Call on Walmart to end gun sales

Forum rules
Keep News and Politics about News and Politics.

Do not post full articles from other websites. Always link back to the source

Discuss things respectfully and take into account that each person has a different opinion.

Remember that this is a place for everyone to enjoy. Don’t try and run people off of the site. If you are upset with someone then utilize the foe feature.

Report when things come up.

Personal attacks are against guidelines however attacks need to be directed at a member on the forum for it to be against guidelines. Lying is not against guidelines, it’s hard for us to prove someone even did lie.

Once a topic is locked we consider the issue handled and no longer respond to new reports on the topic.
Della
Princess
Princess
Posts: 21975
Joined: Sun Jun 03, 2018 12:46 pm

Unread post

Inmybizz wrote: Fri Aug 16, 2019 10:08 am I didn't read the article. Is Walmart the top gun seller?
Another question is how many murders and mass shootings have occurred with guns bought from Wal-Mart?
306/232

But I'm still the winner! They lied! They cheated! They stole the election!
Momto2boys973
Princess
Princess
Posts: 20107
Joined: Wed May 23, 2018 5:32 pm

Unread post

If those background de were any useful, the Virginia Tech shooter wouldn’t have been able to legally buy one over the Internet. He had a history of mental illness and violence tendencies.
Fact is, those “background checks” are just the bare minimum and completely useless. They’re just there for the pro-gun crowd to be able claim that “something” is being done.
29again wrote: Fri Aug 16, 2019 2:40 am Purchasing a gun over the internet still requires a background check at the delivery point, which must be someone who holds an FFL. They do the check, and if you pass, you can pick up the gun. It's not like when you order a gadget off of Amazon, that gets delivered to your doorstep.
Momto2boys973 wrote: Thu Aug 15, 2019 12:35 pm Exactly. So obviously backgrounds check are useless. Just like putting a Band-Aid in open heart surgery. Just the illusion that something is being done.

And by using the guns he wasn’t a criminal. He was old enough to carry a gun, he just wasn’t old enough to own one (yeah, very logical 👍🏻😁) If the “background check” had included the people in her household that could have access to the gun and mental health being a deterrent to have access to a gun, she wouldn’t have been able to purchase one legally and she didn’t seem the kind to be so desperate to go and get one illegally. If background checks include checking social media and allowing for a waiting period of not 3 days, but of 3 months to see how the person is behaving, if gun ownership was limited to a certain number and types of guns and ammo, then maybe some of these incidents should be stopped. There’s no excuse why Stephen Paddock owned 24 legal weapons that he used to murder people in Las Vegas. ZERO excuses for that. Number of guns owned should be a red flag in any background check.

And, as I said, mass shootings are crimes so opportunity. If Adam Lanza, the Columbine kids, the Orlando club shooter, and the Virginia yech shooter didn’t have a ready access to guns, those crimes would most likely not have been committed. Seung-Hui Cho had a history of mental problems, even psychiatric evaluations for suicide threats and he was even able to legally purchase a gun over the internet. So again... how did the “background check” help there?
hockeymom87 wrote: Thu Aug 15, 2019 12:20 pm
And when his mother bought that gun he didn’t have anything that would have came up to stop her from getting it. Him and other using guns that aren’t there’s shows that criminals(and if you use a gun that’s not your a criminal) don’t care about laws.
❤️🇮🇱 עמ׳ ישראל חי 🇮🇱❤️
Deleted User 1344

Unread post

MysticDreamer wrote: Fri Aug 16, 2019 5:58 am
Rebeccaraev2 wrote: Thu Aug 15, 2019 12:10 pm
EarlGrayHot wrote: Thu Aug 15, 2019 9:42 am Well, three days is hardly enough time to do a thorough background check. That is ridiculous.
I got my job in a prison, federal background checks, and it only took 2 days.
When I worked at the prison, it took me 30 minutes, to a to run a background check on potential visitors. When there is nothing to find, it don't take long at all.
Well that’s great but what if there is something, a real issue that is harder to find and takes more time such as that nutcase in Charleston SC who shot at least a dozen people in a black church? They sold him his gun before the background check was complete!
And that’s not unusual now days. It sounds like you have just been lucky!
Deleted User 1018

Unread post

Ledina60 wrote: Fri Aug 16, 2019 11:47 am
MysticDreamer wrote: Fri Aug 16, 2019 5:58 am
Rebeccaraev2 wrote: Thu Aug 15, 2019 12:10 pm

