Right

Someone mentioned that it is not guns that kill people - people kill.

Maybe we are looking at this the wrong way ? ?.

Lets prevent certain, people from buying guns.

In this case it seems that a Wall*Mart store, saw this shooter as unstable and decided NOT to sell him bullets - sadly another different Wall*Mart Store sold him the bullets. Why from one store to the next made a big difference ?

I dunno ?
But seems to me there is a way to keep the gun laws but not sell to nut cases ? ?

someone probably meeting their sales quota !

One take home message from Bowling for Columbine was that Canada has more guns /capita than we do, but they have a huge cultural difference where they actually respect each other and human life !! . . and we claim to be the "greatest" nation... I don't think we're even close any more.

Cs and Ds in humanities don't get you into Oxford !!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_gun_ownership

This is a list of countries by number of guns divided by number of residents.

The numbers are based on the average of figures provided by the Small Arms Survey 2007, unless other sources are provided, and are an estimation based on dividing the total amount of civilian owned guns in a nation by the total population of that nation. As many people possess multiple weapons and many others possess none, this number is not a representation of the percentage of people who possess guns in each nation. Nor does it recognize that there are government supplied weapons for militia such as Switzerland. Alternatively, a civilian supplied country such as the USA, can have the data significantly distorted by owners that are collectors that have huge collections of weaponry. Another obvious variable is that a country such as Yemen where the public bearing of armament is so obvious that it results in an unreliably wide estimated range of 30% to 90%. . .



I did just a little research on your claim ". . .they have a huge cultural difference where they actually respect each other and human life !!. . . ."

I found nothing to substantiate it and I think it is a baseless claim on anyone's part.

Kate, Kate, Kate . . .

you don't understand . .

the reason they only record 31.5 / 100 people is because the rest are concealed weapons !!

Ok guess what I heard about the numbers was inaccurate !

How can you really tell if he was a nut case or not?There are to many mentally ill people walking around today who should be hospitalized.The problem is when they are hospitalized they only hold them for72 hours and bingo they are outside once again in the streets.Another aspect is they have to be a danger to themselves or others to be hospitalized as I know from experience being married to a paranoid schitzo for over 16 years until she finally died 10 years ago. Mental Illness has to really be approached more forcefully today and not being shied away from.

Yeah you said it brother . . if anyone doubts that, . . . just watch Fox News !!

Right Jerry.

Another aspect is they have to be a danger to themselves or others to be hospitalized

Thats really the sad part to this 72 hour, turn around. I don't even think that these people, get any real help at all ? ? Many just end up being homeless and wondering around. Just seems like a revolving door.

Spot on. Unfortunately, there are too many people who do not realize the severity of this situation

You my friend are 100% correct.My wife that died was held for a measly 72 hours and than let go and bingo the rampage of her mental illness started once again. They only want to medicate you and not really get to the root of the problem which is a bummer.

Heard a psychologist the other day on the radio and she said even after all these years , people still don't accept mental diseases as a "disease", as they readily do contagious diseases...
many still fully or partially blame the patient instead of recognizing they have no more control over it than someone has of picking up a cold !

Sorry to hear about your wife.

Sadly the 72 hr turnaround is a symptom of a profit based health care system (profits of hospitals, profits of doctors, profits of insurance companies). I don't know what the answer is , but as long as it's profit driven these things will continue to happen.

I think one big mistake is they tend to make policies (both medical procedures and coverage) in lumps (groups)... example - heart attack patients get "X, Y and Z" BUT they're not all alike... some may not need Y or Z , and others may need all plus A, B and C ! But they tend to lump instead of go by the specifics of the diagnosis of the patient's symptoms.
AND not all patients heal at the same rate, thus 72 hrs for all is stupid !! . . some might need 48 and some a week ! . . again, I think it's mostly driven by profits.