this post was submitted on 26 Oct 2023
316 points (84.1% liked)

4chan

4241 readers
27 users here now

Greentexts, memes, everything 4chan.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Zoomboingding@lemmy.world 187 points 1 year ago (4 children)

They missed the part where he has a history of mental health issues and had heard voices telling him to kill people. He should have lost access to his guns.

[–] Cheems@lemmy.world 83 points 1 year ago (6 children)

Which is something gun control typically aims at

[–] Anyolduser@lemmynsfw.com 30 points 1 year ago (2 children)

It's something current federal law does and has done for decades. A person who is involuntarily committed to undergo inpatient treatment at a mental health facility by a court of law is classified as a "prohibited person" and cannot own or have access to firearms.

Source link: https://www.atf.gov/firearms/qa/are-there-persons-who-cannot-legally-receive-or-possess-firearms-andor-ammunition

The catch is that a person cannot be deprived of any right without due process - typically a literal day in court. Therefore an individual with mental health problems that have not caused enough trouble to land them in front of a judge can't be declared a prohibited person.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] skulkingaround@sh.itjust.works 16 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Sorry bud, best I can do is ban suppressors and shotgun pistol grips. At least they won't be able to shoot you ergonomically.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)
[–] CADmonkey@lemmy.world 20 points 1 year ago (3 children)

Dude was literally in a mental hospital for a while, wasn't he?

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] Grimy@lemmy.world 12 points 1 year ago (17 children)

Or you know, we could only give guns to people that really really need them instead of making a hobby out of it

[–] JustZ@lemmy.world 11 points 1 year ago

This is how it was for the first one hundred years of American existence. "Purposive open carry." Only lawless shit holes had what conservatives want today, habitual open carry. If it was a place with law, open carry without an obvious purpose was a breach of peace.

load more comments (16 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] CarbonIceDragon@pawb.social 84 points 1 year ago

I mean, a law doesn't have to stop every criminal to be useful, if gun control causes any significant reduction in shooting deaths, it will have saved lives, even if some shootings still occur.

[–] Caligvla@lemmy.dbzer0.com 71 points 1 year ago (7 children)

Well, might as well allow everyone to drive cars unrestrictedly since some crazy fucks every once in a while decide to DUI or drive without a license. Nothing can go wrong, right?

load more comments (7 replies)
[–] PP_BOY_@lemmy.world 48 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

Gun control arguments almost always include things like mental health care and annual health reviews to prevent things like this

Edit: had a bit of a stroke in the middle of that sentence

[–] maryjayjay@lemmy.world 5 points 1 year ago

You're hinting at universal healthcare, and that's socialism, boy!

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] phoneymouse@lemmy.world 48 points 1 year ago (6 children)

If gun control won’t do anything then we need gun bans. No more controlling them, take them all away.

[–] echodot@feddit.uk 17 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (7 children)

If the US wasn't so hung up on the Constitution guns would have already been banned. They give basically anyone extreme executive power, none should have that.

In countries where gun control laws do exist even military personnel are not allowed weapons outside of assigned duties. Partially because anyone can go mad, like this, but mostly because administratively it's easier to just say no one should have a gun then to try and work out who has a legitimate exception.

load more comments (7 replies)
load more comments (5 replies)
[–] bl4ckblooc@lemmy.world 39 points 1 year ago (1 children)

What I’m getting from this post is that the only way for gun control to work is a complete gun ban. I don’t think that’s what the user was wanting

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] gmtom@lemmy.world 39 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Why is weapons grade plutonium restricted when the president can still go crazy?

[–] sic_1@feddit.de 20 points 1 year ago (1 children)

While I agree that gun control is a good thing I strongly doubt it will eliminate the issue as it's only addressing the symptom, not the cause. Free healthcare, fair education and equal rights to achieve something in life are far more important triggers. Of course those require much deeper adjustments to the system and society as a whole.

[–] Lt_Cdr_Data@discuss.tchncs.de 23 points 1 year ago (1 children)
[–] nutsack@lemmy.world 6 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I'm taking a shit what do you think about that

[–] Nfamwap@lemmy.world 10 points 1 year ago (1 children)

It's more insightful than OPs take

[–] nutsack@lemmy.world 5 points 1 year ago

thanks I appreciate it

[–] blue_zephyr@lemmy.world 21 points 1 year ago (1 children)

This guy was previously admitted by a mental hospital and was up for mental evaluation. Proper gun control would mean he wouldn't have been able to buy that rifle.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Hadriscus@lemm.ee 17 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (15 children)

It's no gun control (read=the absence of gun control), it's mental health, it's poverty. It's not taking care of your citizens.

[–] Kedly@lemm.ee 7 points 1 year ago (1 children)

The states is fucked, but if you think other countries dont have problems with mental health and poverty, but maybe 1 mass shooting in the last 50 years, then I dont know what to tell you

[–] Hadriscus@lemm.ee 6 points 1 year ago (6 children)
load more comments (6 replies)
[–] echodot@feddit.uk 5 points 1 year ago

But that's the American dream isn't it.

Become hyper wealthy and then abuse everyone underneath you. No one in power wants there to be a social ladder, because if there was a social ladder people might try and climb it.

load more comments (13 replies)
[–] corsicanguppy@lemmy.ca 6 points 1 year ago

What was he doing with a usable bolt in that weapon? We typically had to sign them out for the one day a week we needed them on-base. And there's No Way a reservist would have something like that.

[–] 2nsfw2furious@lemmynsfw.com 6 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Exactly why we need to address the issues that are driving people to the edge instead of just banning stuff like that'll work.

[–] Nurse_Robot@lemmy.world 39 points 1 year ago (7 children)

Banning stuff.. like guns? Like every other developed nation has done? Which works?

[–] Sir_Kevin@lemmy.dbzer0.com 11 points 1 year ago (10 children)

Many countries have not banned guns but instead have proper mental health.

[–] T00l_shed@lemmy.world 5 points 1 year ago

Canada has neither, but does have more strict laws regarding guns. Could be stricter I some ways though.

load more comments (9 replies)
load more comments (6 replies)
[–] shalafi@lemmy.world 22 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

I'm 52. Guess what we had and didn't have when I was a kid.

  • Plenty of guns, and even laxer laws (excepting conceal carry!).

  • No mass shootings.

To be fair, I should include the mental health thing. I remember watching MTv as a teen in the late 80's and they made a big thing of homelessness. I figured it had always been an issue but people ignored it and, as a kid, I was just then finding out.

Yeah, turns out we shut down our mental health centers. Probably a correlation there.

[–] Bipta@kbin.social 28 points 1 year ago

Let's not forget crushing the middle and lower classes, taking away things for them to live for. That doesn't cause you to hear voices but it certainly can't help.

[–] citrixworkkbin@kbin.social 9 points 1 year ago (3 children)

you could have said less mass shootings
No mass shootings though, that's not true at all

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›