Mega-Thread: Gun Control Thread

[Charge me Doctor]

Lol a bar in south Carolina posted a sign saying no guns allowed then proceeds to call all gun owners douchebags well the had to shut down their Fb page and have gone from 5 to 1 stars on yelp

I don't agree with calling people douchebags, but what's bad in restrictions to bring weapon to bar? And was it in a dive bar? Because i imagine that some people can use their weapon as argument is conflict, and this can end up with shootings

[Payday]

Lol a bar in south Carolina posted a sign saying no guns allowed then proceeds to call all gun owners douchebags well the had to shut down their Fb page and have gone from 5 to 1 stars on yelp

It seems that they have been getting a very high amount of customer traffic at the business judging by the amount of recent reviews.

[TZucchini]

When the gun lobby the ability to torpedo a surgeon general nominee because of his views on gun control, you know this country is fucked.

But I get it. The NRA's just looking out for the people!

[TwoNineMarine]

When the gun lobby the ability to torpedo a surgeon general nominee because of his views on gun control, you know this country is fucked.

But I get it. The NRA's just looking out for the people!

Let's all pretend that doesn't happen the other way as well.

[TZucchini]

Let's all pretend that doesn't happen the other way as well.

When was the last time a gun control lobby stymied a nomination because of their "pro-gun" views?

[TwoNineMarine]

When was the last time a gun control lobby stymied a nomination because of their "pro-gun" views?

Considering that Doctor seemed to advocate documenting gun ownership on medical records, I can't blame them for trying to stop him from being the Surgeon General.

To your question though. I'm not sure off hand. I could look it up I'm sure. But honestly not in the mood. Working graveyard kills the soul a bit.

[TZucchini]

Considering that Doctor seemed to advocate documenting gun ownership on medical records, I can't blame them for trying to stop him from being the Surgeon General.

I know, right. Why should our doctors know if someone diagnosed with a mental disorder also owns a firearm?

To your question though. I'm not sure off hand. I could look it up I'm sure. But honestly not in the mood. Working graveyard kills the soul a bit.

I'll help you out. It's never happened.

[TwoNineMarine]

I know, right. Why should our doctors know if someone diagnosed with a mental disorder also owns a firearm?



I'll help you out. It's never happened.

Because mental issues automatically mean you are out to kill people? That logic.

And it sounds to me that he wanted to get gun info from anyone and everyone, not just those with mental issues.

And please don't go there with "It's never happened." Please. Just don't.

[TZucchini]

Because mental issues automatically mean you are out to kill people? That logic.

Because I said that, right? That logic....

And it sounds to me that he wanted to get gun info from anyone and everyone, not just those with mental issues.

That's not even close to accurate, and complete misrepresentation of what he actually said.

And please don't go there with "It's never happened." Please. Just don't.

I asked you for evidence. You supplied none. Because you can't. Because it's never happened.

[TwoNineMarine]

Because I said that, right? That logic....



That's not even close to accurate, and complete misrepresentation of what he actually said.



I asked you for evidence. You supplied none. Because you can't. Because it's never happened.

I explained why I'm not in the mood to find evidence for you good Sir. If no one has presented evidence by the time I get into work tonight, I'll look it up myself.

And that is what you implied.

"I know, right. Why should our doctors know if someone diagnosed with a mental disorder also owns a firearm?"

Why would you need to know if someone with a mental disorder has firearms if you weren't concerned about them killing someone? Seems pointless to gather that data if it will serve no purpose eh?

[Rukentuts]

Because mental issues automatically mean you are out to kill people? That logic. And it sounds to me that he wanted to get gun info from anyone and everyone, not just those with mental issues.

Complains about logic, then plays mind-reader.

[TZucchini]

Why would you need to know if someone with a mental disorder has firearms if you weren't concerned about them killing someone? Seems pointless to gather that data if it will serve no purpose eh?

I am worried about them killing someone. I don't think people with mental health disorders should have access to firearms.

What I didn't say was "mental issues automatically mean you are out to kill people."

