[smoothy]

Show me how your first and second propositions are mutually compatible.



Not all laws are clearly written, it is called prescriptive legislation.

I don't have to... its been written into the constitution since the very begininning.

Nobody really had a problem understanding it until recently... which means tha average intelligence of people has been dropping, because the language in them have never changed.

[Tuttyd]

Not the same . It's about narcissism. The women had to want him to make the conquest a success.
BTW ;he hacked to death 3 of his victims ;he ran down others with the BMW daddy got him. He could've also achieved his goals by being an arsonist and burn down the Sorority House . So this bs about guns is just that . BS . America has had a "gun culture " throughout it's history without these incidents .

Firstly,I see that you and smoothy are still promoting the continuum fallacy.

Secondly. Yes, and times have changed. You have to adapt to the changes because you cannot bend the arrow of time back the other way.

You know the answer but will not say it. We have drifted as a society away from God . Elliot in particular was his own god ."How could those girls pick this guy, the descendant of slaves, when they should be picking me, the descendant of English royalty?" He couldn't cope with the fact that he couldn't get a hook up in Sodom.
BTW ,his old man once made a movie where he travelled around asking celebrities what God meant to them. The movie flopped and almost bankrupted him. He then went out and made a success by making a movie about teens who kill each other in a ritualistic survival game.

Hollywood played an important part in the evolution of your ethos.

You expected a different outcome?

[Tuttyd]

I don't have to... its been written into the constitution since the very begininning.

And when exactly was this beginning?

Nobody really had a problem understanding it until recently... which means tha average intelligence of people has been dropping, because the language in them have never changed.

In other words, you have no idea what I am talking about.

[smoothy]

And when exactly was this beginning?



In other words, you have no idea what I am talking about.

When it was written and ratified... that was very obvious.

You are Australian... I wouldn't expect you to understand it as we do. Its not something you live with every day that is the foundation of your laws and your life where you are. And it doesn't apply to you. Unless at some point you emmigrated.

[Tuttyd]

When it was written and ratified... that was very obvious.

You are Australian... I wouldn't expect you to understand it as we do. Its not something you live with every day that is the foundation of your laws and your life where you are. And it doesn't apply to you. Unless at some point you emmigrated.

No it's not obvious. The tradition dates back to the English Bill of Rights. Such a law is at the discretion of a parliament. It is for this exact reason we understand it differently.

[smoothy]

No it's not obvious. The tradition dates back to the English Bill of Rights. Such a law is at the discretion of a parliament. It is for this exact reason we understand it differently.

THe constitution isn't a "tradition" and neither is the Bill of Rights. Traditions aren't legally binding. Its not a bill of Suggestions.

And We aren't England... We fought a war to get away from them because we didn't like their way of doing things.

Its also not subject to the whims of Congress or the President...it requires a 75% ratification of the states to change.......and it could be done WITHOUT the input or concent of congress.

[Tuttyd]

THe constitution isn't a "tradition" and neither is the Bill of Rights. Traditions aren't legally binding. Its not a bill of Suggestions.

And We aren't England... We fought a war to get away from them because we didn't like their way of doing things.

I didn't say it was a tradition per se. I am saying it has is basis in common law.

The main reason for the war was: No Taxation without Representation.

[smoothy]

I didn't say it was a tradition per se. I am saying it has is basis in common law.

The main reason for the war was: No Taxation without Representation.

That's what the History books say... but it went way beyond that reason alone. That was just the proverbial straw that broke the camels back.

[Tuttyd]

That's what the History books say... but it went way beyond that reason alone. That was just the proverbial straw that broke the camels back.

That's probably true. There are a number of reasons, but the one I stated is an important one.

[smoothy]

That's probably true. There are a number of reasons, but the one I stated is an important one.

Yes it was an important one... wars are rarely found over a single issue... and that issue is usually one more than the people could tollerate after stewing over other issues long enough. Its just easier to pick one out and focus on that, and why its done so often by so many.

[tomder55]

Firstly,I see that you and smoothy are still promoting the continuum fallacy.

Secondly. Yes, and times have changed. You have to adapt to the changes because you cannot bend the arrow of time back the other way.



Hollywood played an important part in the evolution of your ethos.

You expected a different outcome?

Then you have to identify what changed and address the problem there .

[Tuttyd]

Then you have to identify what changed and address the problem there .

