Multiple casualties reported in downtown Louisville shooting

Largely because what "pushes" these people isn't really unique to this country, is difficult to legislate away (and where it can be improved through policy, that policy is not generally supported by the people who want to focus on that issue instead of guns either), and is largely an individual-level combination of some basic conditions. I have yet to see the right actually make any sort of push for improving the mental health system to provide more access to the system. I have yet to see them try to pass legislation designed to lower stress levels via improved safety nets. I have yet to see them pass legislation that attempts to deal with working hours that are too long. In fact, I have seen them oppose each.

So the "mental health" angle is largely a red herring. Heck, some of the people that I know that pull it out are actively hostile to mental health concerns in any other context. It is meant to avoid the fact that people have mental instability around the world, but handing guns out to people when they are mentally unstable is likely to cause violence. And failing to prevent grey markets (markets that are neither fully legal nor fully illegal) exacerbates this issue.

 

That’s a damn quick response.

 

And five people still died.

 

Its America, Banks > Schools

 

They wanted to die probably. Money meant nothing and the potential prison time wasnt how they wanted it to end.

 

Make banks more secure

 

Shooter (25 YO male) apparently texted a friend that he felt suicidal and said he was going to shoot up the bank.

 

Yep, that’s all an inane post warranted.

 

Nothing magical about the AR-15. Any rifle will penetrate soft armor. Plate (ceramic or steel) armor generally will stop rifle rounds. There is some level of variability there but it there is no commercially available round that reliably penetrates plate armor. 5.56x45mm M855 penetrator rounds (which are NOT armor piercing) can penetrate some plate armor certified under older NIJ certification standards, but newer plate armor of at least a Level III+ NIJ or NATO designation will be able to stop multiple shots. All Level IV will reliably stop AP rounds up to and including 30-06 armor piercing.

If their rifle could penetrate police vests I would guess that it is likely the police were using soft armor. Wrong tool for the job.

 

The argument about mental health (it's not guns) is like saying there is no need to get drugs off the street. Let's only focus on addiction and drug abuse, but not the actual drugs... but that is folly. When you declare war on something intangible, you will never achieve your objective. You can't eradicate that which is abstract, such as mental illness, racism, terrorism, etc... The scope is too broad. It's like if instead of a Polio vaccine, they said let's eradicate viruses. Why not focus on achieving the fixable problem at hand instead of a Boogeyman.

Should you treat mental health? Yes. Should we increase efforts to do so? Yes. But it can't be the singular solution to this problem.

 

No doubt Big-Gov-Ron working on making it a Florida law as we speak

 

Wrong... not trying to redirect at all, as the psych piece is absolutely part of the issue here. So, anyone not wanting to have a serious discussion about mental health is as much a part of the problem as the gun enthusiasts who don't want to talk about common-sense gun law.

 

First off, I'm not deflecting. Just saying the discussion about mental health MUST be part of any solution. Beyond that, let's hear your ideas about removing access to guns.

 

I have said we can talk about mental health. And mental health in the US is worse than many other places. But there are many people in Europe, Australia, Japan etc that have mental health problems too. And this almost never happens in this places. Why?
At some point, an honest look at our gun culture has to happen to stop this. But I’m not holding my breath. As I have said for years, if Sandy Hook couldn’t do it, nothing will. This country cares more about guns than kids. And before the come on man’s, or angry responses about hyperbole, tell me specifically how I am wrong. Guns are the single most likely cause of death for children, but guns laws simply can’t pass outside of tiny efforts on the margins. So clearly, child deaths at the level they are are considered acceptable in support of the 2A.

Firearms are the Leading Cause of Death for Children in the United States But Rank No Higher Than Fifth in Other Industrialized Nations

 

You outlaw abortion and keep the guns. Net/net we may come out ahead child-wise. Am I doing this right?

 

Well this is a conversation on guns. So no?

 

‘No Way To Prevent This,’ Says Only Nation Where This Regularly Happens

 

I have no training in human behavior, but I have a hard time believing that a person can just wake up one morning and say I feel suicidal... and I am going to go shoot a bunch of people in a bank. My guess is there were red flags all over the place and no one was paying attention, or no one felt the need to try and get this young man some help.

I have stated many times here that we need more funding for the NICS. I think we should review the specifics of the Baker Act. And many of you, who I know are a lot smarter than me, can provide information on how seeking mental health help could be cross-referenced into the NICS, so a more in-depth process to obtain firearms could be put together.

 

(this isn't all at you, I just see this type of stuff continuously being repeated here)

Is anybody here suggesting that guns are not part of the problem? I see this false argument continuously raised on these boards; it comes off as an effort to stifle any discussion *in addition to* the idea of restricting access to guns. We should be exploring whatever avenues are available to us. It's tiring reading about folks boxing others into the "oh, so you don't really want to solve the problem" type hook when ideas are brought up that focus around the mindset of the people who do this. I've been tagged with a similar label for no logical reason. Maybe Republicans have shut down past possible advances on assistance with mental health issues, but why continue to shut down such ideas? It makes no sense to me...especially given that nobody here is going to actively solve these problems (certainly not on your own through words posted here), you'd think a discussion about it would yield the results that most of you would predict, but the discussion just gets shut down...do you think that helps a genuine discussion on gun control for some reason? Given the many responses on these threads and ones before them, it's pretty clear that it doesn't. I wonder if discussions would be more productive if we split these into separate threads. One thread could be a separate idea for gun control measures; another thread could be a separate idea for other enhancements that could be made or explored involving a variety of topics of human/social development. But the false dichotomies are maddening.

I keep seeing thoughts of repealing the 2nd Amendment (not specifically from you, but from others). Is it not prudent to push for more subtle steps that would be more likely to be accepted by the whole of society? I would think baby steps would be a more logical approach if the goal is to get the whole of folks to buy in. Do we even know things like the average time a killer owns a gun before they shoot their victims? (does this help in a mass shooting situation) What other questions can we ask about the shooter to help figure out what types of restrictions might be possible to obtain?

Go GATORS!
,WESGATORS