I find these things funny:

All you'll end up doing is disincentivizing people from seeking mental health treatment in the first place.

You think people would be more honest with their doctor if there was a big sign on the door that said "we are recording everything you tell us and sharing it with the government so we can more effectively control you. It's for the greater good."

Or are you advocating the return of asylums and vans patrolling the street with white clad orderlies carrying butterfly nets to catch the crazies and force them somewhere against their will?
Maybe neighborhood posters with "see something, say something, report your neighbors?"

Not to mention people change. If they're mentally unstable but seek treatment, get better, then stop taking their meds?
Or if they're normal, buy a gun for recreation or whatever, but then they change?

Other than that, "mandatory treatment?"
Treatment only really works if people want to be treated.
The more you force it on them, the less they are going to want it, the less effective it's going to be, the more dangerous they may become.
You really want to bring back doctor Mengele or forced electro shock treatment?

And of course, by singling out "mentally ill" you are painting with a wide brush. The DSM 5 is like a 1,000 page book....that's a lot of "mental illness."

And other than other than that:

2nd amendment refers to guns and the right to bear arms.
That's just reality, no matter how much you don't want to acknowledge it. Gun ownership is a right.
Driving is a privilege, credit is a privilege, employment is a privilege. None of these things are rights.
Apples to oranges.

Would you perform mental evaluations on someone before allowing them to speak? Would you make it mandatory for some kind of background check before someone is allowed to practice their religion?
Would you create a national database of approved news topics before allowing someone to work as "press?"


Lol.
Seems like a catch-22.
Hold gun retailers/manufacturers legally responsible...so they pay fines and court costs. Otherwise just buy a brand new insurance product to protect them.
Which means they then need to sell more guns to recoup the costs.
Joe Camel S&W.
Otherwise little different than Ford or Chevy. "How many defective products can we sell. How many do we have to recall? Will it cost us more to recall or just handle the lawsuits?"

Or they need to increase the price of guns to offset the costs.
...And then you get the supreme court that could say (similar to no voter i.d.) that the additional costs creates an unfair burden to the poor, and now you get a push for government subsidies to the poor towards firearms purchases.
Because remember the 2nd amendment? Again, gun ownership is a right.
Not a privilege. Just like voting, or free speech.


I just wonder how intellectually honest this really is:

The laws we have in place now theoretically decreased "the number of lives we lose..." but here we are, wanting more regulation, more restrictions on rights for the sake of a false sense of security, more laws passed, more government nannyism.

So lets say you get everything you want passed into law. And by some magic genie taxes aren't increased, people in general are accepting and tolerant of the laws passed.
...And it leads to statistically 1 less life lost.
Are you happy? It decreases the number of lives lost, it fulfilled what you said is the most important thing.
2 less? 10 less? 100 less?

What if it decreased all lives lost but 1.
There's just a guarantee one or more schools are going to be terrorized at some point, and statistically 1 student is guaranteed to be shot at some point that year.
Knowing that, and the kids at school knowing that, are you going to be happy and say "well, that's good enough, better than it was, I'm happy with that solution, I can focus on something else, and get other people to as well."

When people come out and say "we need to do something to end this terror! 1 life lost is too many! That was my kid!"
Are you going to start advocating against them? Saying "well, it used to be a lot worse, but we did so much to decrease the amount of lives we lose. So, just accept it. We need to focus on something else!"
What if it was your kid that hit the 1 lottery?

If that situation does not make you happy, content, accepting, then it isn't "really" just about "decreases the number of lives we lose..."
If it's not, what do you think it's "really" about.

Mandatory Treatment: A Frontal Lobotomy.

why would this desensitize people from getting screenings UNLESS they were scared it would prevent them owning a gun. And those are the exact people who SHOULD probably be restricted from purchasing a gun.

I'd like to add one aspect...
Consider what it would be like without the systems we currently have in place.
I frequent a few SHTF websites.
When SHTF chances are many laws and rights will go out the window.
Try to imagine living in a world where standard gun laws no longer exist. What is the nature of the human animal under duress?
Would you kill a stranger to protect your food?