No. It doesn't mean you're "automatically out to kill people." But it certainly increases the risk. 79% of mass shootings since 2011 are accompanied by claims of mental illness.

[Tinykong]

"History of mental illness" is incredibly vague.

[Cronnix]

What makes this thread "OFFICIAL"? Quit using sensational titles.

[vaeevictiss]

Complains about logic, then plays mind-reader.

by "mind-reader" you mean the fact that some doctors are asking all patients, regardless of mental health, whether they have firearms or not?

even going to the extent of asking peoples children whether or not "mommy and daddy have guns in the house"?

I understand when they have a patient with actual, documented, mental health issues, that will willingly answer that question, but for the average healthy Joe in there, it is none of their god damn business to even ask. I would damn sure get a new doctor if mine ever asked that.

- - - Updated - - -

I am worried about them killing someone. I don't think people with mental health disorders should have access to firearms.

What I didn't say was "mental issues automatically mean you are out to kill people."

No. It doesn't mean you're "automatically out to kill people." But it certainly increases the risk. 79% of mass shootings since 2011 are accompanied by claims of mental illness.

since the antis here love this one...the vast majority of these happened in areas with strict gun control. Even the ones in the "pro gun" states happened in areas that banned weapons...just putting that out there lol.

Oh i know, i know, you have this idea that more guns are bad and if someone tried to stop a crazed gunman they would end up shooting innocent people too, so places should just ban guns...either way...your idea obviously isn't working either.

[PhaelixWW]

That's not even close to accurate, and complete misrepresentation of what he actually said.

Oh?

He's the president and co-founder of Doctors for America. And one of their recent campaigns, "Docs vs. Glocks" seeked to do exactly that.

What makes this thread "OFFICIAL"? Quit using sensational titles.

The mods changed the title and have been merging other gun control threads into this one for a while now.

It's "OFFICIAL" because it's official.

Also, the fact that it's on page 1418 and has the second most views/replies currently in this subforum should tell you something.

[TZucchini]

Oh?

He's the president and co-founder of Doctors for America. And one of their recent campaigns, "Docs vs. Glocks" seeked to do exactly that.

That's not even close to accurate, and complete misrepresentation of what he actually said.

what he actually said.

I was specifically referencing his tweets following Sandy Hook. And the dude hasn't ever said that he wants to "get gun info from anyone and everyone."

The Doc vs. Glocks law sought to add gun ownership to medical records. That's it. Only a completely paranoid and delusional fool would be against something like that.

[Masark]

since the antis here love this one...the vast majority of these happened in areas with strict gun control. Even the ones in the "pro gun" states happened in areas that banned weapons...just putting that out there lol.

And as I've been saying, city-and-state-level gun control is futile. You can just drive from strict-control-state to another state with looser-than-your-mom gun control, buy your guns, and then head home with no one the wiser.

[PhaelixWW]

I was specifically referencing his tweets following Sandy Hook.

You were specifically responding to a line of discussion started by the statement:

Considering that Doctor seemed to advocate documenting gun ownership on medical records, I can't blame them for trying to stop him from being the Surgeon General.

You mentioned mental illness patients, TwoNineMarine said all patients, then you responded with what I originally quoted.

Nobody else was talking about tweets. Your attempt to backpedal here is duly noted.

The Doc vs. Glocks law sought to add gun ownership to medical records. That's it.

Privacy is privacy. Guns are not a medical concern until and unless that person is deemed to be a danger to themself or others.

[TZucchini]

You were specifically responding to a line of discussion started by the statement:

The line of discussion started with my original post, referencing an article discussing why there's so much backlash. Said article referenced the comments he made that "expressed support for gun control in the wake of the Newtown shootings." His comments were made via tweet.

And yet still, even if we went with TwoNineMarine's comments....the good doctor has never stated what TwoNine, or yourself, have claimed.

Privacy is privacy. Guns are not a medical concern until and unless that person is deemed to be a danger to themself or others.

Paranoia is paranoia. When a person become diagnosed with a mental health disorder, I suppose it would be good to know whether or not they possess firearms.