police must first take action to catch the criminal, but the law stops police from acting before a crime is committed. The ONLY people who will be restricted by more laws are those who obey the law in the first place. Just look at DUIs. It is illegal to drive drunk yet it still happens. Adding new penalties to DUI would not change a damn thing. Same with gun laws.
0
1 Reply
Asker
1 y
You're ultimately saying, why have laws against rape, murder, pedophilia, or anything for that matter since criminals are just going to commit crimes anyways. Do you know how stupid what you said is?
You're conveniently ignoring the fact that countries with psychological assessments of potential gun buyers don't have mass shootings. Why aren't crazy people and those other countries getting guns illegally and conducting mass shootings?
Because whoever decides the criteria for crazy will make it flexible enough to be shifted down the road and it will be used to cut off clear minded coherent citizens from buying guns.
At the end of the day owning a gun is a fundamental right. End of story.
0
6 Reply
Asker
1 y
So then you're in favor of crazy people owning guns then?
- "shouldn't we have laws requiring a mental health assessments of gun buyers like other countries"
- Me: "No
Because whoever decides the criteria for crazy will make it flexible enough to be shifted down the road and it will be used to cut off clear minded coherent citizens from buying guns."
- You: "So then you're in favor of crazy people owning guns"
... yes that's a red herring lmao. I was addressing your point, not the title. Your point was the mental health assessment recommendation. And I said it would be misused to stop healthy individuals down the road so the assessment requirement is a bad idea.
So when your response is "so you support crazies!!! Derrrrrr" yes that's a fucking red herring you unthinking moron.
That's pretty reasonable. The problem is that too many of those who make the laws are vehemently anti-gun, and would set standards so high as to be unreachable- and believe me, a US with too few guns would be a MUCH nastier place than a US with too many.
Find an external nonpartisan baseline to work from, and most people would support it- but that's easier said than done.
If I think covid vaccines cause a myriad of health issues, am I crazy? See where we run into problems? Who gets to decide who is crazy? All these mass shooters were monitored by authorities before it happened and they let it happenâŠdidnât warn anyone or anything. I think powerful forces want these mass shootingsâŠ
No, there needs to be a comprehensive mental health system. Parents often have offspring that they know are troubles and do not have the capacity to care for them and there are no programs available so they fall through the cracks.
0
3 Reply
Asker
1 y
So wouldn't it just be simpler to conduct a psychological assessment of gun buyers?
So what you're saying is that since they're going to kill people anyways, we might as well let them have guns. I mean what's the worst that can happen besides a higher body count?
While we're at it, why don't we make bombs legal too? It's not too difficult to make anything from a pipe bomb to a ammonium nitrate U-Haul truck bomb, so we might as well make bombs legal. Brilliant reasoning!
Reasonable people will agree that mental illness is a problem when it comes to mass shootings. So the question is , how would we have mental health professionals determine this free of political bias?
0
9 Reply
Asker
1 y
The same way it's done in other countries that require a mental health assessment of gun purchasers. đ
So I could do the research to find the exact details of the psychological assessment that's used in all these other countries. But it'll be a complete waste of time because you'll just come up with some other stupid ass excuse and dance around the issue like you're doing now.
That's just a lazy excuse, and YOU are the one dancing around the matter. From what you've said, it does not appear that you actually know the specifics of what's done in other countries, and their procedures and processes may differ in significant ways. It would actually be interesting to know what other countries do, but I wouldn't necessarily assume that it can be copied exactly and still be legal here, where we have constitutional requirements for due process and aren't a parliamentary democracy. It's hard to know without specific details.
You know you can always Google it. Do I need to explain how to use Google to you?
The two links I posted in my original question describe all the criteria one needs to meet in order to buy a gun in the countries they list. Do I need to teach you how to click a link too?
How would that actually work in the US with HIPAA? What exactly is meant by "mental"? How would that be checked? What is meant by "residential records"? And how would those be checked?
Canada: "Background checks consider criminal, mental-health and domestic-violence records, and take into account addiction and domestic violence." Again, what mental health records if there's never been an evaluation or treatment and what about HIPAA?
France: "Background checks consider criminal, mental and health records".
The point you seem to be missing is that specifics matter. These are different countries with different laws and bureaucratic procedures so you can't just say that we'll do what they do and expect the same results.