Its the nature of the beast that is in question here. The driving force that causes one human being to kill other human beings. We think, in our protective society that we are above such things but what is it that cause a shift in reasoning? What makes a person that is docile kill without remorse?
If we can figure that out, we have a chance at preventing future tragedy.
Not that it is the only reason people kill but it might shed light on a solution.
The cold sad fact is that if you were removed from your comfort zone, you would either be a victim or an aggressor. You would either take what you need or wait (and possibly starve) to be provided for.

a Good question.

,
It's more than obvious they need a better way to protect students these days. Whether it be bullet proof glass, finger print scanner or retinal scanners at the doors or some sort of identification scanning cameras on the property that identify those who have been expelled or black listed it appears we are going to have to upgrade in this ever changing world in order to protect the children once they are on school grounds...jmo

Yea, or how about scaling back the graphic, bloody violence and killing
scenarios that seem to be everywhere. Movies and games, kids are being raised on it. That to me would be a good start. jmo

Why don't they sue the police?


Police have admitted that they received at least 20 calls reporting suspected gunman Nikolas Cruz in recent years, and his former classmates said they received multiple death threats from him.

As new information surfaces surrounding the mass shooting that killed 17 people at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School last week, it is becoming even more apparent that law enforcement blatantly ignored a number of warning signs about the suspected gunman, which included 20 calls to police detailing death threats and violent behavior.

Broward County Sheriff Scott Israel admitted that there were at least "20 calls for services in the last few years" regarding Nikolas Cruz, who is now accused of entering the school he was expelled from and opening fire on his former classmates and teachers. Israel said that given the latest allegations against Cruz, the department now plans to review the reports they have received in the past.

"Every one of these calls for service will be looked at and scrutinized," Israel said. "If we find out that one of our deputies or call takers could have done something better, or was remiss, I'll handle it accordingly."

Given the fact that Cruz was expelled from the school, his presence there should have served as a major red flag, and Israel claimed that as soon as the school's security guards noticed Cruz was on campus, they "tried to contact him."

"The school certainly knew about him, our school resource deputies knew about him," Israel said. "As soon as he came onto to the campus, I understand that the security guards tried to contact him. I'm not going to go into any more of that know because we're trying to look at videos and piece that together."

However, Israel did not explain why the guards were not able to apprehend Cruz before he reportedly opened fire inside multiple classrooms. The sheriff also did not address how police responded to the 20 calls they received about Cruz's violent behavior and apparent death threats.

Multiple students are now speaking out and saying that they received death threats from Cruz, which they reported to the school. Enea Sabadini, a former classmate, told Buzzfeed that he began receiving messages from Cruz on Instagram saying things such as "iam going to shoot you dead" and "Im going to watch ypu bleed," after he started dating Cruz's ex-girlfriend last year.

Another former classmate, Connor Dietrich, told the New York Post that Cruz was obsessed with his girlfriend and after she broke up with him, he became wildly jealous and began stalking both her and her new boyfriend.

"The reason he got expelled was because he was fighting with his ex-girlfriend's new boyfriend," Dietrich said. "He stalked her and threatened her. He was like, 'I'm going to kill you,' and he would say awful things to her and harass her to the point I would walk her to the bus just to make sure she was OK. We all made sure she was never alone."

Dana Craig said she was friends with Cruz's girlfriend and she was one of the people who encouraged her to break up with him after she heard stories of his abusive behavior. She told Buzzfeed that Cruz began targeting her in April 2016 when he heard the advice she gave about his relationship.

"I'm going to get you and I'm going to kill you because you took this person away from me. I'm going to kill your family," Craig recalled the messages saying. She noted that they were sent from the girlfriend's Instagram account, which Cruz had access to.

Craig said she also reported Cruz's behavior, which means that there were at least two students who reported the death threats they received from a fellow classmate whose Instagram account featured photos of him brandishing guns, knives and showing off small animals he had murdered.

In response to the shooting, former classmates said they were not surprised to learn that Cruz was the suspect and as Joshua Charo told the Miami Herald, "I can't say I was shocked. From past experiences, he seemed like the kind of kid who would do something like this."

Not only did the local police department fail to address legitimate concerns from students who saw Cruz on a daily basis and received death threats from him online, but the FBI also failed to act when it received at least two credible tips about Cruz's plans to carry out a mass shooting.

