Oregon shooting: Initial reports of 10 dead at Umpqua Community College

[crazy canuck]

And lastly, we attack the mental health problem.  This goes to health care accessibility and the fact that you can't seem to commit depressive people against their will.  This is the biggest issue, imho.  Societal taboo that push some to keep schizophrenic family member at home without decent care and other problems related to lack of decent healthcare for low to average family income.

This is a legacy of our terrible experience with institutionalization in the 40s through the 70s.  When people saw what was going on, particularly after One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest, the backlash created a situation where people who needed help had a really hard time getting it because the resources weren't there anymore.  It was still an "out of sight, out of mind" issue, but "out of sight" became people's homes or the streets instead of what were effectively minimum security prisons.

I agree.  We had the same circumstance here.  Community treatment became the prevailing model.  Problem is it is impossible to provide community care to people who really should be receiving care within a medical institution.  There seems to be a growing realization that we threw the baby out with the bathwater on this one.  But now we face the problem that rebuilding the infrastructure for institutional care that had been abandoned will be very expensive.  So now most of the people that had been institutionalized in mental care facilities are institutionalized in our criminal justice system.

It is a very difficult problem.

[Valmy]

Ok but clearly they are not the majority, right? Can't reasonable people on both sides of the aisle reach a compromise and simply outvote the fanatics?

You just do not get how these things work Marty. But then, neither do I, so I cannot answer you.

[Martinus]

Cue in some feminist writing an article about "insane-shaming". 3. 2. 1.

[Martinus]

Ok but clearly they are not the majority, right? Can't reasonable people on both sides of the aisle reach a compromise and simply outvote the fanatics?

You just do not get how these things work Marty. But then, neither do I, so I cannot answer you.

Yeah, well it's the same in Poland more or less. If one party supports something, the other is against it, no thoughs or buts. I wonder how we got to this and is there a way out.

[Eddie Teach]

Ok but clearly they are not the majority, right?

They are the majority who donate & vote based on the issue.

[crazy canuck]

I recall that someone gave a very good analysis about the politics surrounding this issue after another of these tragic events but I cant seem to find it.

[Berkut]

And even better the more fanatic 2nd Amendment types think any mental health check before selling a gun is a form of gun control.

Ok, there are probably fanatic 2nd Amendment types and fanatic anti-gun types - but wouldn't the moderates wishing to introduce some form of gun control (such as background checks and waiting periods, for example) whilst keeping the right to bear arms in principle, be the majority? It seems like this is one of these issues where politicians on both sides are more interested in keeping it as a wedge issue rather than a problem to be solved by compromise.

It is actually an example of where a minority can hold a democracy hostage to their views, even while the majority thinks they are bonkers.

It is a third rail for the radical gun nuts. Any attempt to have any kind of gun control is an instant and total reversal of any support for a politician, regardless of other views. Your typical gun nut would vote for a no gun control ever Sarah Palin over any kind of sane gun control advocate even if they aligned with all other views and where clearly a superior choice.

Couple that with vesting all political capital in the gun control debate into an organization that has been completely taken over by the complete crazies (the NRA) and the problem is considerably worse than simply whether we can have rational gun control. The debate happening right now is whether the NRA and their ilk will even allow current laws on the books to be enforced, much less discuss new ones.

[DGuller]

The one issue I agree with NRA on is that it really is a mental health problem much more than it is a gun problem.  That said, we may differ somewhat on whose mental health is the issue.

[Valmy]

The one issue I agree with NRA on is that it really is a mental health problem much more than it is a gun problem.  That said, we may differ somewhat on whose mental health is the issue.

I will buy that once the NRA starts championing mental health services and working to keep guns out of the hands of the mentally ill. But this is just their excuse to justify doing nothing, rather than a call for action.

[Berkut]

The one issue I agree with NRA on is that it really is a mental health problem much more than it is a gun problem.  That said, we may differ somewhat on whose mental health is the issue.

I will buy that once the NRA starts championing mental health services and working to keep guns out of the hands of the mentally ill. But this is just their excuse to justify doing nothing, rather than a call for action.

The 2nd says nothing about only sane people being allowed to have a gun.

[Habbaku]

If the mentally ill don't have guns, how can they defend themselves against the mentally ill who have guns defending themselves against the mentally ill with guns?

[Berkut]

The one issue I agree with NRA on is that it really is a mental health problem much more than it is a gun problem.  That said, we may differ somewhat on whose mental health is the issue.

If you consider clinical paranoia a mental health issue, this isn't even really a joke.

Your typical gun nut isn't opposed to background checks and whatever on the merits, but rather because they truly believe that the end goal is US black helicopters coming to take away THEIR guns, and any control beyond what exists now is just a step in that direction.

You really cannot reason with them any longer.

[Valmy]

So the problem is the mentally ill having guns...and we are in favor of that. To deal with all these mentally insane delusional people being heavily armed might we suggest getting some guns 

Yeah that is typically how they think.

[Barrister]

13 dead

Gunman was killed in a shootout with police, not sure if he's included in that count.
http://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/oregon-college-shooting/multiple-casualties-after-shooting-umpqua-community-college-n437051

This is odd:

The shooter told people to get on the ground and started asking them people to stand up and state their religion, Moore told the newspaper.

I wonder what was the "right answer".

Answering "christian" got you shot in the head.  Other answers got you shot in the leg.

http://news.nationalpost.com/news/world/youre-going-to-see-god-oregon-shooter-asked-hostages-if-they-were-christians-witnesses-say

[Martinus]

And even better the more fanatic 2nd Amendment types think any mental health check before selling a gun is a form of gun control.

Ok, there are probably fanatic 2nd Amendment types and fanatic anti-gun types - but wouldn't the moderates wishing to introduce some form of gun control (such as background checks and waiting periods, for example) whilst keeping the right to bear arms in principle, be the majority? It seems like this is one of these issues where politicians on both sides are more interested in keeping it as a wedge issue rather than a problem to be solved by compromise.

It is actually an example of where a minority can hold a democracy hostage to their views, even while the majority thinks they are bonkers.

It is a third rail for the radical gun nuts. Any attempt to have any kind of gun control is an instant and total reversal of any support for a politician, regardless of other views. Your typical gun nut would vote for a no gun control ever Sarah Palin over any kind of sane gun control advocate even if they aligned with all other views and where clearly a superior choice.

Couple that with vesting all political capital in the gun control debate into an organization that has been completely taken over by the complete crazies (the NRA) and the problem is considerably worse than simply whether we can have rational gun control. The debate happening right now is whether the NRA and their ilk will even allow current laws on the books to be enforced, much less discuss new ones.

So I guess you guys just need to mobilise and change the system by electing people who are not hostage to the gun lobby - that is if you cared enough about it to do something instead of bitching on online forums.