Excellent article regarding mental health laws.

But I do have an issue with gun control and ´large capacity´ magazines. There are valid reasons to have more than 10 rounds in a modern sporting rifle or handgun for law-abiding citizens. He´s wrong about that.

You´re a little off-key this time Charles. Remember, the purpose of the 2nd Amendment is to provide citizens a means of protecting themselves against tyranny. Weigh that against your support of controlling "assault weapons".

What we desperately need is a culture with a restored reverence for life. That will not come about without a restoration of faith.

What exactly is an assault weapon? Are there hug weapons? Isn´t an assault weapon anything used to injure another... even your fist, if you´re a boxer?

As usual, Dr. Krauthammer nails it. The law changes regarding the mentally ill have not helped them. Only a fool from the ACLU could consider the homeless living in every downtown an improvement over their previous living conditions! Every homeless person is someone´s son or brother or father or cousin. Many, with treatment, could have quality lives. We choose to turn our heads; the mental health community calls it leaving them to die with their rights on.

The Second Amendment didn´t foresee 30- or 100-clip magazines. My first preference would be banning these, but if that isn´t done, then at least put major, major restrictions upon their purchase. No one diagnosed with a serious mental illness should be able to purchase them. No one who houses a person with serious mental illness should have them in the house. Due to the nature of delusions/psychotic thinking, it would be extremely unusual for a person in this state of mind to break into a stranger´s home to look for such items. That requires a level of pre-planning that just doesn´t go with psychosis.

Worth a read for the conclusion alone.

Why is it considered entertainment to watch people get killed or to pretend to kill them yourself?

Not how often those who decry video games are the first to defend pornography.

Benjamin Franklin:
´´Those Who Sacrifice Liberty For Security Deserve Neither.´´

FTA:´´We made that trade after 9/11. We make it every time the Transportation Security Administration invades your body at an airport.´´

#4 holds forth on firearms while demonstrating his complete lack of knowledge. A clip is not a magazine and a magazine is not a clip. You want to ban something that you cannot even accurately describe . My God, man! If one can go out in any city or town in the United States and purchase cocaine, methamphetamine, heroin,etc.; substances which are not only banned but have had a "WAR" declared upon them by the feds; what makes you think you can ban plastic and metal boxes with springs inside of them? Anyone with any mechanical aptitude at all could make one in a home workshop. The only citizens who would abide the ban are the ones who would never commit a crime. The truly evil or deranged people will get and use whatever they desire regardless of whatever flaccid law is on the books. They are CRIMINALS!!!! THEY DO NOT OBEY THE LAW!!!!! Yet you want to punish those of us who would and do obey the law. Madness!

Quotable quote:

"While law deters the rational, it has far less effect on the psychotic."

Dr. Charles Krauthammer

#2 - Standing ovation over here!

Regardless of the type of arms or amount of accessories to go with it, the Second Amendment was installed in our Bill of Rights (**ahem**) in the #2 spot for the reasons that have nothing to do with anything except providing a means for the people of the nation to prevent their government from becoming tyrannical - controlling their lives, their money, their land and purchasing power.

Without it, the country becomes one of the people existing only to serve that government, rather than the other way around as it was intended.

We are NOT - and MUST NOT - allow ourselves to become servants to the government, thereby empowering that government to use us and allow us to breathe only for our money.

We are darn uncomfortably close to that edge.

Everybody here should listen daily to Mark Levin. His first hour is generally a lesson on government, finances, the Constitution, this country and our history, etc. He´s the best there is.

Charles is too liberal on the Second Amendment. He states the last assault weapons ban didn´t work because it didn´t have enough teeth, and because guns weren´t confiscated. In other words, like a liberal, he proposes even more of something that has been proven not to work. Countries that actually did enact confiscation subsequently saw increasing crime rates, or in some cases, much worse.

Charles is wrong on the "assault weapons" ban.

I guess growing up in the 60´s playing cowboys and Indians, war and etc. as children somehow made our cultural less violent than today´s children playing video games with electronic weapons controlled by a Xbox controller? Somehow children playing with toy guns and bows and arrows was less damaging in the 60´s? This tragedy happen for one reason and one reason only, something deep within Adam Lanza genetics went wrong and his mental capacity was abnormal and even with all the early warning signs in the world, those who cared for him where helpless to actual help him. Please stop pointing the finger and making stupid argument that his cultural upbringing, violent video games and guns caused this occurrence to occur. I don´t seem to find any evidence of WWI, WWII, Korean or Vietnam vets who endured the actual act of violent war come back into society and go into a crazed killing spree. If there where incidence then it would be documented how their mental capacity could not re-program back for normal society values......again the root cause is something deep within a killers mental capacity, something politicians can´t regulate through laws that ban guns and what I find entertaining. If they want to help then pave the way to allow trained professional to help those in need and take it out of the courts.

