Trump says Texas shooting due to 'mental health problem,' not a gun issue

[Stargeezr]

Another nut job who was military.  Trained to handle guns, then uses a gun to kill  others.    Nothing will change in the USA in our lifetimes except more needless killings, because even the President does not want to change  any gun  law.

 

Geezer

[brucec64]

9 hours ago, hansnl said:

In fact, two guys probably stopped the killer doing more havoc, hunted him down, probably killed him. After some time the police arrived.

Yes the two guys owned guns and used them.

But only after 27 people were already killed. So, the "good guy" with a gun argument does not really hold. Now, if neither of them had a gun...

[Carib]

Naaaah it was not a gun issue. He used marshmallows. 

 

Too bad most americans cannot read other languages, they would see that the world looks at the usa in bewilderment concerning this issue. Basically where it comes down to is: How stupid can you be and how many more have to needlessly die before "something" will be done.

[pegman]

6 hours ago, Peterw42 said:

 

I thought the same, is Trump qualified to give mental-illness assessments ?

One could argue that all the terrorists have been mentally ill, therefore no point in blocking people from certain countries or religions because its a mental health issue.

Maybe it's a case of it taking a mental case to know one.

[tomacht8]

Everybody with mental health problems can buy a gun in the US.  So what is the problem here.

 

[yardrunner]

13 hours ago, darksidedog said:

If the guy had mental health problems, why then was he still allowed to purchase guns?

because their is no effective gun control law and that Donald is why the gun control regulations are to blame

[brucec64]

7 hours ago, 67Vagabond said:

Typical emotioal commentary here that adds nothing to the story.    I can read a story about rice production in Isaan and see a Trump is a a nutcase comment below it.  

 

Roughly 39% of American households have a gun comprising about 80 million Americans out of 320 million or so population.      Unfortunately a handful of nutcases go off every year making the problem seem much worse.   

 

More gun laws only hurt the law abiding citizens.    Something tells me this guy would have driven a vehicle into a crowd if he didn’t have a gun as we saw in New York recently.        The guy in Las Vegas rigged a car with explosives.  Someone who plans to hurt others will always find a way.    Look at what’s going on in Europe.     Tiny Sweden had more terror attacks last month than the US has had in a year. 

 

Someone brought up the Netherlands.  America is on par with other European nations when broken down by race and ethnicity.  But it’s unpleasant for some when facts are brought up.  

 

 Gun confiscation would only open up a black market.    America has lengthy border with Mexico where drugs, guns and humans flow freely across the border. 

This is a misleading argument. In nearly every one of these mass shootings, all guns were legally obtained. Also, almost all illegal guns started off as legal guns. Usually, they are bought from gun shows as straw purchases and then sold on the black market. I'm sure there is a strong correlation between the number of legal guns in a country and the number of illegal guns. Decrease availability of legal guns, and there will be a decrease in illegal guns, and overall gun deaths. But, "you will have to take my gun from my cold, dead hands", no matter how many people are slaughtered on a now weekly basis, and then we will be forced to listed to these same old, tired, shameful arguments to justify the slaughter.

[EvenSteven]

A mental health issue and not a gun problem?  Ok, then let's start handing out guns to the mentally ill.  That shouldn't create problems, right?  Better yet, let's give them fully automatic weapons!

[selftaopath]

By his personal experience Mental Illness is something 45 is an expert about. Here's on letter stated by MH professionals; among other "duty to warn" admissions :

https://www.alternet.org/trump-trauma/open-letter-donald-trump-and-supporters-trauma 

[Jingthing]

Here we go again ...

Clearly once a great power. 

Now crippled to solve basic problems. 

Mental health problem indeed.

 

Quote

 

The Thirteen Stories You'll Read After Every Mass Shooting

 

 

http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slatest/2017/11/06/thirteen_stories_you_see_after_every_mass_shooting.html

[Keesters]

USA has a 'mental health problem' letting so many people have guns.

[Araiwah]

A mental health issue as in a government that will never admit to a gun problem or toughen up the gun laws is the one I'm going with.

[selftaopath]

17 hours ago, darksidedog said:

If the guy had mental health problems, why then was he still allowed to purchase guns?

Maybe because in America someone with "mental health problems" aka mental illness can become POTUS. 

