Graham Pushes Bill in Response to Weekend's Mass Shootings

[GURPS]

Senator Lindsey Graham (R-SC) announced a bipartisan 'red flag' bill on Monday that would set up a grant program designed to prevent mentally ill people from possessing firearms. Graham and Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) plan to introduce the bill soon. Sen. Pat Toomey (R-Penn.) is also reportedly introducing a similarly bipartisan bill with Sen. Joe Manchin (D-WV) to expand background checks.
Left and right-leaning media outlets have reported on this news similarly.

https://www.allsides.com/story/graham-pushes-bill-response-weekends-mass-shootings




Actions will solve nothing none of the mass shootings in they past 25 yrs would have been stopped by these ' common sense gun laws '

 

[Monello]

They won't be content until we turn into New Zealand.

 

[Hijinx]

I don't believe there is anyone here ----or anywhere else that is against stopping the insane and mentally ill from owning weapons.

The kick is who gets to decide who is mentally ill? What actions are needed to declare a person mentally ill.
If the "Powers that Be", decide a background check declares a person is mentally ill what does that do to that persons job, his/her livelihood, their societal acceptance, will they have a list that is publically available and that this person stays on for life?

If they are mentally ill shouldn't they be forced to be treated? Because after all a gun is not the only way to kill someone.
How many mentally ill people will slip through this net,because in the past they have not shown any signs of mental illness.?
When the Police go to their home and confiscate guns they already own should they be compensated for the value of the weapons?
If they have broken no laws is there a Constitutional right that allows Law enforcement to enter their domicile with no evidence against them except that they themselves gave them when they applied for a permit to buy a weapon?

 

[GURPS]

If the "Powers that Be", decide a background check declares a person is mentally ill what does that do to that persons job, his/her livelihood, their societal acceptance, will they have a list that is publically available and that this person stays on for life?

China's Social Credit Score Adjudicated by someone like Transporter


Oh So Sorry, Your Score Too Low To Buy Gun ....

 

[transporter]

Senator Lindsey Graham (R-SC) announced a bipartisan 'red flag' bill on Monday that would set up a grant program designed to prevent mentally ill people from possessing firearms. Graham and Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) plan to introduce the bill soon. Sen. Pat Toomey (R-Penn.) is also reportedly introducing a similarly bipartisan bill with Sen. Joe Manchin (D-WV) to expand background checks.
Left and right-leaning media outlets have reported on this news similarly.

https://www.allsides.com/story/graham-pushes-bill-response-weekends-mass-shootings




Actions will solve nothing none of the mass shootings in they past 25 yrs would have been stopped by these ' common sense gun laws '

Keep spouting your BS comrade.

Keep spinning...the ingorati must be kept in line.

BTW...what has doing nothing done????

 

[transporter]

I don't believe there is anyone here ----or anywhere else that is against stopping the insane and mentally ill from owning weapons.

The kick is who gets to decide who is mentally ill? What actions are needed to declare a person mentally ill.
If the "Powers that Be", decide a background check declares a person is mentally ill what does that do to that persons job, his/her livelihood, their societal acceptance, will they have a list that is publically available and that this person stays on for life?

If they are mentally ill shouldn't they be forced to be treated? Because after all a gun is not the only way to kill someone.
How many mentally ill people will slip through this net,because in the past they have not shown any signs of mental illness.?
When the Police go to their home and confiscate guns they already own should they be compensated for the value of the weapons?
If they have broken no laws is there a Constitutional right that allows Law enforcement to enter their domicile with no evidence against them except that they themselves gave them when they applied for a permit to buy a weapon?

Actually, if you would read the bullshit that is posted on here by all the gun nutters and the post you wrote above...most people on here are against stopping the insane and mentally ill from owning weapons.

Every question you asked is made in support of the insane and mentally ill owning weapons.

 

[GURPS]

Keep spouting your BS comrade.

Anyone or Anything that does not conform to YOUR World View is Either Ignorant, Uneducated or Selfish

Keep spinning .... the ingorati must be kept in line.

Ah Yes Ad Hominem Attacks make such cognizant conversation

BTW ... what has doing nothing done????

Allowed Americans to Keep Their Rights

Actually, if you would read the bullshit that is posted on here

Only Bullshit because you don't agree ...

by all the gun nutters and the post you wrote above ...

Yeah that fosters a discussion

most people on here are against stopping the insane and mentally ill from owning weapons.

Bullshit ... everyone on here has posted about the need to do more

the difference is NONE of the solutions offered would have changed ANYTHING

So many of us stand against giving the Gov MORE POWER just to ' feel safe '

MORE Firearms in the Public Space is a better solution

 

[Midnightrider]

They won't be content until we turn into New Zealand.

By ‘they’ you mean trump, right?

 

[black dog]

By ‘they’ you mean trump, right?

Post what firearms President Trump has banned?

 

[vraiblonde]

At first glance you have to wonder why they didn't do this years ago. Take another glance and you can see how our corrupt politicians and their mentally unstable cultbots will abuse this to eliminate their political enemies. The Democrats have been screaming to disarm their enemies ever since I can remember, and I have no doubt they will define "mentally ill" to mean "anyone who disagrees with them".

Too bad we can't trust our government to look out for our best interests, eh?

Anyway, this is a biscuit they throw to the howling dogs to shut them up. It will be forgotten in the next couple of weeks. Not to mention a lot of crazies fly below the radar...right up until the minute they start gunning people down.

 

[Yooper]

An interesting take on the intersection of Big Tech, liberal bias, and the recent shootings:

Audit: Google Heavily Favors CNN and Left Media in Mass Shoo...

RESEARCH REPORT The days following two tragic mass shootings in Dayton, OH and E

www.allsides.com

...readers who used Google to learn about the shootings may have seen an overwhelming majority of news from left-leaning media sources — CNN, the New York Times and the Washington Post in particular — rather than a mix of news sources from the left, center, and right, according to a new audit by AllSides.

The audit found:

• 70% of results were from outlets that have an AllSides Media Bias Rating of Lean Left or Left.
• 18% of stories were from outlets that have a Center media bias.
• 4% of stories were from Lean Right or Right biased outlets.
• 8% of results came from outlets not rated by AllSides.

In addition, nearly half (46%) of results came from just three news websites. CNN (25%), the New York Times (14%) and the Washington Post (7%) appeared in the first three results of the “Top Stories” box most often.

This analysis does not show any direct evidence that Google is intentionally suppressing voices from the right in relation to the shootings. It may be that a lack of right-leaning news media overall accounts for the huge difference between left and right-leaning appearances in Google News, or is perhaps an unintended consequence of Google’s algorithm.

Google’s preference for left media outlets meant certain perspectives were seen more than others.

For example, the suspected El Paso shooter wrote a manifesto expressing his concern about a “Hispanic invasion of Texas.” An oft-seen narrative in news coverage came from sources on the left that tied the manifesto to comments President Donald Trump has made, which some on the left see as incitements to racist violence. Meanwhile, news outlets and commentators on the right mentioned that the Dayton shooter was a socialist and supporter of Elizabeth Warren, while emphasizing their belief in the importance of protecting free speech in the wake of the shootings.

Not every story published by a left-leaning outlet is biased. But they often provide similar narratives that align more with the left-wing than other political tribes. Consuming articles like this is part of a healthy news diet, but a 70% left-wing bias is not balanced.

I probably snipped too much already. So please do AllSides a favor and click over to read the rest (to include graphics).

H/T GURPS (for bringing AllSides to my attention awhile back).

--- End of line (MCP)