• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Nearly 30 arrested for mass shooting threats in weeks after El Paso, Dayton

MikeDwight

Well-Known Member
You say hurting and I referenced an article of a gop member attempting to help with reasonable restriction. Are you suggesting "urbanites" should stockpile weapons to prepare for war torn environments in case of rebellions? Seems a bit extreme.
I guess that was the point I went for. Sorry that its true and the police didn't backup anybody, they ran for it.

Hit Rodney King then you can't get on camera again probably.
 

idav

Being
Premium Member
I guess that was the point I went for. Sorry that its true and the police didn't backup anybody, they ran for it.

Hit Rodney King then you can't get on camera again probably.
It's not about extremes of either everyone has guns or nobody has guns.
 

MikeDwight

Well-Known Member
I'm not trying to argue with a staff member. I didn't catch your specific point a few pages back. Both sides congressionally introducing gun legislation could be promising.
 

idav

Being
Premium Member
You misunderstand. To make the argument why should not have thought police.
I believe in freewill so don't think it would work. The best we can do is guide each other the best we can, I believe laws are useful only to a certain extent. Humans tend to use their toys rather stupidly so the same reason I wouldn't give a child a lighter, grown up children need restrictions on military type weaponry, at the very least very tight accountability.
 

Curious George

Veteran Member
I believe in freewill so don't think it would work. The best we can do is guide each other the best we can, I believe laws are useful only to a certain extent.
This doesn't really why we should not have such laws if the technology were possible.
Humans tend to use their toys rather stupidly so the same reason I wouldn't give a child a lighter, grown up children need restrictions on military type weaponry, at the very least very tight accountability.
And this seems almost entirely directed at guns not thought police. But if we are going to treat adults as children why not give them an indefinite timeout when they think bad thoughts?
 

idav

Being
Premium Member
This doesn't really why we should not have such laws if the technology were possible.

And this seems almost entirely directed at guns not thought police. But if we are going to treat adults as children why not give them an indefinite timeout when they think bad thoughts?
Technology is going to change things a lot I just worry about Black Mirror scenarios.

Yes we send adults to timeout in jail cells. Bad thoughts are not enough because of freewill. Freewill shouldn’t entail letting people have free reign, that’s why we have police.
 

Curious George

Veteran Member
Technology is going to change things a lot I just worry about Black Mirror scenarios.

Yes we send adults to timeout in jail cells. Bad thoughts are not enough because of freewill. Freewill shouldn’t entail letting people have free reign, that’s why we have police.
Even though we agree that there is a correlation between bad thoughts and bad action?
 

gnomon

Well-Known Member
I stand with what I stated, "any mental disorder". That's my opinion whether you like it or not.

I don't like it. The category of mental illness is so broad that you would deny the constitutional rights of so many without providing any actual evidence for doing so.

I think your opinion is garbage. If you want more I'll provide it.

But not unless you make an actual effort to defend your point. Until then....not interested.

I've decided to not waste my time with useless arguments.
 

We Never Know

No Slack
I don't like it. The category of mental illness is so broad that you would deny the constitutional rights of so many without providing any actual evidence for doing so.

I think your opinion is garbage. If you want more I'll provide it.

But not unless you make an actual effort to defend your point. Until then....not interested.

I've decided to not waste my time with useless arguments.

Mental illness, also called mental health disorders, refers to a wide range of mental health conditions — disorders that affect your mood, thinking and behavior.

Now you tell me why someone that has a mental illness that affects their mood, thinking and behavior should have a gun.
 

gnomon

Well-Known Member
Mental illness, also called mental health disorders, refers to a wide range of mental health conditions — disorders that affect your mood, thinking and behavior.

Now you tell me why someone that has a mental illness that affects their mood, thinking and behavior should have a gun.

Based upon the fact that people with mental disorders are no more likely to be violent than the general population.

Now you tell me what you know about people suffering from the wide category of mental disorders.

I don't expect much.
 

We Never Know

No Slack
Based upon the fact that people with mental disorders are no more likely to be violent than the general population.

Now you tell me what you know about people suffering from the wide category of mental disorders.

I don't expect much.

I agree most individuals with mental illness, when appropriately treated, do not pose any increased risk of violence over the general population.
The problem is many don't take their meds as prescribed, too much/too little/not at all or mix them with other drugs, alcohol etc. which any/all can/will exacerbate their condition.
There's also a problem of the dose not being correct, too little/too high.
So again I stick with they don't need to possess guns.
 
Last edited:

We Never Know

No Slack
Based upon the fact that people with mental disorders are no more likely to be violent than the general population.

Now you tell me what you know about people suffering from the wide category of mental disorders.

I don't expect much.


