OK, I’ll ignore your trademark ‘snarkiness in situations that don’t call for it,’ and give you an example of what I’m talking about.
If somebody has, say, bipolar disorder, but is misdiagnosed as having depression (which happens all the time, particularly with bipolar 2 disorder), then giving them SSRIs can totally fark them up. From inducing mild bouts of mania, all the way up to severe psychosis.
The US has an extraordinary high number of people on SSRIs, and there is no way they all need them. And while the current one hasn’t been confirmed yet (that I’ve seen), the last 5 mass shooters have all been on them.
I’m not saying it’s the cause… I’m just offering another aspect to ponder in this particularly messy situation.
Strengthening gun control, mandating effective background checks and reducing the number of available assault rifles in the community directly reduces the chances of a nutcase having access to a weapon of mass murder.
It will not eliminate the problem. Nutcases will still shoot people. But less often. It will save lives.
This talk about one watered down useless piece of legislation not preventing one specific shooting is missing the point. Trump and the GOP watered down gun control when they had every opportunity to strengthen it. The GOP prevented Obama from implementing meaningful reform. While the GOP blocks any reform, people will continue to die in preventable shootings.
Gates, one of the 4 charged to this point by Mueller’s team, is reported to be close to a plea deal. He would be joining Flynn and Papadopolous in pleading guilty.
The murderer (I hate the ‘shooter’ term, let’s call a spade a fucking spade) purchased his AR15 about a year ago.
Between 1994 and 2004, it was illegal to purchase this category of weapon. (Not to own one, if you’d purchased it previously, mind you). This was the questionably named ‘assault weapons ban’ which was introduced under Clinton and which Bush removed.
I don’t remember whether Obama’s proposals (which the senate republicans did not even allow to a vote) would have reinstated this ban. But the ban certainly would have applied to this person buying this gun.
@Essendon12
The issue with Trump is that he is the nominal head and face of the Republican party. A party that removed the ban on assault weapons. Who rolled back the restrictions on access of guns to people with mental health problems. The group who blocks all minor and major efforts to change the laws that you appear to agree are ridiculous. A group who has passed legislation blocking the collection of data and research into the guns issue. A group who have (in recent times) been blaming mental health, while cutting resources for government to assist those with mental health issues. Who (as an example) changed the VA from automatically accepting veterans PTSD as being war related, to having them go through a process of being checked that takes months and finds over 95% are still eligible.
So when the face of the party who has done all that comes out and gives the same platitudes that his party has for years, who blames people for not reporting the student’s risk elements even though this had actually been done, rather than blaming the fact that the kid could get an automatic rifle, which most people believe is far more of the root cause, then people are going to be frustrated with him.
There is also a element here of realisation that without a super-majority, the Democrats cannot implement any change. But if a Republican president pushes for change, he may get enough support that with Democrats real change can be pursued. So there is disappointment that Trump is showing zero appetite to do this.
People are people. There’s sick people, and unstable people, and ■■■■■■ people, and angry people, and violent people everywhere.
There’s not AR15s on the street everywhere.