• treefrog@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      You’re linking an article about a study funded by Biden’s justice department and the other poster is right about your both sides comments

      The OPs article is about an office Biden is creating for this exact type of research too.

      I understand the frustration. I have a 13 year old who his mom has tucked away in gun loving rural America.

      But your both sidesisms are not helpful.

      • Jeremy [Iowa]@midwest.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        You’re linking an article about a study funded by Biden’s justice department and the other poster is right about your both sides comments.

        Care to support that?

        The OPs article is about an office Biden is creating for this exact type of research too.

        Right - Biden, of AR-ban fame.

        It remains to be seen whether or not this office will support any research or just parrot Everytown.

        I understand the frustration. I have a 13 year old who his mom has tucked away in gun loving rural America.

        But your both sidesisms are not helpful.

        I don’t believe you do, given your refusal to hold blue team accountable for their failings here in doing anything beyond focusing on symptoms. I’d argue such willful partisan blindness is less helpful.

        • treefrog@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          Funded by the National Institute of Justice, the research arm of the Department of Justice

          From the article you posted.

          The rest is math. They decided to do the project in 2019. Grants take anywhere from 8-20 months to get funded. It also takes time to put together the application.

          Biden’s Justice department funded this research. And since you’re being rude, for ages was clearly bullshit too. You linked an article talking about research that was conceived in 2019.

          • Jeremy [Iowa]@midwest.social
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            1 year ago

            From the article you posted. The rest is math. They decided to do the project in 2019. Grants take anywhere from 8-20 months to get funded. It also takes time to put together the application.

            Ah, I see - you argue that a department is Biden’s for nothing more than his being President at the time.

            And since you’re being rude, for ages was clearly bullshit too. You linked an article talking about research that was conceived in 2019.

            Don’t project.

            You could argue it was exaggerating, sure. It doesn’t change the information has been available and continues to be summarily ignored by both parties.

            • treefrog@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              The NRA (and GOP), have been stifling this type of research for years. So yes, I doubt the justice department under Trump would have approved their research grant.

              I forgave your hyperbole the first time, as you said, it was an exaggeration. Then you came at me like I don’t care about my son because you think I have political bias.

              I’m an anarcho-syndacalist. And I’m sure there’s a lot of other far left people down voting you. I’m not sucking the Democrats off. And acting like both sides are to blame isn’t helpful.

              The Democrats are sick of gun violence and I’m sure they’re aware of the research the justice department, under Biden, funded.

  • Jordan Lund@lemmy.one
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    Here’s the trick… the Nashville shooter had no criminal record and bought the guns 100% legally. There is no gun restriction that would block someone who passes the background check from buying a gun.

    BUT:

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2023_Nashville_school_shooting

    “Hale was under care for an emotional disorder and had legally purchased seven firearms, including three recovered from the shooting scene, between October 2020 and June 2022.[1]”

    If someone is under psychological care, should that be allowed to pop up on a background check? Maybe not as an instant disqualification the way a court ordered commitment or conviction would, but as an advisory note? Leave it to the discretion of the firearms seller? “By the way, this person is undergoing psych care, you could be held liable if they use this firearm in a crime.” That kind of thing?

    Because right now, the only stuff that shows up on the background check are things that were ruled on by a judge, and sometimes not even all of those.

    For example:

    The guy who shot up Michigan State University:

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2023_Michigan_State_University_shooting

    “McRae was arrested in June 2019 for carrying a weapon without a concealed pistol license.[38] Initially charged with a felony, he pleaded guilty to misdemeanor unlawful possession of a loaded firearm as part of a plea agreement in November 2019.[39] He was originally sentenced to twelve months’ probation, which was later extended to 18 months, and in May 2021, he was discharged from probation.[35] Because McRae was not convicted of a felony, his ban on possessing weapons ended with the end of his probation.[40]”

    Arrested for a felony gun charge, pled out to a misdemeanor, did his time, did his probation, was allowed to buy guns again.

    Had he been convicted of the felony, he would have been blocked from owning a gun. The misdemeanor was not a barrier and did not appear on the background check.

    Maybe it should have? Maybe ANY gun charges, felony OR misdemeanor should bar you from gun ownership?

    • treefrog@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Stopping people in therapy from owning guns is a good way to stop people from getting mental health care.

      And anyone who has therapy billed to insurance has a mental health diagnosis. That’s just the nature of healthcare billing in the U.S.