And since you brought up Monk, who in his show had OCPD

Although obsessive-compulsive personality disorder (OCPD) is an Axis II diagnosis that is not commonly associated with behavioral disinhibition, the literature contains reports of occasional explosive aggressive outbursts.

Obsessive-compulsive personality disorder and behavioral disinhibition. - PubMed - NCBI
 

gnomon

Well-Known Member
I agree most individuals with mental illness, when appropriately treated, do not pose any increased risk of violence over the general population.
The problem is many don't take their meds as prescribed, too much/too little/not at all or mix them with other drugs, alcohol etc. which any/all can/will exacerbate their condition.
So again I stick with they don't need to possess guns.

Sorry for being flippant.

There is the fact that a large percentage of gun deaths in this nation involve suicides. But this is a thread about those who commit murder on a massive scale and the issue of mental illness doesn't quite coincide. Mass shootings more often involve aspects that include religious beliefs, issues regarding racial identity, nationalist beliefs, etc. Issues that are not classified as mental disorders.

I can understand that you believe that people with a mental disorder should not have such an access to the means of self harming or suicide or even harming others.. But the lack of ownership will not prevent such individuals of committing self harm or harming others.

And the fact that those who do suffer from mental disorders are not those who commit acts of mass violence, in continuing with this thread, I disagree that someone who has suffered from a mental disorder should be denied the rights others possess.
 

gnomon

Well-Known Member

We Never Know

No Slack
Sorry for being flippant.

There is the fact that a large percentage of gun deaths in this nation involve suicides. But this is a thread about those who commit murder on a massive scale and the issue of mental illness doesn't quite coincide. Mass shootings more often involve aspects that include religious beliefs, issues regarding racial identity, nationalist beliefs, etc. Issues that are not classified as mental disorders.

I can understand that you believe that people with a mental disorder should not have such an access to the means of self harming or suicide or even harming others.. But the lack of ownership will not prevent such individuals of committing self harm or harming others.

And the fact that those who do suffer from mental disorders are not those who commit acts of mass violence, in continuing with this thread, I disagree that someone who has suffered from a mental disorder should be denied the rights others possess.

No problem, forgiven.

Tell me again how people with a mental illness don't do mass violence(shootings). This is only one example. Sometimes we don't get to know there medical/mental history.

James Eagan Holmes is an American convicted murderer responsible for the 2012 Aurora, Colorado shooting in which he killed 12 people and injured 70 others at a Century 16 movie theateron July 20, 2012

According to Holmes' lawyer, Daniel King, Holmes began to suffer from mental health issues in middle school and attempted suicide at age 11.[23][24]

According to Holmes, during his childhood, he was frightened of what he called "Nail Ghosts" that would hammer on the walls at night. He would also see shadows and "flickers" at the corners of his eyes, which would fight each other with firearms and other weapons.
Holmes saw social worker Margaret Roth once before she sent him to psychiatrist Lynne Fenton.[25] Holmes was depressed and "obsessed with killing for over a decade".

James Holmes (mass murderer) - Wikipedia
 
Last edited:

gnomon

Well-Known Member
My error. I thought it was you. I just looked and it was another poster. My apologies.

More than an error. I'm done with someone who thinks they can call out single subjects and declare that anyone with any mental disorder at any instance of their life should be forbidden of owning a firearm.

I'm done with bigoted opinions,
 
Last edited:

We Never Know

No Slack
More than an error. I'm done with someone who thinks they can call out single subjects and declare that anyone with any mental disorder at any instance of their life should be forbidden of owning a firearm.

I'm done with bigoted opinions,

You act as if it is a personal issue with you.

Tell me again how people with mental illness dont commit mass killings.

Educate yourself. These 10 were random picked, researched and the results are...

Las Vegas Shooter 2017. 58 killed. Shooter Stephen Paddock suffered anxiety and depression.

Aurora, Colorado shooting 2012. 12 killed. Shooter James Holmes suffered depression, halucinations among other things.

Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting 2012. 26 killed. Shooter Adam Lanza suffered anxiety, OCD, asperger's, and schizophrenia.

Living Church of God shooting 2005. 7 killed. Shooter Terry Ratzmann suffered from depression.

Red Lake, Minnesota 2005. 10 killed. Shooter Jeff Weise suffered depression, abuse, multiple suicide attemps.

Binghamton shootings 2009. 13 killed. The shooter Jiverly Antares Wong suffered depression.

Sandy Hook 2012. 26 killed. The shooter Adam Lanza suffered asperger's depression, anxiety and OCD.

Washington Navy Yard 2013. 12 killed. The shooter Aaron Alexis suffered depression and hearing voices.

Charleston church 2015. 9 killed. The shooter Dylann Roof suffered depression and OCD.

Stoneman Douglas High School 2018. 17 killed. The shooter Nikolas Jacob Cruz suffered depression, autism, and ADHD.
 
Top