TOTALLY GEEKED!

The only gun law I would propose is that if you own a gun that is not secured properly and that gun is used in a crime, or a suicide, or harms a child in an accident - you should be arrested and given a very very harsh penalty. All these "I had my gun on the kitchen table and my toddler shot herself" crimes need to stop. I know there are not that many but the ones that happen are often not prosecuted. The people who leaves guns unsecured are irresponsible and reckless and should be punished.

flan327 wrote:

---

huskerbb wrote:

---

flan327 wrote:

---

huskerbb wrote:

---

Lady Gaga Snerd wrote:

---

Well, he purchased his gun quite a bit longer prior to this incident so that wouldn't have changed anything in that regard. Most of the mass murders are very patient and calculating.

---

 I don't disagree.  I'm just saying it would prevent some such crimes.  most certainly not all.

---

 Preventing ANY murders is a step in the right direction.

flan

---

At what cost?  Banning all violence from TV would probably prevent just as many murders--but are we willing to sacrifice freedom of speech in that manner?  

---

 husker, I was agreeing with your statement about a longer waiting period.

flan

---

Oh, sorry.  I thought you were talking about the general tone of doing SOMETHING such as assault weapons bans or jlbear's yearly evaluations.   

And I've seen people go so far as saying that an intruder should not have been shot.

huskerbb wrote:

---

Mellow Momma wrote:

---

The only gun law I would propose is that if you own a gun that is not secured properly and that gun is used in a crime, or a suicide, or harms a child in an accident - you should be arrested and given a very very harsh penalty. All these "I had my gun on the kitchen table and my toddler shot herself" crimes need to stop. I know there are not that many but the ones that happen are often not prosecuted. The people who leaves guns unsecured are irresponsible and reckless and should be punished.

---

I might not disagree--but--I've seen it carried too far. 

 

I've seen it where people want to make you responsible if they BREAK INTO your house and steal your gun then you are still responsible if you didn't have the gun in a safe, or whatever.  That is nonsense.  A reasonable standard is a locked house.   

---

 I think someone who breaks into your house deserves whatever they get and should not have the right to sue you for anything. But someone who leaves a loaded gun where a child can get it should be thrown in jail, no matter how much they are "punishing themselves". 

Lady Gaga Snerd wrote:

---

flan327 wrote:

---

Maybe your imaginary Supernatural friends can help...

flan

---

 What????  Do you not go to Church flan?

---

It's a TV show.

flan 

We do need better mental health care. Insurance will pay for pills, surgery, etc but not counseling. Why? Counseling would be far less expensive. And, if you are put on medication for a mental health condition, I think there should be some component of counseling that is at least offered in conjunction with being put on meds for depression, anxiety, bipolar or whatever.

For addicts and substance abuse, there should be Involuntary and compelled treatment. If you want to drink yourself into oblivion at home, then fine. But, if there are any brushes with the law whatsoever, then that should trigger compulsory treatment. Addicts should not be allowed to walk out of rehab. They should be compelled to complete the term of treatment, even if you have to lock them down. They can't get better until the fog of addiction is cleared and then they can see how to help themselves.

For the crazy, paranoid, deludeds, whatever happened to the Paddy Wagon? We used to round them up and treat them. Now, I guess we prefer to see them living on streets in cardboard boxes.

Lady Gaga Snerd wrote:

---

We do need better mental health care. Insurance will pay for pills, surgery, etc but not counseling. Why? Counseling would be far less expensive. And, if you are put on medication for a mental health condition, I think there should be some component of counseling that is at least offered in conjunction with being put on meds for depression, anxiety, bipolar or whatever.

For addicts and substance abuse, there should be Involuntary and compelled treatment. If you want to drink yourself into oblivion at home, then fine. But, if there are any brushes with the law whatsoever, then that should trigger compulsory treatment. Addicts should not be allowed to walk out of rehab. They should be compelled to complete the term of treatment, even if you have to lock them down. They can't get better until the fog of addiction is cleared and then they can see how to help themselves.

For the crazy, paranoid, deludeds, whatever happened to the Paddy Wagon? We used to round them up and treat them. Now, I guess we prefer to see them living on streets in cardboard boxes.

---

 When you are on meds like that, you have to see a counselor or your meds won't be refilled. Just like seeing a doc to get your BC filled. You don't just get a Rx and then "see you next year". You get a Rx, but you can't get refills unless you are under the care of a doc who is seeing you regularly. Psych meds are not just passed out like tic tacs. 

