Congresswoman Gifford shot

[Javier h]

I have news for you

There are plenty of basket cases all over the place and the police dont do anything about it.

[z31maniac]

There are plenty of basket cases all over the place and the police dont do anything about it.

Yeah?

I know here in Tulsa, our DA was recently threatened ONE time.

So they gave him a security detail with TPD officers with experience protecting dignitaries in the armed forces.

[Farbin Kaiber]

The Sheriff could have 5150'ed him, numerous times, in effect causing him to be on a list for 5 years blocking him from purchasing a firearm. Issue would have been solved. With his mental health issues, and threats, it could have been done. '

This is how it was the PCSD fault.

[Javier h]

Really? I guess then its who you threaten but I seriously doubt certain things significantly differ from State to State.

A co-worker was threaten for his life via email last year and the cops just spoke to the suspect.

Years ago the same thing happen to me but in person, and the police said it was freedom of speech. They did not even bother talking to the suspect who was a gang member.

My neighbor had his mailbox blown up by an M80. It was a prank from some high schoolers. All they did was talk to the suspect as the neighbor INSISTED on it. They did not even require the parents to replace the mailbox although the parent did a few months later after the son refused to do so.

The detective's contention was just leaving it alone unless it happenned again. All they did was provide a business card and took down a report. There was some mail in the mailbox that was destoryed.

All I am saying is that cops see wrong things happen all the time but do very little about it. Whether that is right or whether we have the resources to respond to every single incident is another matter.

The ability to own a firearm is a constitutionally protected right, and depriving someone of that right involves a legal process. Under the 1968 law, a person must be declared mentally unfit by a court or have been committed to a mental institution to lose his or her right to possess firearms.

It's my understanding that Jared had a clean record in that sense. I dont believe you are required to take a mental test when applying for a firearm in AZ.

[joshh]

This is becoming more and more prevalent. The girl in Florida who had some 20+ pages of proof that a guy was stocking her. She was killed by the very guy the judge refused to slap a restraining order on.

Protecting the criminal has become more important than protecting our law abiding citizens.

[Raxe]

The Sheriff could have 5150'ed him, numerous times, in effect causing him to be on a list for 5 years blocking him from purchasing a firearm. Issue would have been solved. With his mental health issues, and threats, it could have been done. '

This is how it was the PCSD fault.

By that logic a gun ban would stop all gun crime.

[Farbin Kaiber]

No, by displaying unsafe mental instability, after thorough inspection and diagnosis from a licensed medical professional, a right is revoked for a set period of time, until that individual can show they have regained "normal" mental health and can re-acquire the revoked right.

[joshh]

By that logic a gun ban would stop all gun crime.

LOL, no it wouldn't.
If a criminal really wants to get a firearm they can. This is the case in any country. But making them unable to get them legally is a damned good start.
I'm all for tightening up who and how people get firearms. But it's the extreme elements on both sides that prevent real solutions in this area.

[joshh]

No, by displaying unsafe mental instability, after thorough inspection and diagnosis from a licensed medical professional, a right is revoked for a set period of time, until that individual can show they have regained "normal" mental health and can re-acquire the revoked right.

I agree however how do you decide what "normal" is. Everyone on any mental drug? Where does it stop.
For those like Jared it's pretty obvious but for those on the fence it would be very tough to regulate who can and who can't.

[Raxe]

My point precisely, if he wanted a gun he could have obtained one regardless of a doctors note. It wouldn't have done anything.

[Javier h]

Do you guys honestly believe that officers go around evaluating people in hopes of filing paperwork to possibly remove a firearm that a someone might potentially own? I bet they see a series of mental cases every day and who are we kidding. There are plenty of other weapons that can easily be fatal like a car! In general, the Police go after the people committing crimes, not necessarily those potentially having a propensity to do so.

Again, from my end, it sounds like a resource issue and/or training. Not all people with mental issues are necessarily violent and sure they let people go all the time in this sense.

[Farbin Kaiber]

No, I am implying that if protocol was followed, in one of the many documented cases ( who knows how many went undocumented...) he would have long before the day he went to buy a gun been placed on a list that would have flagged him when they did his 7-day waiting period and Background Check.

[joshh]

My point precisely, if he wanted a gun he could have obtained one regardless of a doctors note. It wouldn't have done anything.

Yes it would have. He would have a tougher time getting one. And would this have turned out the same way? But this isn't an issue where it's all or nothing. A series of steps would have prevented this from happening the way it did.
Because someone can skirt the law shouldn't prevent laws from being made or enforced.

[ck_taft325is]

My point precisely, if he wanted a gun he could have obtained one regardless of a doctors note. It wouldn't have done anything.

This fucking guy.

[Raxe]