For Christ's sake, Charles. Without a mass shooting to report, you decide to just pull a mass shooting story out of your ass.

[Insert Goldy reference here.]

the "fix mental health first" argument is already the go-to second line of defense on Slog, or any internet forum where 2nd am. absolutists "debate" with rational people.

it's like saying "fix suicidal impulses" before you put up a tall fence on the aurora bridge.

The NRA and their gun nut supporters clearly don't actually believe in creating a viable mental health system. They just need to deflect criticism, and blaming the mental health system is the fastest and laziest way to do it. No libertarian gun nut is going to support expanding government health care. The health industry lobby is just as strong an influence on the right as the gun lobby.

@2

What would you know about rational people? Know who is rational? Those who believe that government is actually limited by the Constitution, they're rational, and they understand our history.

Those who believe that subjecting explicitly granted constitutional rights to public referendum based on irrational fear- they're rational.

Those who realize granting federal authority to suspend my rights today grants that authority to suspend yours tomorrow? Yep, they're rational.

You and your ilk running scared and willing to give other people rights away in consequence aren't rational. Hell, you aren't even truly American.

@4 oh! an "ilk", is it? Forsooth.

Whenever I see that kind "2nd Amendment" shirt-tucking nonsense, I'm reminded of something Antonin Scalia said in another context: the constitution is not a suicide pact.

Hey, every other complex issue has always had just one root cause and one simple solution, right?

@4: Why exactly do you feel you have any right or place to declare who is a "real" American/Christian/woman/man/family/whatever?

I do not want to engage with your laughably outdated and increasingly irrelevant ideas of these things, but rather just understand why you think you are the sole decider of what reality is.

Stupid CNN, Charles is right, there is no link between these shooters and mental health issues.

My prediction for this thread.

"Siding with a kind of politics that has the strengthening of gun control laws as one of its core agendas?"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_dilem…

@4: What would you know about rational people? Know who is rational? Those who understand that it is the prerogative of the Supreme Court to decide what is and isn't Constitutional, they're rational, and they understand our history.

Those who believe that it's wrong to subject explicitly granted constitutional rights, such as the right to equal protection under the law, to public referendum based on irrational fear, they're rational.

Those who realize that interpreting a given right as carte blanche against any reasonable regulation today leads to a total inability to regulate tomorrow? Yep, they're rational.

You and your ilk, running scared of big bad Uncle Sam and willing to needlessly endanger the lives of others in consequence, aren't rational. Hell, you aren't even truly American.

TL;DR: Seattleblues thinks he knows better than the Supreme Court as to what's Constitutional, thinks he knows better than the overwhelming majority of presidential historians as to the virtue and valor of FDR, thinks he knows better than the overwhelming majority of scientists as to whether evolution and climate change are real, and thinks he knows better than any religious leader as to what qualifies as Christian or not. He's got a terminally swelled head, no sense of personal fallibility, and an inability to learn beyond his own preconceived notions. He can be safely discounted.

Good Morning Charles,
I very much disagree with you on this Charles.

"A big part of the Reagan revolution was about kicking mentally ill people out of hospitals (socialism) and on to the streets (individualism). "

That simply isn't true. In fact, I've read of this canard before from the Left. That that is uttered so flippantly is just absurd. No, Reagan didn't merely 'wave a wand' and release the mentally ill. It just didn't happen that way. And, no the NRA isn't the enemy (I'm not a member nor do I possess a firearm).

I do believe pop culture AND some of the mentally ill are responsible for SOME of the mass killings in this country. But, what's conveniently forgotten is the great(!) number of murders in general by firearms in this country obtained illegally by perfectly rational humans. These killings are 'visceral reaction' or retaliatory.

Look, I get that we live in a very violent country vis-a-vis other developed countries. And, yes 'gun culture' has something to do that. But, we've had a 'gun culture' and mental illness for that matter, prior to the NRA (founded 1876?). Targeting excuse the verb, the NRA won't cut it in the great debate.

