Background Check Fails in Senate

[The dane]

[lnrw]

[Indy]

[Professor]

Meh. Should have probably passed. But, background checks would have done little to nothing to stop any of the recent events. The Newton guy got his guns from a family member, right? I don't think he asked permission, just took them. How is a background check going to prevent that?

Like I said, this certainly wouldn't hurt to have passed. But, it also wouldn't have helped.

Face it, who shoots people? Criminals. They may be mentally deranged, or they may be sane. But, they are criminals. Making a new law won't prevent them from getting guns. What's a little B&E charge to steal a gun when you are planning on shooting up a school?

There are 2 kinds of people who shoot others. Sane people who are thinking somewhat rationally about it. You cannot prevent this type of crime by means being discussed now. No background check or assault weapon ban is going to prevent a gang banger from shooting a rival gang member, or a father from shooting his wife. Sorry.

Then there are the insane. These people are off their meds, or undiagnosed, and they think that a gun is the logical answer. Again, no background check or assault ban is going to stop them. But, correct mental health facilities and infrastructure WILL stop it (or stem it).

So, when you get mad that your government "hasn't done anything" to stop gun violence, be sure to direct that anger properly. Don't get mad because they didn't pass something that wouldn't have worked anyway. Get mad because they aren't even considering the things thta WOULD work.

[Indy]

This is yet another example of the all or nothing false choice.

Hey guess who else wasn't a criminal before they committed an atrocity? That list is endless, but let's start with the 19 9/11 hijackers.

Hey: you can't stop ALL terror attacks, so let's get rid of the security measures put in place after 9/11, right? Unless these laws would have prevented Columbine or Sandy Hook, then they're useless.



Speaking of criminals: yeah you're right, we can't stop all of them. So what we've done now is: make it easy for them. Or mentally ill people. Or--ta-da!--people on the terror watch list. Why fuss with a registered dealer when all you have to do is go online or to a gun show? Problem solved. For murderers.

Since when is a law's benefit erased by examples of those who won't follow it?

Back to the stoplight example...

[Aaron]

[lnrw]

The 19 9/11 hijackers were guilty of a crime before they committed the atrocities. Planning is a crime. Assocation, in their case was a crime.

So what law should be passed to cause criminals to obey the law?

[lnrw]

[Aaron]

[lnrw]