Thread: 24 shot in 24 hours prompting Mayor Bloomberg to call for tougher gun laws

Before I head off to work -

Let's go back to the psychiatric issue. How many millions out here have serious psych problems and/or are on psych meds? Why should these people be allowed to carry and a guy who can't pass a police psych exam get turned down because the psychologist thinks he'd be a danger to carry a gun?

Let's say you slap a cop in the face and get the maximum misdemeanor penalty, a year in jail. Do you think a perp deserves more than a year in jail for this crime? You might, but if I go back to the scenario, why is it that right now in 2011, this perp can be convicted of this misdemeanor of slapping a cop and have let's say 20 other convictions for low level assault and let's say 20 other arrests for felony assault but no convictions and still be allowed to carry? This guy has obviously displayed repeated violent behavior, but he will still be able to purchase a firearm.

Taking rounds from a 30-30 or a .223 or a .40 or a .357 etc goes back to what I posted a few back - Yes, we need to regulate and restrict rounds as well. These types of weapons and ammo are simply not needed in a 'civilized' society.

Can I imagine a day where I'm walking through Times Square and the homeless guy on the street who has no felony conviction record, but 100 other arrests and convictions, and is schizo and bi polar and depressed is allowed to carry a handgun or assault rifle? And to simply balk it off and say that it's his right to own those weapons? Hell no. I'll keep these very restrictive gun laws we have here.

The system is flawed. At some point in time we have to look at the bigger picture. I think once people can do that without such tunnel vision, then they will see that just allowing free carry to any citizen is irresponsible. Laws are created and changed daily across the nation - there is a reason the word "amendment" exists.

And finally, keeping things on the inquisitive level here - what were your views about the Brady law?

On that note, good luck and stay safe, CT time for me - "Stay thirsty my friends" Let us all pray for no attack today.

I'll tell you what, when we get a "civilized society" one day, I'll consider revising my views. We don't have one today. We won't until we fix the legal system that lets someone have all the arrests you describe without a felony conviction. I'd prefer to risk the nutty guy get a weapon than to take them away from the millions who have the right to carry one (like your New Yorkers, who DO have that right and who are presently having it violated by the NY legal system). As for Brady background checks, I have no problem with requiring sellers to ensure that a purchaser isn't a felon.

Regarding the Brady Act, I'm also referring to the numerous prohibitions/restrictions attached to it. What are your views on the restrictions?

That's part of my issue as well - if the right to bear arms was so strong, then why is it that cities such as New York (not the state, just the city) can be so restrictive and do so legally, and in plain view of the Constitution, the NRA and everyone else? Restrictive gun laws is nothing new in NYC, it's been around for decades.

I think it's way past time to truly revisit this issue. Guns exist and are available to the public. Tens of thousands die each year at the hands of a man or woman with a gun. Would that violence exist if no one had access to guns? I don't think so. I mentioned before, it takes a different kind of mentality/man to shoot someone as opposed to stabbing or cutting someone. I don't think that everyone would all of a sudden begin to carry knives. If you didn't already carry a knife, then I doubt you'd start. And if you did, I doubt you'd use it.