Despite the complexity of the factors at play in the V-Tech tragedy I keep thinking of 1 thing--do you agree?

Question

There's no simple answer anywhere, and no one place to point the finger of blame, but IF the purchase of a handgun in Virginia had not been quite so easy a thing for someone with a history of mental instability to do, perhaps things might have gone differently. It is senseless to rely on the answer provided by the individual seeking to purchase a handgun as to whether or not he/she has ever been treated for mental illness. It's obvious that this will not be a truthful answer, in such a case as the one we've just seen. What kind of system could be initiated to link a person's history of violent tendencies and mental instability to his/her official record, when these have not been reported in connection with actual crimes?

Answer 1

anyone can check off NO on a form. its up to the person who is selling the gun to make sure that all of the information provided on the form is accurate. do they not have a waiting period in virginia? do you just fill it out and they look it over and you get your gun? is all the gun dealers see $$$?

i think you should have to wait 30 days to get your gun. you'll probably be so tired of waiting for it you wont want it anymore.

P.S. i am totally a fan of the Chris Rock Bullet Control program. Make bullets cost $5000 a bullet.

"'Cause if a bullet costs $5000
there'd be no more innocent bystanders.

That'd be it.

Every time someone gets shot, people will
be like, ''Damn, he must have did something.

''****, they put $5000 worth of bullets
in his ***.''
People would think before
they killed somebody, if a bullet cost $5000."

Answer 2

Dirkle1: It is the nut who has the gun? You can't just simply blame the "nut" for his possession of a firearm. This country allows people the right to bare arms. These "nuts" get the guns, because they are allowed to. Some "nuts" don't have a history of violence, or police records, so when it comes down to background checking, they could come out clean and walk away with a firearm. I'm pretty sure this guy wouldn't have been successful in killing over 30 people if he didn't have his firearm. And the death penalty doesn't stop a shooter from shooting. How is supporting it going to improve anything? We should be focusing on how to prevent this stuff from ever occuring in the first place, not wait until it already happens, then just kill the shooter afterwards. It wouldn't be sparing any lives, making it completely pointless to the supposed cause.

There are lots of factors that aid in tragedies like these, so blaming just the "nuts" is rediculous..

Answer 3

If the person wasnt able to buy a handgun I'm sure they would've have found other means of executing their plans. The problem with researching the person's history is that some people has no history of violent tendencies or mental instability and are everyday normal people that have been driven to the point where they felt they had to execute others in order to "free" themself.

Answer 4

I disagree 100%....the price of living with the capacity to arm the citizenry; means...some, will use guns for evil.

The price of an unarmed citizenry.? Rent and watch 'Shcindler's List'... All despots disarm the citizens...

And so what if someone was once depressed or anxious or overwhelmed with the vissicitudes of life and sought mental health care (which is primitive and for the most part ineffective) that should not preclude them from any of the rights of a free citizenry....

Did you know that a true paranoia..is never cured? The person just learns to keep their presecution fears to themselves. Most likely the korean fella..had a paranoid 'illumination' experience...where "aha, it all makes sense now...it's not that I have pushed everyone away and acted strangely..which has brought attention upon me (some of it, in the form of being 'teased' (read, confronted) about my anti social ways....No, it's not me; it is them...I shall murder them". But, he was so dishonest..that only parts of this would be considered....that last big lie..'you made me do this'..is hogwash.

Answer 5

Stricter gun laws would have had no impact on this situation whatsoever. Even demonstrating a history of mental instability would have had no impact. he had already been for an evaluation at least twice in the last year, and I'll bet money, that he owned the guns before he was ever evaluated. The problem you anti-gun NUTS refuse to accept is that this issue has nothing to do with the gun. It is the nut that has it. If, however, it had been easier to get guns and there happened to be four or five law-abiding, gun toting healthy individuals with some balls in that room. He would never have been able to get off more than a few shots in the first place. If there had been one law-abiding teacher at the Columbine school with some balls, there would have been much less of tagedy than there was. The problem in this world isn't that guns are too easy to get, it's that they are too difficult to get, and that there are too many ******* walking around screaming for more gun laws! If you want to stop gun-related crimes - then grow the balls to support the death penalty for any crime committed with a gun. STOP TRYING TO BLAME THE GUN!!!

Answer 6

There is kind of a system in place. The FBI has a sytem if convicted of a violent crime then the person is banned of owning a firearm forever. It's not fool proof.

Answer 7

Hi Barbara,

I applaud your motives for proposing this; however, I would be extremely concerned if this were to be done. The potential for misuse is great, given that we are talking "tendencies" and "instability."

Answer 8

I agree with you in the fact that more locks should be closed on people who has a mental or substance abuse (alcohol, drugs, et al) past so this NEVER EVER happends again!