I got my job in a prison, federal background checks, and it only took 2 days.
When I worked at the prison, it took me 30 minutes, to a to run a background check on potential visitors. When there is nothing to find, it don't take long at all.
Well that’s great but what if there is something, a real issue that is harder to find and takes more time such as that nutcase in Charleston SC who shot at least a dozen people in a black church? They sold him his gun before the background check was complete!
And that’s not unusual now days. It sounds like you have just been lucky!
Backgrounds only cover what has been reported. I imagine psych issues are covered under HIPAA and would not ever come up on a background, as current laws stand. Criminal offenses would be the same. If the individual has not ever been arrested nothing will be found out. Watch enough ID Discovery, you will find that many times, the offender didn't have a criminal history prior to offending. Sure, an extensive background would weed out people, but it isn't a cure all. I think one of the recent mass shooters didnt have a criminal history. Having radical views isnt a crime, yet.
Deleted User 1344

Unread post

MysticDreamer wrote: Fri Aug 16, 2019 3:46 pm
Ledina60 wrote: Fri Aug 16, 2019 11:47 am
MysticDreamer wrote: Fri Aug 16, 2019 5:58 am

When I worked at the prison, it took me 30 minutes, to a to run a background check on potential visitors. When there is nothing to find, it don't take long at all.
Well that’s great but what if there is something, a real issue that is harder to find and takes more time such as that nutcase in Charleston SC who shot at least a dozen people in a black church? They sold him his gun before the background check was complete!
And that’s not unusual now days. It sounds like you have just been lucky!
Backgrounds only cover what has been reported. I imagine psych issues are covered under HIPAA and would not ever come up on a background, as current laws stand. Criminal offenses would be the same. If the individual has not ever been arrested nothing will be found out. Watch enough ID Discovery, you will find that many times, the offender didn't have a criminal history prior to offending. Sure, an extensive background would weed out people, but it isn't a cure all. I think one of the recent mass shooters didnt have a criminal history. Having radical views isnt a crime, yet.
But they did find something that indicated he was potential trouble, in a watch list and belonged to a white supremacy group and voiced plans to act on his prejudices. It was discovered shortly after he killed the people in their Church.
There are many flaws in the present system. And that’s why we are having so many tragic mass shootings.
Momto2boys973
Princess
Princess
Posts: 20107
Joined: Wed May 23, 2018 5:32 pm

Unread post

But then if America is a country that cares more about personal rights than about public safety, then it shouldn’t be so fast and lose with guns. It’s a terrible combination, as we’re seeing now. It’s inexcusable that a kid with known and extensive mental health problems, with violent tendencies was able to get a gun over the Internet with just a useless look at his “record”. And if the justification for such blatant disregard for public safety is that he has a “right” to have his mental issues private, then America, you need to take away the possibility of buying guns from everyone.
Not everything should be a “right” for everyone without question.
MysticDreamer wrote: Fri Aug 16, 2019 3:46 pm
Ledina60 wrote: Fri Aug 16, 2019 11:47 am
MysticDreamer wrote: Fri Aug 16, 2019 5:58 am
When I worked at the prison, it took me 30 minutes, to a to run a background check on potential visitors. When there is nothing to find, it don't take long at all.
Well that’s great but what if there is something, a real issue that is harder to find and takes more time such as that nutcase in Charleston SC who shot at least a dozen people in a black church? They sold him his gun before the background check was complete!
And that’s not unusual now days. It sounds like you have just been lucky!
Backgrounds only cover what has been reported. I imagine psych issues are covered under HIPAA and would not ever come up on a background, as current laws stand. Criminal offenses would be the same. If the individual has not ever been arrested nothing will be found out. Watch enough ID Discovery, you will find that many times, the offender didn't have a criminal history prior to offending. Sure, an extensive background would weed out people, but it isn't a cure all. I think one of the recent mass shooters didnt have a criminal history. Having radical views isnt a crime, yet.
❤️🇮🇱 עמ׳ ישראל חי 🇮🇱❤️
Deleted User 1018

Unread post

Known or otherwise, when you deal with mental health issue, you enter the realm where HIPAA comes into play. How far one wants to play with that, I guess depends on the individual. Now, I do know a felon isnt supposed to own a weapon, but most people who are felons dont care about that, or they wouldnt be a felon. And felony convictions are matter of public record. Anybody's criminal history can be looked at. Then you deal with individual dealers, those who run the gun shows. I had a neighbor who was a gun dealer, and he didnt believe in the Brady Bill and all the restrictions that went with that. He helped several other neighbors get guns without the background checks. There are so many loopholes and just plain holes for anybody, if they so choose, to get a weapon. Around here, people borrow hunting rifles to go hunt their game of choice, if they don't have a hunting rifle. We have several times, to hunt small game.