#4 is using the same argument the idiot Piers Morgan used against modern weapons -- that they weren´t in use during the 18th century when the Constitution was written. Um, the reason for the second amendment is so that citizens can resist the tyranny of government. Muskets aren´t going to cut it.

Don´t worry. Ol´ Joe and his "blue ribbon" commission will get to the heart of this matter.

#2, well done. Occam´s razor does apply here.

Most murders are by young black fatherless boys in the city who have no positive future, no job prospects and no desire to have a job. This culture continues to build on itself and because of itself. Murder rate for blacks is 5 times higher for blacks than whites. Conn was actually an exception to the norm but alomost all of these murders are the result of mental and cultural issues.
PS, the worst mass murder at a school was committed in the 1920´s using dynamite.

There is no cut and dried reason. The kid snapped. Mom was just unable to help him to the degree he needed. What is more of a surprise to me is that something like this doesn´t happen more often.

It can´t be blamed on guns. 9/11 took out thousands of Americans and not one gun was used. My heart breaks for the lost children and their surviving families. I just can´t imagine the pain.....

#4 "..The Second Amendment didn´t foresee 30- or 100-clip magazines. My first preference would be banning these, but if that isn´t done, then at least put major, major restrictions upon their purchase…."

To anyone knowledgeable of arms, this statement has to be the pinnacle of ignorance…Unfortunately, there are so many who will nod their heads in agreement with statements like this heard on ´news´ channels and read in opinion columns that it becomes ´the truth.´

To the uninformed: a ´clip´ is not a ´magazine.´
Some weapons are designed so that the rounds of ammo are held together on a strip of metal so that they can be inserted into the weapon as a unit. This is a ´clip.´
Some weapons are designed so that the rounds of ammo are inserted into a spring-loaded metal or plastic ´box,´ which can then be inserted into the weapon. This is a ´magazine,´ The terms are not interchangeable.

For some weapons, magazines are available that will hold up to thirty rounds of ammo. This does not, by itself, make the weapon more deadly except that the shooter doesn´t have to pause to reload as often.

The term ´assault weapon´ accurately refers to a rifle capable of firing repeatedly when the trigger is held down. The old style ´Tommy gun´ is an example.

When the Constitution was written, every handheld weapon was of military grade. I don´t suppose your average citizens back then owned many cannon, but if there had been two parked in every barn lot I doubt anyone would have wrung their hands over it.

What has changed is that we now live in a culture that glorifies violence and has no regard for life or the God that created it.

Dr. K misses the missing dad.

Poster #4 should recognize that if the Founding Fathers could conceive of high capacity magazines, the would most likely be in favor. Being rational and sophisticated men, they would welcome technological developments to enhance warfighting.

(cont.)
During and after WWII, The Russians developed a rifle capable of automatic fire which was named the Avtomat Kalashnikova. The final model was model 47. Thus the AK-47. This term is not a generic term for any gun painted black with a pistol grip. It is the gun hanging around the necks of every male over ten years of age in the Middle East.
In the USA, with very few exceptions, only the government and criminals have automatic weapons.
Us ordinary citizens are restricted to ´semi-automatic´ weapons, which fire one round each time the trigger is
´pulled.´ Semi-automatic weapons have a cycle time which restricts how fast the trigger can pulled.
Focusing on ´magazine capacity´ and ´assault rifles´ is the height of imbecility.
Focus should be on the recognition, identification and treatment of persons behaving erratically before they get to the point of acting out their fantasies…and in recognizing that ´gun-free´ zones are not gun free for the criminal or crazed, only for the law-abiding who are the very ones who should be armed.

A devious person can tape the bottom ends together and make their own large capacity magazines. Found that out by listening to a local conservative talk show host who owns guns. So much for a ban on large capacity bullet holders.

For every ban(Brady bill), there will be at least 70 people who figure out how to get around it and go and hurt people. David Letterman stated that fact surprisingly.

Any weapon, when used to hurt someone, is an assault weapon. Be it guns, knives or explosives. Remember Oklahoma? There was also an incident in 1927 using a large quantity of explosives to blow up a school. Are farmers going to have their fertilizers banned also? We would do better to ban the ACLU and their garbage. They are responsible for a lot of what is wrong in our culture right now.

Where was his father?

Everything the good doctor says in discussions 2 & 3 of the article is correct, reasonable, and should be factored into the fix concerning this current problem. His observations expressed in these facets are where the most effort needs to be expended (or is that expanded?).

The real root of the problem is simple, yet probably impracticable for him to express "on the record". So, let me do it for him.