I guess that would be a very good starting point.

[J_9]

Then mental health system has changed. There is no arguing that.

[talaniman]

The definition of mentally ill has changed as well as how its treated, and who pays for it. Its well documented that many were mildly mental cases lumped in and put with the more mentally challenged and treated/mistreated the same way, and not just with meds, but other physical means that can only be classified as torture.

The challenges of modern treatment leaves many to fall through the cracks of notice, and only crosses a line after they have killed someone. So my question is how a person that had an extensive history of mental issues and treatment buy a gun in the first place? That had to be one lousy background check if he went through it 3 times, in 3 different cities, in a tightly regulated state, don't you think?

[smoothy]

I don't disagree there Tal... what exactly was going on in those hundreds if not thousands of therapy sessions... and was the therapist in the wrong legally if there was cause to notify the authorities.

My guess is the Therapists were paid by daddy to keep it all quiet (big money can buy that sort of thing)... and I bet the Feds have no record of his mental issues.

[J_9]

So my question is how a person that had an extensive history of mental issues and treatment buy a gun in the first place?

Street dealers don't do background checks. Gangs don't do background checks. There are so may ways to get around having a check done I couldn't even begin to explain it.

Without violating HIPAA, I'll try to explain my experience as best as possible. I worked the ER the other night. Had a gentleman who was in custody for waving a gun at his wife and then the cops. Funny thing was that he wasn't mentally ill. Just diabetic. You ask, "how does diabetes come into play?" Well, when blood sugar isn't controlled properly there are mental status changes. This man was neither psychotic, nor was he mentally ill when he purchased the firearm. There was no history of violence.

So, now are you going to add a physical health problem like diabetes to the list of people who cannot qualify for gun ownership?

The "history" of mental illness must be documented for it to come up on a background check if a person purchased a firearm in the legal manner. Most people with mental illness know that they will not be able to pass the check, thus they go to outside sources to purchase their weapon.

[talaniman]

This fellow did not J, he had history and he legally bought a gun. That should have been a red flag to dig deeper, and the fact his parents sent alarms that should have triggered at least more than a knock on the door.

Given his history, he should never have been allowed to buy a gun, plain and simple, but we know crazy evil, people and criminals find a way and being undiagnosed doesn't help us as a society at all. The background checks failed miserably in this case.

[smoothy]

We haven't determined anyone who knew about his mental illness had ever contacted the authorities as they were required to (Therapists ARE in many cases).

[talaniman]

There is no requirement to report someone you think has a mental illness, but he does have a paper trail that should have been looked deeper into as it developed. Hell, AGAIN, if his parents had reported him and that fell on deaf ears, what would an outsider saying he was crazy do?

Crazy is no crime, nor is evil, until it crosses a line, from intention to actions. The very notion a 22 year old can buy weapons and ammo who neither hunts or lives in a rural area is unacceptable and I don't care what the constitution says about rights. You let the NRA, and gun nuts subvert common sense, despite the mounting body count.

[smoothy]

There is no requirement to report someone you think has a mental illness, but he does have a paper trail that should have been looked deeper into as it developed. Hell, AGAIN, if his parents had reported him and that fell on deaf ears, what would an outsider saying he was crazy do?

Crazy is no crime, nor is evil, until it crosses a line, from intention to actions. The very notion a 22 year old can buy weapons and ammo who neither hunts or lives in a rural area is unacceptable and I don't care what the constitution says about rights. You let the NRA, and gun nuts subvert common sense, despite the mounting body count.

Um... if a mental health professional encounters someone who poses a potiential threat to others... yes they are required to report it.


Stop trying to dump the blame on every one else that had no part in this. HIS parent, HIS therapists... and the people he knew (I doubt he had many real friends based on his video rant) all knew he was mentally ill. In fact 30 people were emailed his manifesto including his therapist 15 minutes before he started shooting people. His therapist called his parents... not the police... in fact none of those 30 people called the police.

Maybe the voting age should be raised to 40 as well.....if he's old enough to serve in the Military and vote....he's old enough to own a gun. and people in the urban areas have just as much reason to own weapons as rural people....What with the average Obama voter that infests inner city regions....most of whom have no use for the law and believe they have the right to take things other people worked to earn. Many of whom despite felony convictions own weapons illegally, but can't be stopped and searched at 3am or almost anytime walking around suspiciously....because they would have been "Profiled"