As The Free Thought has reported, in addition to the messages Cruz sent to his fellow students, he also posted comments on YouTube videos in the months leading up to the shooting, saying things such as "I am going to kill law enforcement one day," and "I'm going to be a professional school shooter."

Rachel Blevins is an independent journalist from Texas, who aspires to break the false left/right paradigm in media and politics by pursuing truth and questioning existing narratives. Follow Rachel on Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, Steemit and Patreon.

Comment:

FBI admits it investigated YouTube Florida school shooting threat, but failed to identify author
Pressure mounts on FBI following disclosure it mishandled tip on Florida shooter
Florida family on school shooter: "We had this monster living under our roof and we didn't know"
Florida School Shooting: A Culture of Narcissistic Entitlement and Resentment


http://www.sott.net/article/377859-At-least-20-students-told-police-about-receiving-death-threats-from-Nikolas-Cruz-police-did-nothing

Nice post.

So, more of the same....
Its all Charlie Brown's parents to me.
"Meh wah, meh meh wha meh wah wah meh wah."

He said, she said.
Coulda, shoulda, woulda but didn't.

The sad fact is, we know there's a threat but we do nothing and it happens then its aw shiat.

the FBI couldn't identify the YouTube author... Seems like someone had to post it,.. YouTube doesn't keep records?

?????????????????????????

Thought I'd share the Message of Jordan Peterson to the school shooters: past, present and future

https://youtu.be/GYua-3JmnT4

State funded culture. Sue? Yeah right. This whole thing stinks as do so many other tragedies that have happened that could have been prevented.
Blame the guns. Take, take, take. Isn't a Democracy infested country great!

The constitution is not an instrument for the government to restrain the people, it is an instrument for the people to restrain the government - lest it come to dominate our lives and interests.
Patrick Henry

laws restrain people, the constitution outlines how much restraint can be applied

amendments AMEND those boundaries

like how the law allowed people to own people, until a war was fought over if that 'right' should be a right at all and the constitution amended where those legal boundaries would be defined ...

C'mon yall what's all the hub bub about everything..it't the GUN..nothing but the gun what gun was it..was it an AR ..a 45..oops gotta ban them..come on you zombies of main stream media ..follow the bouncing ball...nothing else matters it's the gun..rush it to all elitists main stream beat it in their heads..for days..they must assimilate ..we have mind control..

So we should just throw it out or better yet burn it and let all these random and highly prized twisted legislators be our masters then. Great plan miss.

@tomb, I agree, the blame game must stop and people must accept that there is plenty of RESPONSIBILITY which INCLUDES gun law and enforcement of gun laws, as well as cultural values, and family dynamics.

@integrity, no, its not an all or nothing equation, I have never believed or stated it was. The constitution is LITERALLY created to be able to be amended. That is not throwing it out, but allowing it to be adapted, as it was intentionally written to have the capacity for.

Well I'm sorry about that but that was sarcasm..100%...No you see there is a blame game ..to all the agencies who didn't follow up..You see it doesn't matter what gun they use ..today it's the AR ..what if it was a 45..shotgun..the fact is that people would die..For me it's not a matter of it being an AR..shotgun ..45..what would the issue be then..the systems that sre suppose to be working didn't on so many levels..and had they it wouldn't have mattered what gun was to be used..because it never would've happened..

But the haters of the NRA the elitists who own main stream media make it whatever they want it to be about..and they cover up the rest..just like they've done with everything else ..You see they want to take your guns..it will make the great big take over of our country that much easier..You see there is a reason to have these weapons..and that's to protect you from a tyrannical government..the one that's attempting to form ..right in front of our faces..

the weapon used is a factor in how easily and how much damage can be done, there is no way around it

IF they stop shooters before they get a gun, thats great, there is no way around that

when they DONT stop shooters before they get a gun, limiting the types of guns LEGALLY available may decrease the number of lives lost and may give them another way to lock people up before they use the weapon, FOR HAVING THE WEAPON, and there is no way around that either

This shooter got a gun because no LAW prevented him from doing so, and there is no way around that either


...plenty of responsibility, both sides pointing at strictly one or the other helps nothing.....

I know I know