Interesting how everyone including shoppo is saying we need better mental health care.

Ummmm...gun guys been saying that after every active shooting.

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

Interesting how everyone including shoppo is saying we need better mental health care.

Ummmm...gun guys been saying that after every active shooting.

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

But no one wants to pay extra to have it be available.

In his State of the State address, Ige said even the strictest gun laws could not have stopped what happened in Diamond Head this past weekend. So his focus is getting more officers to supplement the force. Was interesting that he said that, particularly the first part.

wow, I'm surprised he actually said something like that  .

and here we go... not all victims bodies have been recovered yet and the investigation is still ongoing...
https://www.kitv.com/story/41594183/us-representative-ed-case-discusses-strict-guncontrol-laws 

Inside?

Not necessary.

He was identified by HPD as mentally ill.

He and HPD had MANY interactions.

No one believed he had guns, because he had TROs against him filed by neighbors.

The missing landlord had her late husband's guns that were registered to him.

I'm going to guess the 69 yr old renter was able to access her guns.  No laws would have stopped him -- either existing or future laws.

The only thing that would have stopped him would have included involuntary committal and treatment.  That means every other mentally ill person with similar symptoms would also be committed.

Only one person did anything this violent.

When I said a failure of the system I didn't mean of the gun purchase system, though it may have been a factor.

Rather I had in mind the legal system and mental health system. Were there some incident in his record which should have gotten him locked up but didn't because of the failure of an officer, or a prosecutor, or a judge, aor a mental health professional.

Inside?

Not necessary.

He was identified by HPD as mentally ill.

He and HPD had MANY interactions.

No one believed he had guns, because he had TROs against him filed by neighbors.

The missing landlord had her late husband's guns that were registered to him.

I'm going to guess the 69 yr old renter was able to access her guns.  No laws would have stopped him -- either existing or future laws.

The only thing that would have stopped him would have included involuntary committal and treatment.  That means every other mentally ill person with similar symptoms would also be committed.

Only one person did anything this violent.

no laws would've stopped him from buying gasoline, matches, sharp pointy objects and what ever items he could think of in his mental state either.
There's a reason why the crazy kids were driven in a separate bus and left at a separate time than the rest of the kids
I had a crazy class mate that drank Elmer's white glue.

no laws would've stopped him from buying gasoline, matches, sharp pointy objects and what ever items he could think of in his mental state either.
There's a reason why the crazy kids were driven in a separate bus and left at a separate time than the rest of the kids
I had a crazy class mate that drank Elmer's white glue.

It seems that this issue is on a pendulum. It wasn't long ago that people with all sorts of mental illnesses were locked up now they are moving towards not locking up anyone. No idea when we are going to start moving back the other direction though.

I bet we will also see a proposed law to keep all firearms locked up at all times like san Francisco.

wow, I'm surprised he actually said something like that  .

Yup, same here.  Very surprised.  Even seeing a LOT more discussion of importance of mental health/issues lately on usually very liberal media and people.  Don't think that will change the tide on calls for gun control, but. . .

I bet we will also see a proposed law to keep all firearms locked up at all times like san Francisco.

I've already seen calls for just that.  The "no loaning of firearms" was another one. . .

It seems that this issue is on a pendulum. It wasn't long ago that people with all sorts of mental illnesses were locked up now they are moving towards not locking up anyone. No idea when we are going to start moving back the other direction though.

Whenever the liberals stop calling for equality in all things, especially based on emotion.

But no one wants to pay extra to have it be available.

Had law makers been spending money on mental heath instead of gun control from 20 years ago, we might have been better off.  But instead they spend billions on gun control.  That is the point I'm trying to make.

We have a mental heath problem disguised as a gun problem.

Had law makers been spending money on mental heath instead of gun control from 20 years ago, we might have been better off.  But instead they spend billions on gun control.  That is the point I'm trying to make.

We have a mental heath problem disguised as a gun problem.

Mental illness is a problem with every stinking demoncrat in this country....

Mental illness is a problem with every stinking demoncrat in this country....

The Liberals teach "victimhood".  EVERYONE is mentally ill to some degree.  It's how you avoid responsibility, and related consequences, for bad behavior.  ADD, ADHD, anxiety, social insecurity, etc.  It's all designed to convince us nothing is our fault, we can't control ourselves, and the system should treat us, not punish us.

Heard on KHON news at 6 some idiot rep suggested that ammo needs to be registered! What a jackass.....

Heard on KHON news at 6 some idiot rep suggested that ammo needs to be registered! What a jackass.....

I think that idiot rep is mentally ill. He/she needs to be registered....that's the root problem.

Had law makers been spending money on mental heath instead of gun control from 20 years ago, we might have been better off.  But instead they spend billions on gun control.  That is the point I'm trying to make.

We have a mental heath problem disguised as a gun problem.

I agree with you on that point but here is part of the problem. Gun rights activists are usually conservatives/republicans and we don't have a strong tract record on free health care. So we kind of look like hypocrites if we push back against free health care while at the same time saying we need mental health care instead of gun control. If we are going to say the government needs to provide more to deal with the mental health problem that necessarily means we are going to have to take a step towards socialized medicine. Certainly rather that than lose our guns.

I agree with you on that point but here is part of the problem. Gun rights activists are usually conservatives/republicans and we don't have a strong tract record on free health care. So we kind of look like hypocrites if we push back against free health care while at the same time saying we need mental health care instead of gun control. If we are going to say the government needs to provide more to deal with the mental health problem that necessarily means we are going to have to take a step towards socialized medicine. Certainly rather that than lose our guns.

I don't believe completely socialized medicine is necessary to deal with mental case problems.   It's not an all or nothing proposition.   

This is not an issue any conservative or Republican would have a problem with funding.   If and when Democrats tack on a bunch of bullshit riders, like public abortion funding or illegal alien free health care, that's when the issue will be opposed

I don't believe completely socialized medicine is necessary to deal with mental case problems.   It's not an all or nothing proposition.   

This is not an issue any conservative or Republican would have a problem with funding.   If and when Democrats tack on a bunch of bullshit riders, like public abortion funding or illegal alien free health care, that's when the issue will be opposed

Exactly.  If you think healthcare costs are high now, just wait until they are "FREE!"

In order to keep cost within budget, the "free" mental healthcare will have to treat those patients with the greatest need.

Who decides that?  As we all know, there is not way to identify who will commit violence and who will not.  So, public safety would be hit-or-miss.  Not much different than now.

This is not an issue any conservative or Republican would have a problem with funding.   

I would tend to agree but how many republicans are introducing bills that would do this? (maybe there are, I just haven't seen any, rather it seems republicans resist such bills)