[selftaopath]

16 hours ago, juice777 said:

Trump said that based on preliminary reports, the gunman was "a very deranged individual, a lot of problems

 

No s*** sherlock

 

If a physicist was writing about gun control it would be this.

 

More guns = more shotings =more shotings = more deaths

 

Why can't the Americans who love there guns just tell the Truth. We love guns that's it we love them. We value our guns over other people life's.

 

 

 

Sent from my SM-G900F using Tapatalk

 

 

 

 

When does this charlatan read reports? Do they read reports a/b climate change or the "duty to warn" reports? 45 and his regime are not interested in Truth/facts/rule of law/democracy. They are not pro America.

[selftaopath]

15 hours ago, LomSak27 said:

Another shooting and no good guys with guns around, shocking. This is getting to be a broken record.

Maybe reducing guns in US society is the way forward, unless NRA members can stop talking the talk and actually walk the walk.

NRA = No Rational Adults.

[zaphod reborn]

15 hours ago, mikebike said:

So he either lied on the background check, or he slipped through the cracks caused by vagaries between military and civilian language and terminology.   Or both. 

CNN is reporting that DOD failed to enter his conviction into the NICS database.  There was a two-count serious domestic violence conviction involving firearms and life-threatening injuries to his child.  He served 1 year in the stockade for the conviction, and that was after a plea deal.  This guy never should have had access to guns.  Bottom line is that Trump is wrong and this is about guns.  There needs to be review of existing gun laws to close loopholes and enforcement lapses.  

[Scott]

Off-topic post and reply removed.

 

[selftaopath]

13 hours ago, Emster23 said:

It wasn't that long ago that Republicans and NRA shot down reasonable restriction on gun ownership by mentally ill. This is squarely on them, not Americans in general who do support reasonable gun control

How many individuals remember/know that the Republican National Convention DID NOT allow firearms in the convention center. lol lol lol lol What a total bunch of corrupt hypocrites. 

[selftaopath]

6 hours ago, yardrunner said:

because their is no effective gun control law and that Donald is why the gun control regulations are to blame

Maybe dimwit don will suggest the armaments manufacturers sell hand grenades.

 

I suspect only when congress experiences mass killing in their masses will they put America first over party/money. 

[mike324]

Thing is that you still can get guns without any background checks via purchases online and at gun fairs. Obama tried to close this loophole, but the NRA and Reps were up in arms about it.... One of the ways many guns ended up being illegal is through these legal loopholes.

[juice777]

I found out that 1 in 4 have some sort of mental health issues. There is about 360 million people in the USA so that's at least 90 million with some sort of Mental health issues . And I am going to go out on a limb here and say that the there more then 1 out of 4 in America compared to the rest of the the world. Thats just from reading about the over prescription of anti-depressants and opioids based painkillers Etc. No Web sites could give a exact number of how many people own guns in America. But I think it said about half of all Americans live in a house where someone owns a gun. So according to my rough calculations that's 90 million Americans with some sort mental Health Issues who live in a house with a gun. So how many have severe mental health issues and live in a the house with a gun. And how many of them actually is the person in the house who owns the gun. Got to be a few million at least.

Sent from my SM-G900F using Tapatalk

[ballpoint]

14 minutes ago, selftaopath said:

Maybe dimwit don will suggest the armaments manufacturers sell hand grenades.

 

I suspect only when congress experiences mass killing in their masses will they put America first over party/money. 

Well, if criminals can get hold of hand grenades then it's only fair that decent, law abiding citizens should have access to them too.

 

Or, taking it further:

 

[hdkane]

19 hours ago, darksidedog said:

If the guy had mental health problems, why then was he still allowed to purchase guns?

quite some time ago, i examined some data from the us govt regarding gun ownership and violence...surprisingly, the least amount of recorded violence was in locales that had the highest percentage and frequency of legal gun ownership...there are 3 ways to purchase a weapon in the usa...submit paperwork and documentation to a licensed gun dealer (this is the process that screens applicants for red flags in their past behavior...the process can be immediate or take days)...purchase a gun from an individual (as an individual, you have the right to transfer or sell your legally obtained property without interference by the govt, so no background check is needed and minimal records are retained)...buy a gun illegally from a seller without any paperwork...the problem is that the number of illegal weapons is about equal to the number of legally obtained weapons...so the situation evolves such that the most violent places in the usa are those with the lowest rates of legal gun ownership...effectively, the govt has made a segment of the citizenry ready victims...gun control advocates forget the simple fact that the best way to protect yourself (other than reasonable prevention) is to own a gun...if you live in a liberal area of the usa with strong gun control, you'd be foolish not to obtain a gun yourself if you can, because there is a very good chance that predators will have them...in a more conservative state, with more legal gun ownership, you'd be much safer...as the saying goes, "you don't find any mass shootings at a gun show" 