What's there to address besides the fact that you just want to split hairs to find any excuse as to why a psychological assessment of somebody buying a weapon designed to murder people is wrong or inconvenient.
So let me tell you how Google works. Go to the website below and ask your question, then the Google machine will answer it. đ https://www.google.com/
If you canât explain how itâs done, you obviously donât have any idea what youâre supporting and donât even want to know. And you are so ashamed of what youâre proposing that you insisted on going anon.
You could at least explain whether HIPAA would need to be, what this psychological assessment would consist of, whether a second opinion could be obtained and who would be qualified to perform the assessment. But the chances of you doing that are probably zero.
Funny how you went anonymous for thisâŠ. Typical uneducated coward with links provided by a known left wing organization that falsifies data and information on a daily basis. 🤣
Should terrorists be funded American guns by the American government? The taliban was given a literal $85.6 billion in the Afghanistan withdrawal which included hundreds of armored vehicles, black hawk helicopters that function, fighter jets that are now operational and thousands upon thousands of weapons and high tech assetsâŠ.
So youâre argument is should crazy people allowed to have guns? You didnât say in AmericaâŠ. You stated it basically in general right? So mr. anonymous, should terrorists overseas be allowed to have guns?
Itâs interesting how the left wants to talk about the rights opinion when the left funded maniacs billionsâŠ.
And the biggest mass shooter in American history was an Anti Rightwing activist, yet not a single soul on the left talks about Stephen paddock⊠he bought a lot of guns, clearly the guy wasnât all there was he?
Crazy people will do crazy things, we know that already, I donât think mentally ill people should have the right to buy guns or have the right to walk the streets, I think they should be hospitalized in mental hospitals in order to be treated, rather than them living on the streets or living among us. It only takes a fraction of a second for things to go bad with individuals like that.
I donât think the Taliban should be able to have access to any of what was left behind either. Because one day itâs gunna bite us in the butt. Biden even said it himself before he got into office. https://youtu.be/Rq-8OK4wgaA
See the right makes mistakes and so does the left, both sides are hypocritical to the fullest. But no ones going to point both sides out for what they say or do.
Those laws have been on the books for decades it is just both sides choose to ignore them along with the hundreds of gun laws on the books that are selectively enforced by our government
0
2 Reply
Asker
1 y
There are no such laws on the books. You're completely full of shit. The only requirement to get a gun in the US is to pass a criminal background check.
It isnât that easy. There would have to be a system of second opinions and a way to appeal plus who would pay for it. Plus some like Ted Bundy would show no signs of psychopathy
0
3 Reply
Asker
1 y
Well they seem to be managing to do it well in other countries. sounds like another BS excuse to me.
We do gave crazy people laws. More often than not, the laws don't get enacted for many reasons.
0
9 Reply
Asker
1 y
Bullshit. the only requirement to buy a gun in the US is pass an instant background check that considers criminal convictions, domestic violence and immigration status. No psychological assessment is required as in most of the other countries listed below. www.nytimes.com/.../international-gun-laws.html
Under 18 U. S. C. § 922(d), it is unlawful for any person to sell or otherwise dispose of any firearm or ammunition to any person knowing or having reasonable cause to believe that such person âhas been adjudicated as a mental defective or has been committed to any mental institution.
Try again. I can find the law specific to your state too. But here read for yourself.
Yeah because crazy people walk into a gun shop and ask what's a good gun for a mass shooting or killing children at a school. đ
Do you really believe gun shop owners and gun dealers are qualified to make a medical or psychological assessments of a potential buyers? Are you really this stupid?
Ah see that's the one of the reasons my initial reply talked about. Far to many judges, doctors, sherrifs, police chiefs do t labels people as "crazy" on their background che k is due to lawsuits. They don't want to be sued for infringing on someone's rights. So they don't press the issue. So the gun owner never knows that and the gun is sold.
A psychological assessment is not required to buy a gun in the US. Only a background check which looks at criminal convictions, domestic violence and immigration status.
Girl's Behavior 
Guy's Behavior 
Flirting 
Dating 
Relationships 
Fashion & Beauty 
Health & Fitness 
Marriage & Weddings 
Shopping & Gifts 
Technology & Internet 
Break Up & Divorce 
Education & Career 
Entertainment & Arts 
Family & Friends 
Food & Beverage 
Hobbies & Leisure 
Other 
Religion & Spirituality 
Society & Politics 
Sports 
Travel 
Trending & News 
