BoatBanter.com - Trump Seals His Fate

On 10/3/2015 9:58 AM, wrote:
On Sat, 3 Oct 2015 02:05:58 -0400, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

On 10/3/2015 12:59 AM, wrote:
On Fri, 2 Oct 2015 18:52:34 -0400, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

On 10/2/2015 6:34 PM, John H. wrote:
On Fri, 2 Oct 2015 17:50:38 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" wrote:

On 10/2/2015 1:24 PM, wrote:
On Fri, 2 Oct 2015 09:23:20 -0400, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

I agree and the criminal element of our society will always find a way
to get a gun and ammo. However, these mass shootings in schools are not
being done by people with criminal records. They are young for the most
part and obviously suffer from some anti-societal mental health issues.
Making it harder for them to get the supplies (ammo) they need may
help reduce the number of horrific mass shootings, especially in schools.

If the person does not have a record, how do you prevent them from
buying a gun or ammo?

Apparently you missed *all* of the criteria I proposed that leads to a
license. Lack of a criminal record is only one. A doctor's sign-off
as to physical and mental good health is another. The medical details
do not need to be divulged but, for example, if the doc knows the
applicant has a history of drug abuse or is under treatment/medication
for severe depression or whatever, he would just disqualify the applicant.

How would your regular doctor know you were under treatment for severe depression or
whatever? A psychiatrist can't divulge that info without some pretty stringent
requirements.

All your medical records (and I assume mental health records, if any)
are electronically stored and available for authorized people (docs) to
download and read.

Last time I visited my primary care physician he asked about the results
of a stress test I had taken two year prior. Before I could answer he
pulled up the results on his laptop in the exam office.

You had to sign a HIPPA authorization or he was breaking the law. It
was probably in that 15 page packet you fill out every time you go to
a different doctor.
How many people would sign a HIPPA release if they knew the
information was going to be a public record, as virtually any
government document is. (with the Snowden factor, they are all public
records)
The question becomes what ELSE would be affected by this?
Jobs, housing, credit?

If I was an employer I might be reluctant to hire a guy who the
government says can't be trusted with a gun because of mental
problems. I certainly wouldn't rent them an apartment. Too hard to
clean up the blood when they snap.

I have to admit that it's amazing to see how many reasons there
are that you "can't" do something with very little consideration
as to how maybe you "can". If enough thought and energy were
given to solving the problem as given to the reasons why you can't,
maybe some progress could be made.

Perhaps I just live in the real world where crazy people are a
protected class and you can't discriminate against them until they
kill someone. Then they still have more rights than they deserve. You
only have to look at the Holmes trial to see that.
This sombitch may never adequately pay for his crime.
The guy who shot Reagan is another example.

Maybe part of the solution is an honest debate and then action on
many issues that face our society, even if not directly related to
crimes conducted with guns. I know it's a very complex problem
and, short of banning private gun ownership completely, there is no
easy answer or one that will eliminate the possibility of some mentally
disturbed person going off the deep end. However, the frequency of
these occurrences (mass shootings) is very disturbing. To "get used
to it" as BOA advocates just doesn't make sense.