The god of Liberty is a hungry god. Child Sacrifice Uvalde edition. [UNLV Update]

Actually had an idea that might help. So why isn't that happening?

Reagan.

Because people don't want to "stigmatize" the mentally ill. It's society's job to adjust around them.

Which is why you're still here.

Please describe the adjustments anyone must make for my dysfunction.

Or concede you've got nothing by making a wise ass remark instead.

Putting your boring ass on ignore.

Oh, please god no.

Anything but that!

One concession offered and accepted.

Couple of extra shots of whiskey, typically.

Less brain damage than beating my head against the wall, which is the other tempting reaction.

How does that claim fit in with this?

It certainly is crazy talk, becayse you keep saying it despite the fact that mental health issues don't seem to be a factor in most mass shootings. https://www.columbiapsychiatry.org/news/mass-shootings-and-mental-illness-5

You would have to ask the people who made that decision. I'm more interested in why anyone would be opposed to rounding them up and warehousing them NOW.

One factor among many. They could be showing violent shitbag tendencies without a diagnosis. Whatever their malfunction, the solution is the same: remove them from the opportunity to cause further harm.

Yeah we should come up with a system where we can predict who will commit a crime and throw them in jail before it happens.

Read my post again. Take special note of the word "SHOWING. " That's where we transition from potential to actual, and that's when you need to deal with the fuckers. Deal how? Asked and answered.

*Retarded guy shows UA his birdhouse*

*UA hamburgers him with a Gatling gun*

*Rambo theme plays with the mustard squirt noises in UA's pants*

*Credits roll, Georgia peach logo for no reason, soundtrack on Varise Sarabande*

Terminator theme, or nothing.

Many mass shooters and serial killers have some mental illness as well as being victims of childhood abuse. There is definitely a correlation and while I haven't dived into that rabbit hole yet, I have to assume there is some department keeping records somewhere.

But, as far as mental health itself goes, if it was less stigmatized and treated as an actual ailment, not something to hide away, then many of those with violent tendencies could go through much needed counseling and, perhaps, prevent future violence.

Alas, we'll never know, because as @Diacanu said earlier, Reagan pretty much put the kibosh on that. While he may have had good intentions of shutting down abusive asylums, his decision also, to use a right wing phrase, had the unintended consequences of removing funding for other programs that could or would help.

You can treat them all you want, from inside a secured facility.

What you will not do is let them run free and demand sociey adjust around them.

Unless the adjustment is The Purge, then *creeeaaamm*
I'm sure that was Reagan's phase 2, but it got shot down in committee.

Get ready to lock up:

1) most retail store managers
2) chefs
3) many, many GOP supporters and quite a few Congresscritters
4) Donald Trump

Triggering you to the point you wet your frilly man-panties is not a sign of violent proclivities.

Again with the hatred of femininity.
That shit goes back to Nietzsche. Well, even further back to St. Paul.
But Nietzsche put the sneer and the lip curl to it.

My hatred is of frills on panties, thank you very much.

So Jenee has to parade into the boudoir in chainmail?
Don't you put her through enough?
Tch.

You assume I don't wear a matching chainmail banana hammock, in the name of fairness.

Grabbing for the neck of a Secret Service officer is though.

You're really reaching with this deflection.

You tend to over react and express violent tendencies or solutions, should you be rounded up?

Also covered by the link I provided. In many mass shootings there are no obvious signs that wouldn't also apply to hundreds of thousands if not millions of other people who never engage in a mass shooting.

I am interested in your idea of doing more detailed checks on people's backgrounds to see if they are deemed a risk to society.

Seems like a massive workload to deal with though, filtering through the whole population. Perhaps it could be more practically streamlined by focusing these background checks on people trying to buy firearms?