School shooting in Colorado

[Guest]

Sorting the Mental Health system in the States wouldn't be a bad start. Having a son who has severe psychiatric issues, with high risk behavior, and having had first hand experiences of the system, that's where I would turn my sights to.

I see this bandied about a lot especially in the conservative circles. No. We don't want gun control become a responsibility of doctors. They're sued enough as it is.

[Smudge]

I think Sali means that if people with mental health problems had the support they needed they would be less likely to do extreme things like shooting lots of innocent people rather than putting the responsibility of gun control in the hands of the drs

[Guest]

I think Sali means that if people with mental health problems had the support they needed they would be less likely to do extreme things like shooting lots of innocent people rather than putting the responsibility of gun control in the hands of the drs

This goes back to the family.

[Sali]

I see this bandied about a lot especially in the conservative circles. No. We don't want gun control become a responsibility of doctors. They're sued enough as it is.

Of course we don't want gun control to become a responsibility of doctors.

The majority of mass shootings are done by those who are mentally ill, which shows the system is failing. As I said, I have experience of this with my own son. He has high risk behaviors, and is taken into hospital when he has violent episodes, drugged up to the eyeballs and then sent home, left to us to cope with. This is not safe for anyone and totally beyond anything that the regular person can cope with. There is nowhere anymore long term for people with these illnesses, so they are in public domain. I can tell you first hand, this is very dangerous.

[Sali]

This goes back to the family.

But what happens when families can't cope with their family members who are mentally ill?

[kapikui]

Smudge, these are a couple of pretty good examples of why nothing can get done about gun control in the US. The minute the subject comes up, someone always jumps to the extreme ends.

Some countries that require registration:

Austria, Brazil, the Netherlands, Sweden, and Honduras. Would you care to hypothesize which of those countries is going to fall into genocide first?

The fact is that gun registration and gun control are relatively new ideas in Democratic societies.

But it's tough to argue with the logic of "it hasn't YET" because we can wait forever and still not be able to prove that it won't happen. So how long does registration have to exist without disarmament and genocide before it can called effective? Yes, I'm directing that question at you kapikui. *

I'll tell you what. YOU find out. I would prefer not to. Weapons (notice I did NOT say gun) registration ISN'T a particularly new idea either, though Democracy is. China did it (with swords), and then confiscated, then wiped out large numbers of people, and they did it a large number of times over the course of their history. The simple unarguable fact is that once a people is disarmed, genocide becomes far easier.

Let's look. Austria, the Netherlands and Sweden are all in Europe. How long since there was a Genocide attempt there? 60 years or so? Do you really think it can't happen again? No wait, we have Kosovo that was what 15 years ago or so?

War spreads out over Europe (the place liberals seem to think is so civilized) regularly, and every time it does people are disarmed and can't fight back. The genocide doesn't have to come from the same country or even the same regime. Hitler didn't disarm anyone in Germany. He didn't have to, the regime he overthrew did the job for him, and did it for altruistic reasons. They had no intention of carrying out a genocide. Hitler came along and simply took advantage of it. He didn't disarm anyone in Poland, yet a previously disarmed people couldn't fight back.

Your other countries listed are in South America. Also not exactly a stable environment. All it would take is for a border to change a bit and the people displaced could easily get wiped out.

[Guest]

But what happens when families can't cope with their family members who are mentally ill?

Sali, family is merely the FOUNDATION of society. When I say bring back the family unit, it basically implies, strengthen the foundation of society. I'm not merely talking about family members as mother, father, siblings.

Take rural America for example - it's either you love them or you hate them. Rural America is so closely knit people who get ostracized by that society end up hating it. But, one thing to be said about rural America - they take care of their own. You might say - but mental illness resource is still virtually non-existent in rural America! All I can tell you is, from my experience in the Philippines (where there is almost no resources for mental illness in medical society - mental illness is dealt with by holistic methods and on the dark side of the coin considered disciplinary failures), mentally ill people tend to not get much mileage with harming society because the community is ever watchful and would step in at the first sign of trouble.

[Sali]

Sali, family is merely the FOUNDATION of society. When I say bring back the family unit, it basically implies, strengthen the foundation of society. I'm not merely talking about family members as mother, father, siblings.

Take rural America for example - it's either you love them or you hate them. Rural America is so closely knit people who get ostracized by that society end up hating it. But, one thing to be said about rural America - they take care of their own. You might say - but mental illness resource is still virtually non-existent in rural America! All I can tell you is, from my experience in the Philippines (where there is almost no resources for mental illness in medical society - mental illness is dealt with by holistic methods and on the dark side of the coin considered disciplinary failures), mentally ill people tend to not get much mileage with harming society because the community is ever watchful and would step in at the first sign of trouble.

I wish we had communities like that here, Anatess, but unfortunately, having lived in the rural South of the US, I would hugely disagree with you that they take of their own. I am not from the South and I was an outsider the whole time I lived there. It is hard to break into the circles, even if you do marry into a family. My husband is native to the South and our son was treated like an alien, even though we were part of a huge family. The intolerance and ignorance of his condition was astounding. So nope, no taking care of their own there. I do understand where they were coming from though, it's easier to avoid a situation that you don't understand or really know how to deal with.

But it would be wonderful if the foundation of society would once again knit together. I have to agree with you there. Family units would not be left on their own to become overwhelmed.