|Quoting D L X (Reply 46):|
I know you don't actually mean that, so I apologize for being harsh, but it just grates at me whenever someone discounts the gun discussion that inevitably follows a gun tragedy as mere "politicizing it" like it is some sort of game.
Did you read the list of firearms he had on him at the time? And I'm not being snarky. When the CO shooter was arrested he had an AR-15, 2 Glock 40 cal. pistols and a Remington 12 gauge shotgun. Since it's early and so close to the event I can't speak to which guns he used. But, in order to own the 2 pistols he would have had to go through Colorado's Instant Criminal Background Check System clean. No state I know of in the US requires a background check or license for a shotgun. So, in this case the Remington shotgun would have been legal for him to own anywhere in the US. And, it's just as deadly when loaded with buckshot.
There are various laws for AR-15 (and other semi-automatic magazine fed firearms) ownership by state and they are all almost exclusively related to the capacity of the magazine. To be honest this is not much different than the conversation that was had here on A-net right after Anders Behring Breivik set off an explosive in Oslo and shot all those children in Utøya.
The caliber of an AR-15 is exactly the same as the Mini-14 rifle Breivik used in Utøya (and both are magazine fed). So my point is that I don't think that more laws are needed. Breivik built a car bomb out of fertilizer just like the OK City bomber did. Should we ban nitrogen based fertilizers? We live in a dangerous world. Someone who really wants to inflict maximum pain to others will, regardless of what regulations we put in place. But, sometimes law abiding citizens that legally own firearms save the day, just like this guy did in Florida last week:
|Quoting Acheron (Reply 47):|
Or just require mandatory regular psychological tests as part of ownership?. Or does that infringe upon the 2nd Amendment as well?.
I'll start with this article from the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law.
I won't paraphrase it, but it does do a decent job of explaining our current legal restrictions to gun ownership in the US if you have a psychiatric condition. And there are some restrictions.
But, to answer your original question no regular psychological tests are required and I don't think they should be. For purposes of conversation, I've known several people that were diagnosed with a psychological disorder that were just fine with or without their medications. Does that mean that they can't own a firearm now and forever? What's the process to regain your right to own a firearm after you've been treated for whatever problem it is you had?
To say the least that is a very contentious question here.
[Edited 2012-07-20 13:16:01]
[Edited 2012-07-20 13:18:27]