jrober38

I agree with this. There's a clear double standard when it's a white guy who does it. If it had been a Latino, Trump would be saying build the wall. If it had been a Muslin, Trump would be talking about his travel ban. When it's a white guy, it's just thoughts and prayers and then radio silence from the GOP until the news cycle changes.

Agreed. Banning things will never work. But making it harder to access weapons should be the goal. It shouldn't be an inconvenience for someone to take a course, get vetted and prove that they're actually a responsible gun owner. If the trade off is making people safer, how can that not be something everything is on board with? If you have to get licensed to drive a car, why should you not have to get licensed to own firearms?

Yeah, the status quo cannot be an option anymore. Something has to be done, even if it's on a trial basis for a couple years and then expires.

The young person we're describing is common all over the developed world, but that guy only commits mass murder in the United States and I'm convinced it's because the gun laws are too relaxed. Other factors play a part, and you will certainly not stop all of these atrocities, but I think eliminating the easy access to guns and ammo would go a long way in reducing the number of shootings that do happen.

I don't think they do, because if they did mass shootings would still happen all over the world. It's not like the US has a monopoly on mental illness. What they do have is a monopoly of developed countries allowing people with mental illness to access firearms. These type of people don't navigate the black market anywhere else in the developed world, which shoots down the idea that these people will continue to access guns. I think your average career criminal, who either deals drugs, steals, etc, can probably continue to access firearms, but I think the 24 year old loner with zero social skills will have hardly any luck doing so. If anything, I think the government would feast on finding these guys who want to buy guns online and compiling them into a database. The lone wolf shooters do everything online so I'd think that's where they'd try to find their weapons, and I think the FBI or whoever would feast on trapping them and stopping these shootings before they happen.

I don't view the perpetrators of most of these shootings as criminals in the sense you're describing. I understand they're breaking a law, but this is purely a mental illness thing in my eyes. For the most part, these are deranged, socially awkward white men in their 20s with minimal social skills. If you make something like this illegal, I think the odds of these guys navigating the black market to find a gun to kill a bunch of people with is slim to none. I think that's why you hardly see it in other countries. It's one thing to sell someone some weed because frankly who cares. I think it's another to sell some sketchy guy a gun illegally who fits the profile of a potential mass shooter. Just my opinion. Maybe he'll resort to another weapon, but whatever the alternate choice it'll be a hell of a lot less effective than an AR-15 or similar model.

Never once have I said guns should be banned. Own all the guns you want after you pass a proper test and extensive background check proving your capable of handling a weapon responsibly and are fit to own a gun without being a danger to anyone or yourself.

Good point. Pretty sure in one of my earlier posts I said I'd implement a program encouraging the public to turn in illegal weapons or give info on who has them. Something like $500 per handgun and $1000 per assault rifle. I'm not trying to cherry pick anything. My position is very consistent in that guns need to be harder to access. If you have to get a license to drive a car, you should get a license to buy a gun showing you understand the laws around ownership and have demonstrated proper gun safety techniques to experienced gun operators.

I think this is a cop out. There are cultural issues all over the world. In the globalized world, everyone has extreme politics, everyone has immigrants, and everyone has a portion of the population who wants to hold onto the way things were. The main problem is that deranged individuals can walk into a store and legally buy semi automatic weapons and stockpiles of ammo without any deterrents. The Dayton shooter killed 9 and wounded 16 more in 30 seconds before he was killed. Even when there's a good guy with a gun, that's the type of carnage these weapons can inflict in a short time period.

Mass shootings happen other places from time to time. Often years apart in many developed countries. It happens in the US on almost a weekly basis.

Again, are there no criminals in Canada, Australia, Japan or Western Europe? Why are mass shootings just a thing that happens in America?

Does Canada and the rest of the developed world not have criminals? Why is it only the US that has mass shootings? And the Dayton shooter's weapon was perfectly legal. He ordered it off the internet from Texas through an Ohio gun supplier. Totally legal. The US has the most guns per capita in the world and has by far the most mass shootings. Guns may not be the problem, but having such easy access to them without any meaningful oversight certainly is a problem.