The problem becomes, patients cancel their counseling appointments because they feel better. Life gets in the way. Then the doc has to make a choice - refill a Rx that could keep the patient safe, or demand they make an appointment and risk them going off the meds, possibly for good. 

Ohfour wrote:

---

Really? Im on anti anxiety meds. I see my dr once a year, no counseling required. I dont actually know anyine on meds that sees a counselor...

---

 Well, DD's docs won't just refill her meds without seeing her. Neither of her docs in 3 different states would do it without seeing her. I actually don't know anyone on meds that DOESN'T see a counselor. 

flan327 wrote:

---

Ohfour wrote:

---

Really? Im on anti anxiety meds. I see my dr once a year, no counseling required. I dont actually know anyine on meds that sees a counselor...

---

 Is it a family doctor or specialist?

flan

---

 Family dr. G and I both go to the same dr...

Ohfour wrote:

---

flan327 wrote:

---

Ohfour wrote:

---

Really? Im on anti anxiety meds. I see my dr once a year, no counseling required. I dont actually know anyine on meds that sees a counselor...

---

 Is it a family doctor or specialist?

flan

---

 Family dr. G and I both go to the same dr...

---

 I suspect that is the difference.

I see a psych nurse once a year for my med check, as long as I'm feeling okay. If I start to slip, then I'll see her more often & there would likely be an increase in the amount of med I take.

flan

I didnt see anything in that article requiring counseling. Yes, there should be a database so people cant dr shop.

Ill believe it when i see it. Hell, i have to make an appt a year in advance. You think doctors are going to see every patient every month? Thats the most retarded thing ive ever heard. Not to mention that my insurance wont even fill 30 day rx. We have to pay out of pocket if we get a refillable script and dont fill a 90 day supply at a time..

A lot of docs won't give more than a few months' supply of meds like this without evaluating the patient to ensure they are still stable and following whatever program they are on. It can be done.

Everyone is quick to say the "mentally ill" shouldn't qualify. And people back that up by saying if you've taken medicine then you don't need a gun. What if you went through a really hard time in your life, let's say both your parents died in a tragic car accident, and you were on meds to cope but now you're not. Should you be penalized? And what about people who take meds and are just fine. Should they be ineligible?

Nobody Just Nobody wrote:

---

Everyone is quick to say the "mentally ill" shouldn't qualify. And people back that up by saying if you've taken medicine then you don't need a gun. What if you went through a really hard time in your life, let's say both your parents died in a tragic car accident, and you were on meds to cope but now you're not. Should you be penalized? And what about people who take meds and are just fine. Should they be ineligible?

---

 That's NOT mentally ill.  So, obviously, better diagnostic coding is needed.

And I agree with what husker says. What if you have a crime on your record but it's been 20 years and you've never done anything else? Do you pay for the rest of your life for one screw up?

People will stop getting help to not be stigmatized.

Lady Gaga Snerd wrote:

---

Well that is really what i am asking the " take the guns away" crowd to define Exactly.

---

Me, too.  And I just don't think it is practical to have the MILLIONS of people who own guns have to get some evaluation to weed out a few.  That's ridiculous.  

Lawyerlady wrote:

---

Nobody Just Nobody wrote:

---

Everyone is quick to say the "mentally ill" shouldn't qualify. And people back that up by saying if you've taken medicine then you don't need a gun. What if you went through a really hard time in your life, let's say both your parents died in a tragic car accident, and you were on meds to cope but now you're not. Should you be penalized? And what about people who take meds and are just fine. Should they be ineligible?

---

 That's NOT mentally ill.  So, obviously, better diagnostic coding is needed.

---

How would it be defined then LL?  That is where it would become very tricky.  Are you "mentally ill" if you have insomnia?  Are you "mentally ill" if you have anxiety or depression?  Are you "mentally ill" if you went and had marriage counseling?  I mean, that could indicate that you "cant' get along". 

But, the problem with the Mental Health system is that they are not very good at predicting who is going to be violent.  They don't have some crystal ball over who is going to snap.  And, even though these mass shootings are a terrible tragedy, they are still so rare compared to the general population at large that nobody can predict who is going to do it.  However, we do see that it is Men who are doing these mass shootings for the most part so I think it is pretty safe to let us gals keep our guns!  lol