[ :evil: quote=Momto2boys973 post_id=531235 time=1565989815 user_id=489]
But then if America is a country that cares more about personal rights than about public safety, then it shouldn’t be so fast and lose with guns. It’s a terrible combination, as we’re seeing now. It’s inexcusable that a kid with known and extensive mental health problems, with violent tendencies was able to get a gun over the Internet with just a useless look at his “record”. And if the justification for such blatant disregard for public safety is that he has a “right” to have his mental issues private, then America, you need to take away the possibility of buying guns from everyone.
Not everything should be a “right” for everyone without question.
MysticDreamer wrote: Fri Aug 16, 2019 3:46 pm
Ledina60 wrote: Fri Aug 16, 2019 11:47 am
Well that’s great but what if there is something, a real issue that is harder to find and takes more time such as that nutcase in Charleston SC who shot at least a dozen people in a black church? They sold him his gun before the background check was complete!
And that’s not unusual now days. It sounds like you have just been lucky!
Backgrounds only cover what has been reported. I imagine psych issues are covered under HIPAA and would not ever come up on a background, as current laws stand. Criminal offenses would be the same. If the individual has not ever been arrested nothing will be found out. Watch enough ID Discovery, you will find that many times, the offender didn't have a criminal history prior to offending. Sure, an extensive background would weed out people, but it isn't a cure all. I think one of the recent mass shooters didnt have a criminal history. Having radical views isnt a crime, yet.
[/quote]
Della
Princess
Princess
Posts: 21975
Joined: Sun Jun 03, 2018 12:46 pm

Unread post

This article, Part I of two articles addressing this topic, discusses the various law enforcement-related exceptions to the general rule that the patient's written authorization is required prior to a covered entity's disclosure of protected health information ("PHI"). Part II will address various exceptions specifically related to subpoenas, court orders, warrants, and administrative demands issued by courts, agencies, and attorneys.

https://www.wardandsmith.com/articles/h ... sts-part-i
MysticDreamer wrote: Fri Aug 16, 2019 6:41 pm Known or otherwise, when you deal with mental health issue, you enter the realm where HIPAA comes into play. How far one wants to play with that, I guess depends on the individual. Now, I do know a felon isnt supposed to own a weapon, but most people who are felons dont care about that, or they wouldnt be a felon. And felony convictions are matter of public record. Anybody's criminal history can be looked at. Then you deal with individual dealers, those who run the gun shows. I had a neighbor who was a gun dealer, and he didnt believe in the Brady Bill and all the restrictions that went with that. He helped several other neighbors get guns without the background checks. There are so many loopholes and just plain holes for anybody, if they so choose, to get a weapon. Around here, people borrow hunting rifles to go hunt their game of choice, if they don't have a hunting rifle. We have several times, to hunt small game.

[ :evil: quote=Momto2boys973 post_id=531235 time=1565989815 user_id=489]
But then if America is a country that cares more about personal rights than about public safety, then it shouldn’t be so fast and lose with guns. It’s a terrible combination, as we’re seeing now. It’s inexcusable that a kid with known and extensive mental health problems, with violent tendencies was able to get a gun over the Internet with just a useless look at his “record”. And if the justification for such blatant disregard for public safety is that he has a “right” to have his mental issues private, then America, you need to take away the possibility of buying guns from everyone.
Not everything should be a “right” for everyone without question.
MysticDreamer wrote: Fri Aug 16, 2019 3:46 pm
Ledina60 wrote: Fri Aug 16, 2019 11:47 am
Well that’s great but what if there is something, a real issue that is harder to find and takes more time such as that nutcase in Charleston SC who shot at least a dozen people in a black church? They sold him his gun before the background check was complete!
And that’s not unusual now days. It sounds like you have just been lucky!
Backgrounds only cover what has been reported. I imagine psych issues are covered under HIPAA and would not ever come up on a background, as current laws stand. Criminal offenses would be the same. If the individual has not ever been arrested nothing will be found out. Watch enough ID Discovery, you will find that many times, the offender didn't have a criminal history prior to offending. Sure, an extensive background would weed out people, but it isn't a cure all. I think one of the recent mass shooters didnt have a criminal history. Having radical views isnt a crime, yet.
[/quote]
306/232

But I'm still the winner! They lied! They cheated! They stole the election!
User avatar
Poietes
Regent
Regent
Posts: 2492
Joined: Thu May 24, 2018 11:57 am

Unread post

This whole conversation is amusing to read as I’m sitting at a hunters safety course with my 13 year old.
”Just because you can doesn’t mean you should.”
Deleted User 1344

Unread post

Poietes wrote: Fri Aug 16, 2019 8:32 pm This whole conversation is amusing to read as I’m sitting at a hunters safety course with my 13 year old.
13 is a little young to be putting a gun in a kid’s hands.
Let him be innocent a little while longer!
Locked Previous topicNext topic