Never forget that Adam Lanza acquired his weapons from his mother in a very restrictive gun control state, Connecticut. Clearly, he was mentally ill. But institutionalizing him and other mentally ill is an extremely difficult process.

This tragic problem needs to be discussed openly w/o rancor. I'm all ears but pointing fingers doesn't help. Again for the record, I favor background checks and restrictions on some (most?) assault weapons.

There would be a lot fewer gun tragedies if every gun owner kept their firearms locked up in a gun safe and out of reach of the mentally ill, not to mention children, thugs, felons, and addicts.

If you know someone with obvious mental problems, and you know they have a firearms, talk to them about turning over their weapon to you for safekeeping. Separate them from their firearm if at all possible. Above all, do not do nothing.

@10 That was pretty much the best take down of that dickhead I have seen yet. There really is nothing left to say, and we should all follow up by completely ignoring him on all threads. Kudos!

@15 they only believe in freedom for Them, not feeedom for everyone. Its consistent with every other GOP policy.

This is such bullshit straw bull. I'm a libertarian: I want government to be smaller. That being said, I 100% support the government doing more to help the mentally ill, and hate Reagan and would piss on his grave if I had the chance.
The difference is that a liberal would raise taxes on everyone to fund a huge, ineffective federal mental health system. A libertarian would use the money saved from no longer fighting the war on drugs, the endless wars overseas and the endless layers of bureaucracy we want to do away with (why do we need the FBI AND the US Marshalls, exactly?) and use that to fund local, community based mental health.
Charles seems to think that it's impossible to both support mental health and the right to bear arms. Yep, just like it's impossible to support the right to bear arms and gay rights at the same time...oh...wait.... http://www.pinkpistols.org/

CNN is right, and not in the usual "Charles Mudede is wrong about everything" sort of way.

CNN is absolutely right about this.

Oh, and before any of you spout off about what a libertarian douchebag NRA shill I am, I'm a libby-lib who doesn't even own a gun.

And now you can get back to your little circle-jerk.

@10

The Supreme Court that in Heller determined the 2nd Amendment guaranty of the right to bear arms an individual one? Or the Supreme Court that in Citizens United decided (correctly) that for legal purposes corporations have rights of free expression- on incorrect jurisdiction since that question hadn't been raised by either counsel? Or would it be the court of Brown v Board or Plessy v Ferguson- which was right? If you think the high court infallible you're woefully ignorant of its history.

But then, you're a lefty who thinks the solution to any problem is a government programs. Paid for by someone else of course.

Don't recall ever questioning the right to equal protection. It is, of course, fundamental for a stable government. Which is why I dislike gay so called marriage, in which a tiny minority tries to destroy marriage for everyone else.

As for the rest, it's mere nonsense. Come back when you grow up and can talk sensibly with the adults, m'kay kiddo?

@18 LOL yep that pretty much sums it up.

@21: One of the many differences between you and me is that I don't claim to have higher judicial authority than the SCOTUS. I may DISAGREE with rulings like Citizens United, but I don't go around saying it's unconstitutional to allow corporations to donate money to politicians without being subject to limits and regulations. (For the record, I have no direct quarrel with DC v. Heller; I'm not terribly convinced of the value of an outright ban of personally-owned firearms.) But as much as I might disagree with Supreme Court rulings, I don't talk a load of bollocks about how they're wrong and we need to all just ignore them the way you think makes sense. The ruling is what it is; rather than ignoring it, I advocate to change it. This is how we do things in a system of popular sovereignty.

As for your assault on the right to equal protection, you yourself admitted to illegally discriminating against persons with regard to housing based on their sexual orientation. Also, you call it "destroy[ing] marriage for everyone else"; we call it "gay people getting married". Let's wait and see which happens. Will marriage be destroyed? Or will gay people just get married? I'll bet you $5000 on the outcome over the next ten years; are you in? And just to remind you, it's actually a majority that supports marriage equality now.

As for the rest, it's mere nonsense, just like the parts of your post that I directly addressed. Come back when you start thinking critically and can talk sensibly with anyone, okay you daft old fogey?