John Oliver touches on Mental Health (and mass shootings)

[lnrw]

Saz, you are so wrong about people not grasping 'the concept of federalism.'

Ask some of your elders if it mattered to them who was wearing the boot on their necks.

[lnrw]

[Saz]

[Saz]

[lnrw]

[lnrw]

[Dylan]

[lnrw]

[Saz]

Again, wrong. If you have or are serving in the militia, then own a firearm. I'm actually of the belief that even felons, if they meet the requirements, should not have this right infringed. It's not a question of law abiding or not, its a question of if they government has a right to limit what an individual can do. Simply because they have such a right, does not mean they will exercise it. The government could tax people at 99% if it wanted, but they don't, even though it has that power.

The bottom line is, unless you have served in the militia, the government should have the power to limit who can bear arms and when. You seem to not at all wonder the innocents who are murdered by individuals that should not have a gun. You seem to ignore the fact that law abiding citizens use guns to commit illegal acts all the time. You seem to ignore the fact that the government does licence and restrict certain people from using a whole range of deadly items, from cars to transporting dangerous chemicals, all the time. Basically, except for the carve out for the militia and it's members, there is no reason, constitutionally or from a policy perspective, that guns should not be licences and regulated like every other extremely dangerous item in society. I suppose there is no point in banning RPG's or hell, nuclear weapons, as all it does is take them out of the hands of the law abiding while doing nothing to keep law breakers from using them!

It's a facile argument and out of touch with reality.

[Saz]