>>>>>>>>>>>>>http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/18169776/from/ET/
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>Since he was never prosecuted for any crime, he was able to purchase the weapons. However, there is ample evidence that he was mentally ill... This article doesn't mention his English teacher contacting the police earlier due to disturbing writings (that was on morning news)
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>As you seem very reluctant to ban guns in the US I would have thought additional tax on them could be used to pay for additional checking of the buyer and of their justification for buying a gun.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>Nick
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>Justification? I thought all the buyer needed in the U.S. was to show a lack of any criminal record. Does he also have to show some sort of justification?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>Yes thats right. But some investigation of what the gun is for would be a good idea plus evidence of training in how to use it. Its an offense to use a car without a license proving you have been trained how to use it, the same should be true of guns.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>Personally, I feel that is reasonable, and I would comply. However, I have noticed a trend that most hunters/gun enthusiasts seem to be Republican and are against more regulations and government interference in general.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>Yes the training could also incorporate some element of checking you aren't a complete nutter. It wouldn't be foolproof but it would probably have caught this guy.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Now when you talk about that, you are approaching a slippery slope. What is definition of a complete nutter? If I took depression medicine 5 years ago in college, should I be qualified to buy a firearm today?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>I'd say the simple answer then is "no".
>>>>>
>>>>>Why not? I have handled firearms since I was 10 years old. I have passed hunter's safety classes, and have never been in trouble with the law. You think I shouldn't be able to buy/own a gun because I had some rough times in college years ago?
>>>>
>>>>Having taken medicine for depression should only be a flag that says you should be evaluated. The current evaluation then is what then should decide whether or not you get to own a gun.
>>>>
>>>>If there are rules, then they should be followed, if not, then we're all in trouble.
>>>
>>>But there are no rules, and since this rule is BS then I am against it and will cast my vote accordingly.
>>
>>Do you have an alternative suggestion, or are you happy with the current state of affairs that allows people like the Virginia Tech killer to buy a gun simply because he has ID and no record?
>
>I would be in favor of a waiting period. That would prevent spur-of-the-moment incidents. I would be in favor of raising the age to 21. I would maybe be in favor of stricter regulations for guns under a determined length (handguns). I would be in favor of a hunter's safety or gun safety class for everybody that can buy a gun. I would maybe be in favor of a "gun license" kind of thing.

Ok, but I don't see how any of that would stop a situation like Virginia Tech. The crazies would still be able to buy a gun and use it. If there is nothing in the system to stop unstable people from owning guns just by virtue of their being unstable, then I don't see how any of it will help.

>
>These laws have to be reasonable to EVERYBODY, or else you are just going to feed black market gun sales.

Well, if you mean 'fair' to everyone, then we at least have scope for discussion. Ok, how about this. Everybody who wants to buy a gun has to go through an evaluation, regardless of anything in their past.