Excuse my ignorance, but what do the pro-guns lobby have against universal background checks?

[Monty91]

[Gunner Since Time Began - born to moan]

[Monty91]

[Chief Arrowhead]

http://buffalo.ynn.com/content/top_stories/655499/judge-orde rs-guns-returned-to-amherst-man-mistakenly-identified-as-vio lating-the-safe-act/ (http://buffalo.ynn.com/content/top_stories/655499/judge-orders-guns-returned-to-amherst-man-mistakenly-identified-as-violating-the-safe-act/)

[Chief Arrowhead]

Criminals won't comply, will they?

It doesn't screen for mental instability or things like that. Every one of these recent scumbags could have complied, and some did buy guns because they weren't criminals.

If you have a national database of gun owners, it's a simple matter to go house to house to take them away. Or, you could just demand that everyone turn in their guns, making those that don't comply a criminal. So it is one of those "give them an inch" things.

Those in favor of this don't really want to solve the main issue, which is to deter these tragedies or quickly respond to save lives.

Many, many, many disagree with the above opinion.

[seasider7]

[Monty91]

It seems that whenever these events take place the news channels go against every single word of advice from health/psychology experts about how to cover them in a way that will not encourage/inspire others.

[Chief Arrowhead]

Witness all the speculation yesterday, and today about who committed the horror in Boston.

It's a tough one for them because their revenues and viewership are in freefall and the major media in today's world are constantly behind the curve. Twitter had all the real time info out there. So they are under pressure to report what they know without going through the principles of journalism, which is to verify the source as legitimate and then independently confirm said info BEFORE reporting.

When you couple this with the fact that they are completely in sync with the template of the left you end up with a decidedly skewed theme as to what is important and what is not.

Sandy Hook is a classic example. Debating the actual notion of deterring the horror, or at least shortening the response so that lives are saved, was long since abandoned and the task of denegrating their political opposition began. Piers Morgan has since dedicated his whole show non-stop to this cause. If you have an opinion other than the political template of the left you are shouted down, called names, etc.

Pretty sad, because there are some pretty good ideas on both sides, but to acknowledge that the NRA might have a decent idea or two is absolutely not allowed because it is necessary to portray all NRA members as gun totin' rednecks with few teeth and a *snicker* fear of God.

this plays out in the media on a daily basis.

[Supermac1976]

http://youtu.be/PezlFNTGWv4

[barrybueno]

[Supermac1976]

[seasider7]

[Chief Arrowhead]

it becomes robotic.

There's a lot od societal implications in these incidents as well. Most likely the shooter believes he will become famous, and who can deny that? The media will make him famous. Mass killers get an extra special recognition as well. The media will use his whole name - first, middle and last.

In a culture where being famous becomes the end all, those with warped minds and hyper-inflated egos view these actions as justifiable, especially if they have a claim to being a victim of some sort.

I guess it has always been this way, though, in one way or another, so there's not a lot stopping it. But it seems rational not to solely pinpoint something like background checks or semi-automatic guns or bullet clips as the panacea. It's just seizing the opportunity to defeat what you view as your "enemy".

Hence my running pressure cooker satire.