 

the issue of mental illness is also pretty confusing, because a huge swath of the citizenry claim a mental illness simply for the benefits that may obtained from the govt...a huge percentage, probably more than 30% of claimants for social security based on illness, are malingering...while psychologists like to think that about 2% of the population has mental wellness issues, because of financial incentives offered by the govt, about 10% of people now claim a mental illness of some degree...in other words, politicians risk alienating a large number of voters if they restrict their rights...and of course, how do you define mental illness...should someone with a learning disability lose the right to gun ownership?

 

i think that liberals tend to veer the discussion toward gun laws because it takes the scrutiny away from the individual and groups...if you examine the individual/groups, then you would find that whites and asians are the targets of violence more often (more than 20 times) than blacks...so rather than saying "we have a problem with black violence", it's more palatable to believe that "we have a general problem with gun violence"...

 

as a point of reference or comparison, in thailand the discussion might proceed that "we have a problem with gun violence" ...or "we have a problem with thai men"...because most of the gun violence here involves thai men as predators/offenders...where would you put society's resources?  stopping people from buying guns in thailand (they are already so expensive to obtain legally that most people cannot purchase them)...or trying to adjust the fragile thai male ego?  keep in mind that any solution doesn't address the real urgent issue...that illegal weapons are already plentiful.

[Catoni]

7 hours ago, brucec64 said:

But only after 27 people were already killed. So, the "good guy" with a gun argument does not really hold. Now, if neither of them had a gun...

       What do you think would have happened if the citizen did not open fire on him making him drop his weapon and run for his vehicle? 

  You say..... "Now, if neither of them had a gun..."      Yeah.... and if only money grew on trees and I had a gold mine in my backyard....and far leftwing and far rightwing dictators did not exist..  everything would be okay with the world...  It's nice to dream unrealistic dreams isn't it? 

     If he didn't have a gun.... he could just ram his vehicle into them as they come out the church.... or build a small bomb and throw it inside the church..

[brucec64]

       What do you think would have happened if the citizen did not open fire on him making him drop his weapon and run for his vehicle? 
  You say..... "Now, if neither of them had a gun..."      Yeah.... and if only money grew on trees and I had a gold mine in my backyard....and far leftwing and far rightwing dictators did not exist..  everything would be okay with the world...  It's nice to dream unrealistic dreams isn't it? 
     If he didn't have a gun.... he could just ram his vehicle into them as they come out the church.... or build a small bomb and throw it inside the church..

Both of which would have happened before a "good guy" with a gun would have stopped anything. But keep up rationalizing that your gun madness is anything positive. How many more children have to die before you can move away from your indefensible position?

Sent from my SM-N950U1 using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

[brucec64]

quite some time ago, i examined some data from the us govt regarding gun ownership and violence...surprisingly, the least amount of recorded violence was in locales that had the highest percentage and frequency of legal gun ownership...there are 3 ways to purchase a weapon in the usa...submit paperwork and documentation to a licensed gun dealer (this is the process that screens applicants for red flags in their past behavior...the process can be immediate or take days)...purchase a gun from an individual (as an individual, you have the right to transfer or sell your legally obtained property without interference by the govt, so no background check is needed and minimal records are retained)...buy a gun illegally from a seller without any paperwork...the problem is that the number of illegal weapons is about equal to the number of legally obtained weapons...so the situation evolves such that the most violent places in the usa are those with the lowest rates of legal gun ownership...effectively, the govt has made a segment of the citizenry ready victims...gun control advocates forget the simple fact that the best way to protect yourself (other than reasonable prevention) is to own a gun...if you live in a liberal area of the usa with strong gun control, you'd be foolish not to obtain a gun yourself if you can, because there is a very good chance that predators will have them...in a more conservative state, with more legal gun ownership, you'd be much safer...as the saying goes, "you don't find any mass shootings at a gun show" 
 
the issue of mental illness is also pretty confusing, because a huge swath of the citizenry claim a mental illness simply for the benefits that may obtained from the govt...a huge percentage, probably more than 30% of claimants for social security based on illness, are malingering...while psychologists like to think that about 2% of the population has mental wellness issues, because of financial incentives offered by the govt, about 10% of people now claim a mental illness of some degree...in other words, politicians risk alienating a large number of voters if they restrict their rights...and of course, how do you define mental illness...should someone with a learning disability lose the right to gun ownership?
 
