Thoughts and Prayers

[Jason]

[Taylor]

More thoughts and prayers today, and I'm sure more people and politicians who will throw their hands up and say nothing can be done (especially since the shooter hasn't been reported to be Middle Eastern).

Our president tweeted his thoughts and prayers and that he's monitoring the situation from Japan. 

[UndertheHalo]

1 hour ago, Taylor said:

More thoughts and prayers today, and I'm sure more people and politicians who will throw their hands up and say nothing can be done (especially since the shooter hasn't been reported to be Middle Eastern).

Our president tweeted his thoughts and prayers and that he's monitoring the situation from Japan. 

Think we can talk about the issue right away? 

Or is that only when the mohameddans do something. 

Edited November 5, 2017 by UndertheHalo

[Rico]

In before the too soon comments.

[tdawg87]

It was a white Atheist.

Well ain't this the conundrum!

[the dude abides]

4 minutes ago, tdawg87 said:

It was a white Atheist.

Well ain't this the conundrum!

Ex Air Force cadet to boot.

conundrum indeed

T's & P's

 

[the dude abides]

Thank god he didn't have a banjo though.

 

[UndertheHalo]

How do we know anything about him ?

[Spirit]

If anyone thinks it's too soon to talk about the need to outlaw guns, there's drunk driving to discuss.

 

As if.

 

 

[UndertheHalo]

https://www.thoughtsandprayersthegame.com/

[red321]

31 minutes ago, Geoff said:

If anyone thinks it's too soon to talk about the need to outlaw guns, there's drunk driving to discuss.

 

As if.

 

 

Can you send a link to the people talking about outlawing all guns?

[mtangelsfan]

You don't have Nate's email?

[Spirit]

20 minutes ago, red321 said:

Can you send a link to the people talking about outlawing all guns?

 

Here you go.

 

 

[red321]

I’ve never seen Nate suggest all guns should be banned. 

Sure, you have a small minority/fringe who might suggest something similar...unlike the default position of the thoughts and prayers crowd...which appears to be....golly gee...this is complicated...whatever should we do

[Spirit]

That's because Nate's a nutjob gun owner.

 

 

[Vegas Halo Fan]

[UndertheHalo]

They did “do something” in February they rolled back the Obama era mental health requirements.

Edited November 6, 2017 by UndertheHalo

[mtangelsfan]

19 minutes ago, UndertheHalo said:

They did “do something” in February they rolled back the Obama era mental health requirements.

There should be requirements but that law was henky.  Mental health is not a objective subject.  It is a touchy thing to take away the rights of someone, you better have good evidence that it is warranted.

[mtangelsfan]

He passed a background check for a job:

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/breakingnews/shooter-worked-at-schlitterbahn-a-job-that-required-him-to-pass-criminal-background-check/ar-AAuvF9Y?li=BBnbcA1

have to wonder about background checks.

[RallyMo]

3 minutes ago, mtangelsfan said:

He passed a background check for a job:

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/breakingnews/shooter-worked-at-schlitterbahn-a-job-that-required-him-to-pass-criminal-background-check/ar-AAuvF9Y?li=BBnbcA1

have to wonder about background checks.

Eek.

We had Schlitterbahn passes this summer. It's good times.

[UndertheHalo]

19 minutes ago, mtangelsfan said:

There should be requirements but that law was henky.  Mental health is not a objective subject.  It is a touchy thing to take away the rights of someone, you better have good evidence that it is warranted.

MT, the law added people receiving social security checks for mental illness and people who have been declared unfit to handle their financial affairs to the national gun restriction database.  It wasn’t henky.   If your mental issues are so severe that you can get a welfare check or if you literally can’t have a bank account because of you mental issues.  Then why should one be able to have a fire arm.  Shouldn’t the communities safety trump the right to a gun in any sane world ? 

Really, is someone’s life diminished because they can’t have a gun.  This is a ridicuous debate.  There was nothing wrong with the Obama restriction. 

Edited November 6, 2017 by UndertheHalo

[UndertheHalo]

9 minutes ago, mtangelsfan said:

He passed a background check for a job:

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/breakingnews/shooter-worked-at-schlitterbahn-a-job-that-required-him-to-pass-criminal-background-check/ar-AAuvF9Y?li=BBnbcA1

have to wonder about background checks.

Shouldn’t gun checks be stricter then employment checks ? I don’t understand this point.  No one is arguing that troubled people should just go away and die.  The argument is whether they should have the ability to easily obtain a weapon designed to kill things.  The right to a gun is not a basic human right.  

[mtangelsfan]

32 minutes ago, UndertheHalo said:

MT, the law added people receiving social security checks for mental illness and people who have been declared unfit to handle their financial affairs to the national gun restriction database.  It wasn’t henky.   If your mental issues are so severe that you can get a welfare check or if you literally can’t have a bank account because of you mental issues.  Then why should one be able to have a fire arm.  Shouldn’t the communities safety trump the right to a gun in any sane world ? 

Really, is someone’s life diminished because they can’t have a gun.  This is a ridicuous debate.  There was nothing wrong with the Obama restriction. 

This is because you don't see the second amendment as being as important as the others.  But until it is changed or repealed, it should hold the same weight as any other right guaranteed in the Constitution.  So again, while I understand and totally agree that mental health plays a significant role in some gun violence, we have to make sure that Constitutionally given rights are not infringed without true evidence.

[mtangelsfan]

32 minutes ago, UndertheHalo said:

Shouldn’t gun checks be stricter then employment checks ? I don’t understand this point.  No one is arguing that troubled people should just go away and die.  The argument is whether they should have the ability to easily obtain a weapon designed to kill things.  The right to a gun is not a basic human right.  

There was no point.  I'm not looking for an argument.  Just found the article and thought it was interesting how he passed at least one kind of background check.  

[UndertheHalo]

9 minutes ago, mtangelsfan said:

This is because you don't see the second amendment as being as important as the others.  But until it is changed or repealed, it should hold the same weight as any other right guaranteed in the Constitution.  So again, while I understand and totally agree that mental health plays a significant role in some gun violence, we have to make sure that Constitutionally given rights are not infringed without true evidence.

But isn’t ability to qualify for a disability check due to ones illness sufficient as true evidence ? Surely we agree on that point no ?

and I think I’ve been pretty transparent in my contempt for the 2nd amendment.  I think it’s archaic and worthless.  I would be wholly satisfied with a process that would eliminate it.  I do not hide that.  Rule of law is paramount however and that process just is not going to happen.  So I’ll keep arguing for restrictions. 

That doesn’t mean I think guns should be wholly banned btw.  I just don’t believe that gun ownership should be constitutionally enshrined 

Edited November 6, 2017 by UndertheHalo