this post was submitted on 26 Oct 2023
361 points (96.4% liked)

News

22528 readers
2253 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 6 points 11 months ago (2 children)

A pretty simple how for that case would be to have a protected database where mental health professionals and institutions would report individuals with issues deemed worryng enough to bar from purchasing a gun. Then during the background check they would reference that db. If the person being checked is verified to be in that db fail the check. Maybe have some revaluation options or whatever but it's not hard to imagine how reasonable laws that are actually enforced could actually help. The half baked laws that are half assed enforced and then held up as an example of any laws at all being fundamentally impossible just isn't convincing.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 10 months ago (2 children)

This won't work. Do you want more unmedicated people with guns?

People with mental health issues wouldn't ever seek care if owning a firearm was linked to healthcare. Now we're stigmatizing mental health treatment.

We want people to get care and be managed so they can live a normal life.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 10 months ago

Do you want more unmedicated people with guns?

If they wanted that, they'd do things like oppose red flag laws, insist background checks remained functionally optional, oppose effective waiting periods and oppose mandatory safe storage laws.

People with mental health issues wouldn't ever seek care if owning a firearm was linked to healthcare.

Is "some people care more about their guns than the safety and mental health of themselves and their family" supposed to be an argument for the existing gun laws?

Now we're stigmatizing mental health treatment.

Who exactly is "we" here?

The pro-gun community rushes to blame anyone but themselves, all the while seething with indignation that they get lumped in with people who murder their partners or kill as many children as they can, just because they bought the same guns, from the same stores, under the same systems, with the same requirements as the murderer.

But boy they're not shy doing unto others.

Half the world population will experience mental health problems in their lifetime. If the 80% of mass murderers using legally purchased guns is a low enough figure to sweep under the rug, the fraction of a fraction of mentally ill people carrying out mass murders isn't even a speck of dust.

This man received urgent mental healthcare, to the standard that modern healthcare can provide anywhere in the world. Then he killed 20 people and injured over a dozen more with his legal firearm.

If you're so certain that mental healthcare is the answer, you can give up your guns until you finish building your perfect healthcare utopia. Maybe you could start with the military, since apparently you have to be mentally ill to kill someone with a gun.

Until then, the current gun laws are horrifically and demonstrably inadequate at keeping guns out of the hands of violent people, despite 25 years of pro-gun cultists insisting that they and they alone have the solutions.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 10 months ago

Yeah that's an issue that I would anticipate as well but at least now we are exploring options and identifying what may or may not work and what the trade offs are rather than pretending that it's an impossibility like Mario was doing.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 10 months ago (1 children)

This guy was barred from having a firearm already.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Are you sure you're not confusing him with the previous mass shooter in Maine from 6 months ago?

I know they're hard to keep track of when they happen every month but as far as I've been able to tell, 2 days ago this man was a "responsible gun owner" who wasn't disarmed using the red flags laws (that the pro-gun crowd opposes) despite seeking urgent treatment for mental health problems (which the pro-gun crowd insists is the solution).

[–] [email protected] 1 points 10 months ago

Naa this guy should have had his firearms pulled the second he was involuntarily committed. This is a failure of law enforcement once again.