Hello guest! (Not a guest? Log in above!) As a guest you can submit help requests, create and reply to Forum posts, join our Chat Room and read our range of articles & resources. By registering you will be able to get fully involved in our community and enjoy features such as connect with members worldwide, add friends & send messages, express yourself through a Blog, find others with similar interests in Social Groups, post pictures and links, set up a profile and more! Signing up is free, anonymous and will only take a few moments, so click here to register now!
Current Events and Debates For discussions and friendly debates about politics and current events, check out this forum.
They need to change the debate around mass shootings for change to occur -
November 11th 2022, 04:22 PM
Every time a mass shooting occurs, everyone has the same arguments and makes the same comments. But they all have major flaws.
1) Background checks to rule out "crazies". This will never be possible. Crazy is a subjective term and having actual mental health diagnosis entered in a database searchable on background checks would be a huge HIPPA privacy violation. Not to mention, as there aren't ways to identify which of these people who have a mental health condition are potentially dangerous. Most mass shootings are a persons first "real" (documentable and legally recognizeable) incidence-of-violence and most have never been involuntarily committed to a psych ward so most could pass a background check just fine. Most also appear to be carefully planned and premeditated so that the "cool off" laws in some states probably won't work well either. Most mass shooters do display some "red flags", but these red flags are not really specific to people who go on shootings. They are usually vague traits like "inability to socialize well", "loner", or "angry". Many people are bitter, antisocial, or misanthropic but because they haven't done anything wrong yet, you can't simply take their 2nd amendment rights away. Most of those people would also not commit a shooting so going by these personality differences would also be a form of discrimination.
2) Get rid of the second amendment. But there is not the supermajority of political support to do it.
3) ban specific types of weapons. Possibly a good option, but limited in scope.
So what people need to be asking is: if the second amendment prohibits the right to bear arms and you can't without massive discrimination restrict crazies from buying a gun when guns are legal for everone, what can be done? Thoughts?
Re: They need to change the debate around mass shootings for change to occur -
November 12th 2022, 01:08 AM
What would we do instead if we got rid of the second amendment?
Do you ever get a little bit tired of life
Like you're not really happy but you don't wanna die
Like you're hanging by a thread but you gotta survive
'Cause you gotta survive