How can crazy people be stopped from buying guns and going on the rampage?

Question

Just because someone has a clean police record doesn't meant they're not going to take it into their head to kill a lot of people. Should potential gun owners have to take some kind of psychological test in order to purchase a gun? Or maybe you could give them a lie-detector test--e.e. "have you ever wanted to kill large numbers of people at random for no reason?" I don't know what the answer is, but there is certainly a problem. BTW I agree in principle that citizens should have the right to bear arms. In law-abiding Switzerland citizens have not only the right but the duty to keep guns at home (but you get in trouble big time if you use them for unlawful purposes). Maybe there are fewer crazies in Switzerland, though I wouldn't want to speculate why...

Answer 1

I agree with you but just think, a crazy person can also be smart enough to lie, beat and pass a test and you would never know what they are capable of. But yes it may be a good idea to give some sort of test though I am not too sure if it will really do anything.........

Thank You :-)

Answer 2

You can't stop a crazy person from killing.

In Scottland, where guns are outlawed, a gunman went into a school and killed a punch of kids. In England, where guns are outlawed, they have a higher (per capita) crime rate than in any major American city. There are more home invasion roberys because robbers know that there are no arms in the house. In the US many homes have guns, bobbers don't invade nearly as much.

This crazy, Cho, went through all of the required checks. He didn't have a criminal background.

If some of the students at VT were armed. There wouldn't have been as many dead!

I'm not a gun nut! I don't own a gun! I look at the statistics and see that gun ownership lowers the crime rate.

Which would be better?

1. Every one owns a gun, and knows how to use it
2. Only criminals and crazys own guns

To ericams85: Cho was Korean, moron

Answer 3

Such gun regulation is not feasible. Also it is possible to purchase a gun on the black market very easily.

At the Appalachian School of Law shooting in 2002. A disgruntled student killed two students before he was killed by two other students with their personal firearms.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Appalachian_School_of_Law_shooting

The Virginia Tech massacre was a horrible, horrible tragedy but in time, it will fade from public view. Only those who have suffered a personal loss will be faced with the struggle to overcome their grief and restructure their life. The survivors will suffer the tremendous loss very intently for a period of time and as they struggle to cope with their grief they will resolve it in many different ways but it will never go away, there will be triggers that bring it all back again in vivid detail.

Unarmed security guards can only provide a "sense" of security. They cannot provide virtual security. The objective of the security guard is to take control of the situation, keep people calm, stop panic.

After the reports have been filed, the investigations have been completed and the recommendations made, people will calm down and feel secure, then complacent.

Because of my personal experience, I favor allowing individuals to carry concealed weapons if they have had training and have not had a felony conviction. Most of the people in the self-help group Parents of Murdered Children have strong feelings about this issue as well as Citizens against Homicide. (Members of both national groups have suffered the loss of a loved one to homicide) Compassionate Friends is also a self-help group however it is for parents who have lost a child to any cause homicide, accidental death or disease.
http://www.pomc.com
http://www.pomc.org
http://www.murdervictims.com/CAH.html
http://www.compassionatefriends.org

People in these organizations spend a lot of time writing letters to parole boards, and getting legislation passed like Michigan's "truth in sentencing" and sentencing guidelines" (despite the fiscal impact).

It would be very nice if all the predators, murderers, rapists, child molestors and other gun-toting sickos could be locked up...... or maybe even hanged, drawn and quartered for some.

The justice system and law enforcement can only do so much. The ATF can only seize so many weapons from the predators.

I do understand people who favor gun control. It seems logical,sane, rational, reasonable, civilized. Those most blessed, fortunate people have not suffered personal loss by homicide. It seems sensible to get rid of guns and then poof no more violence. The UK does not have guns. Do people get murdered there?

The reason I favor responsible citizens being educated in safe gun use is for protection. They will not be the ones using the guns to commit a crime or kill an innocent.

Answer 4

The best answer I have for this question would be passed laws for states, It doesn't matter if gun owners take background checks that is true. A psychological testing would be a great idea, but there are alot of killers out there that can "out smart the system". So really how much testing can you do. It is extremely difficult to figure out what type of personality people have, because there are people out there that don't show any signs of mass murderers. In my opinion the only people who should bear arms are people who work for a goverment agency. Hunters should only be able to hunt with bows. Why even have weapons if you do not work for a government agency or hunt?

Answer 5

Paul, I wish we knew the answer to your question. My only ideas are to require training and licensing like we do for a drivers license. I'm a gun owner and wouldn't want to give up my guns, but I would feel that raising the bar would be fair.

I don't know why the US is such a violent culture. I visit Canada often and I'm aware that a lot of Canadians have guns, but they don't shoot each other like we do in the US. They're exposed to the same television, movies and video games, yet they don't react like we do in the US. I wish someone would do a study on that. Maybe it's cultural difference, that they look at things differently. As you pointed out, the Swiss don't haul off and shoot each other. Most Israeli's are armed, I believe, yet they don't seem to shoot at each other.

Answer 6

There are lots and lots of crazies in the US. It is a country tailor-made for restless, dissatisfied people from wherever to come and make their way, which means that at least some of those people are crazy.

With our extra complement of loonies, we are honor bound to outlaw repeating guns of all kinds. The right to bear arms did NOT include AK-47s, Glocks, 22's or any other gun that is semi or fully automatic.

The Founders were thinking of defense, not assault with deadly weapons.

Answer 7

The government wont do anything unless you prove that youre a threat. I know first hand they dont want to spend the money or resources on potential problems. If you are a threat to hurt someone.... you cannot be jailed for that, they cant do anything about it until you actually hurt someone. If you put someone in jail or lock them up on potential alot of people would be in jail.... including people who drink and drive daily.

Answer 8

Better background and police checks. Had the checks been in place when Cho went to buy a gun he wouldn't of qualified because of his past with the police. Better laws on gun purchase and control

Answer 9

How can crazy Americans be stopped from selling guns and going on the rampage?

Answer 10

well people in the us are stupid and crazy? and really bad at parenting skill which would make really crazy people.