Doing nothing obviously isn't the solution. Numerous developed countries around the world have strict gun laws and mass shootings hardly ever happen in those places. Banning guns isn't at all what I'm talking about, but having some sort of licensing system where you have to pass a course to buy basic firearms (shotguns, bolt action rifles, semi auto hunting rifles with limited magazine capacities) is a start. People shouldn't just be treated like they're responsible gun owners until they can actually prove it, the same way you can't drive a car until you pass an exam. I live in Canada, but I own four firearms. Two 12 gauge shotguns for waterfowl hunting, a .300 WSM deer rifle, and a .22. To get those guns I had to pass a test and get licensed, and I have to renew my license every couple years for a small cost. I had to undergo a 5 day course with an experienced gun range instructor, and then I had to pass a test where I had to pass a written exam and pass a practical exam that demonstrated basic gun safety. Then you have to apply, and provide numerous references, and if you're married or in a recent relationship, your current/previous partner has to be notified that you want to be able to buy weapons. If I wanted to own a handgun, or AR-15 style rifle, I could do that (I have zero interest), but I'd have to pass a more vigorous test and apply for a restricted firearms license. I know a few people who have one, and they can essentially only use their weapons at gun ranges, but the system is designed to keep high powered semi auto rifles and handguns out of the hands of people who shouldn't have them. In Canada mass shootings aren't a thing. We've had a few over the past 30 years, but I live my life without any fear whatsoever that bad guys with guns are going to harm me or my family. I own multiple weapons, and have never felt inconvenienced by the system. If anything it's positive to know your Average Joe can't walk into a sporting goods store and load up on guns and ammo. I think the fix would be relatively easy. Create a Federal Licensing System where gun owners have to show a knowledge of gun rules, and show they can safely handle a firearm in a variety of situations. Make "responsible gun owners" prove their competence as gun owners, and require extensive background checks on people who want to buy weapons, with a cooling off period (when you buy a gun, make it Federal Law that the purchaser can't take possession of the weapon for... 48 hours). Additionally mandate restrictions on the number of shells/bullets a weapon can hold under a basic license and extend that number for people who pass the additional qualifications to own "restricted weapons". Register weapons to a license plate, so that when a police officer pulls someone over, they know whether someone may have a gun in the vehicle and educate police on how to approach those situations. Those changes won't eliminate mass shootings, but they'll reduce them and the cost and inconvenience will be minimal on responsible gun owners. Make the possession of unlicensed firearms a Federal Crime with a minimum sentence and encourage the public to turn in people with cash rewards for people who carry illegal weapons. Over time gun violence will go down, as it has all over the rest of the developed world. Something has to be done. The status quo can no longer be considered an option in my eyes.

I think that's rarely the case in these situations, although I do agree that could happen. In most of these situations, the mass shooters stock pile their weapons immediately leading up to their mass shooting. The system needs to be improved. There are so many easy fixes that would eliminate many of these shootings.

Politics of the individual aside, the fact that people with such severe mental illness can buy such high powered weapons is mind boggling.

I imagine the same thing would happen with any Democrat President if they didn't hold both the house and senate. Trump made no effort to include them his first two years because he didn't need them then. No Democrat is going to try and win the party's nomination campaigning on wanting to compromise with Republicans. That would be political suicide at this level.

Neither party has any interest in working across the aisle.

Not 100% sure. One of my friends blew out his ACL last year though, and moved up the cue by being willing to do it on evenings or weekends, and I think he was called in for like 5 am on a Sunday. I think it's possible in some locations, just can't remember where he went.

I don't think they limit MRIs. The wait times have improved over the past 15 years. I think they just have a really rigid system where the people who are a priority get taken care of and the ones who aren't have to wait a really long time.

I disagree. Bernie is never going to drop out. He's too idealistic and will want his ideas to form where the party goes, even if he's not the nominee. Also the field will shrink considerably by their next debate in September when it will become much harder to qualify for the debate. Based on current polling, only 8 candidates would currently qualify for the next debate.

Canadian Health Care is quite good. In Ontario, if you're sick, you go to a Doctor, show your OHIP card, and they treat you. No paperwork, no deductibles, no worrying about anything. I've also been able to pick multiple family doctors of my choosing throughout my life. My wife and I just had our second child. Countless appointments, exams, ultrasounds, blood work, two days at the hospital when the baby was delivered, and when you're done, you just walk out of the hospital, again with zero paperwork, zero bills, zero deducible, etc. Cancer treatments are also quite good as our system pours huge amounts of money into Cancer Research. Pretty much anything where your life is imminent danger, you'll be treated with very high quality care very quickly. The difference, as I see it, between Canadian Health Care and American Health Care, is that Canadian Healthcare tries to prevent illness, because that's where the largest expenses are incurred on the system. Canadian Health Care tries to prevent you from getting sick in the first place, because ultimately they don't want you at the Hospital. On the flip side, American Health Care has minimal interest in that, because the Hospitals and Doctors ultimately profit greatly when someone walks in with a major illness. Pharma profits from you having to take meds for an extended period of time to treat some form of sickness. This difference of approach ultimately is why Canadians live longer lives than Americans.

I'm much more worried about wide spread drought and the mass migration of people that will move because of it than the melting of the polar ice caps.

It's not 12 years or we die. I think it was 12 years to get to net zero emissions or else we reach a point where it may be impossible to reverse a changing climate, because too much CO2 will have accumulated in the atmosphere, and the Earth will just keep warming on its own.

Today was the highest temperature ever recorded in Germany, Belgium, The Netherlands, and Paris, France. It's very concerning some people view climate change as a "hoax".

I'm not twisting anything. Mueller has said numerous times that the report couldn't suggest Trump was guilty because it's impossible to indict him while President.