i think that liberals tend to veer the discussion toward gun laws because it takes the scrutiny away from the individual and groups...if you examine the individual/groups, then you would find that whites and asians are the targets of violence more often (more than 20 times) than blacks...so rather than saying "we have a problem with black violence", it's more palatable to believe that "we have a general problem with gun violence"...
 
as a point of reference or comparison, in thailand the discussion might proceed that "we have a problem with gun violence" ...or "we have a problem with thai men"...because most of the gun violence here involves thai men as predators/offenders...where would you put society's resources?  stopping people from buying guns in thailand (they are already so expensive to obtain legally that most people cannot purchase them)...or trying to adjust the fragile thai male ego?  keep in mind that any solution doesn't address the real urgent issue...that illegal weapons are already plentiful.

congratulations. you have bundled every nonsensical pro gun fallacy into one post. do you consider these almost weekly slaughters normal? because the rest of the world does not.

Sent from my SM-N950U1 using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

[Krataiboy]

More words of wisdom from the nutter with his finger on the nuclear red button.

 

God blessxxx help America.

Edited November 7, 2017 by Krataiboy

[juice777]

       What do you think would have happened if the citizen did not open fire on him making him drop his weapon and run for his vehicle? 
  You say..... "Now, if neither of them had a gun..."      Yeah.... and if only money grew on trees and I had a gold mine in my backyard....and far leftwing and far rightwing dictators did not exist..  everything would be okay with the world...  It's nice to dream unrealistic dreams isn't it? 
     If he didn't have a gun.... he could just ram his vehicle into them as they come out the church.... or build a small bomb and throw it inside the church..

27 people dead before they chased him away did he run out of bullets first?

Sorry I am not totally convinced they saved anyone life's.

As for getting a vehicle and running people down well that's a new worry. But could that guy form Las Vegas have killed over 50 people like that.That seems like a new worry. And America has had mass shooting for as long as I can remember. Could all those depressed confused teenagers get it together to get build a bomb I doubt it. Is there a massive industry based around bombs.Can I buy bomb magazines? Can I buy bombs in the local supermarket with my cornflakes. Can I drink a few beers and go to the local bomb range? What utter nonsense.


It doesn't matter what excuses you come up with. I am sure people life's have been saved my legal gun ownership. But I doubley sure that more life's have been lost because of legal gun ownership. And that's the simple truth. I said before I will say it again.

More guns mean more shotings more shotings mean more deaths.

Sent from my SM-G900F using Tapatalk

[Catoni]

24 minutes ago, brucec64 said:

Both of which would have happened before a "good guy" with a gun would have stopped anything. But keep up rationalizing that your gun madness is anything positive. How many more children have to die before you can move away from your indefensible position?

Sent from my SM-N950U1 using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app
 

    There are about 500 million privately owned firearms in the U.S.    I'm willing to hear your solution.  

 

Do you make a blanket law outlawing all private ownership of guns?   Okay.....  so the law-abiding people hand their guns in, and the criminals get to keep their guns.... (they are criminals... they don't give a damn about what laws you make.)

      Or do you propose black clad SWAT teams go door to door all over the country confiscating guns?  Will that work?  

  What do you do with otherwise law-abiding citizens that don't go along with your dictate?   Put them in "Re-education/Labor Camps" ? ? 

[brucec64]

    There are about 500 million privately owned firearms in the U.S.    I'm willing to hear your solution.  
 
Do you make a blanket law outlawing all private ownership of guns?   Okay.....  so the law-abiding people hand their guns in, and the criminals get to keep their guns.... (they are criminals... they don't give a damn about what laws you make.)
      Or do you propose black clad SWAT teams go door to door all over the country confiscating guns?  Will that work?  
  What do you do with otherwise law-abiding citizens that don't go along with your dictate?   Put them in "Re-education/Labor Camps" ? ? 

it worked in Australia.

Sent from my SM-N950U1 using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app