The two generational slide into moral decay has to be stopped and then reversed. This is a daunting, maybe an impossible task. The first step in this journey is the eviction of the current occupants of our White House. The continuing breakdown of society is their goal and their weapon, and they will pursue it to their bitter end. They have successfully courted large numbers of the people referred to in reply 8´s Ben Franklin quote and reinforced those numbers with even more who will sell their soul for a free lunch.

We need a REAL AMERICAN in the White House ASAP! And, of course, it goes without saying, we need our guns. Not so much, to use them, as for it to be known that we have them.

Similar to the days leading up to the American Revolution, but in much larger numbers, we have a standing army of 50 to 60 million hunters who are proficient woodsmen and marksmen who fit the description of Admiral Yamamoto´s quote;

"You cannot invade the mainland United States. There would be a rifle behind every blade of grass." - Admiral Isoroku Yamamoto (Japanese Navy)

These modern day Minutemen standing shoulder to shoulder with our National Guard are ready to defend America against all enemies, both foreign and domestic.

Charles is so right on his area of expertise:psychology. Deinstitutionalization was a liberal dream with heavy consequences for all society, but especially for the families of the dangerously insane. The ACLU unleashed a nightmare on the US with the shuttering of institutions and the establishment of insurmountable legal impediments to obtaining and maintaining commitments of those who are a danger to themselves and others. And I don´t see O or Biden calling out the ACLU.

I learned to shoot when I was in grade school. It was a six shooter and a good looking pistol. Many times I wish I had had it in the house - Denver and suburbs have had teenagers break into their house and kill the owners. Not in my neighborhood, but scarey. I cannot hold a gun with the wonky right arm, so guess i will beat them to death with my metal cane. Not funny, but it´s not a funny world any longer.

#14, The Cowboys and Indians paradigm of our youth was completely different. We got together with our friends, chose up sides and did battle as cowboys and Indians and our toy weapons almost never automatic or overpowering. In contrast, today´s video game culture is inherently dehumanizing, often with distant, unknown opponents. Video games have a a violent realism with almost no comparison to our simple neighborhood war games of youth. Today´s video game youth are in ever increasingly realistic training exercises, honing their skills, improving their kills. Most keep it all in perspective, even when overdoing it. A few are overwhelmed or activated by it.

Guns don´t kill people; people do. These days most of the young people and many of the middle-aged are killing people electronically. Detective shows once focused on brains and intellectual skills. Now there´s more brutality (along with the crude sex). The economy is in turmoil because of Fauxbama´s policies. People are despairing; young men have too much time on their hands; people aren´t marrying. The major institutions of our society have lost trust. Changing clip sizes ain´t gonna solve these problems.

For all of you chastising me for misusing the terms clip and magazine...my apologies. Typing too fast. But you utterly missed my point. There is no reason for a seriously mentally ill person, known by family, mental health professionals, or law enforcement, to be deteriorating in terms of mental stability, to have access to any sort of weapon...most especially a weapon that can fire off shot after shot in rapid succession.

For those of you who change the subject to drug dealers or the streets of Chicago or whatever...that is indeed a different subject. The thinking of a person who is psychotic is different from the thinking of a street thug. The psychotic person often thinks that he is doing something right - saving the world from aliens, keeping the voices from killing his parents, whatever. The street thug merely hopes he doesn´t get caught.

You can have all the weapons, all the ammunition you want...after you come up with a plan to keep them out of the hands of the seriously mentally ill during delusional episodes. If you refuse to touch that reality, if you insist even these people need total right to all sorts of weapons, then don´t be surprised if you get outvoted and find more of your rights are removed...not just those of the delusional mentally ill.

Iran is pursuing nuclear weapons.

Iran has stated as it´s goal the complete destruction of the state of Israel.

Despite the fact that Iran is openly plotting mass murder, Barack Obama is still willing to negotiate unconditionally with Mahmoud Ahmadinijad....

Obama WON´T act against Iran....

....but he WILL take action against our Constitutional Rights, based on the actions of one madman in Sandy Hook, Connecticut.

#31,

No one is trying to put firearms into the hands of toddlers or crazy people, as you assert.

There are over 300,000,000 firearms in America. Please note that 99.999% of their owners did NOT go shoot up a school last week. Stripping 99.999% of firearms owner´s rights because of the actions of one madman is hardly a sane approach. What law do you propose that would have stopped Adam Lanza?

In re: #31,

Then at that point I will become a criminal. As for the suggestion that we need to develop fool proof methods to keep such weapons from the hands of the mentally ill, such ideas are the equivalent of child-proofing the nation. We can take all the semi-auto weaponry from the public, so the next time evil will rely on a pump shotgun. Then when those laws are declared ineffective, for the benefit of public safety some would suggest that we ban pump shot guns and only allow single shots. Of course the next evil maniac will not have access to semi-automatic weaponry or pump shotguns so the choice will be an old-fashion revolver which has been in existance for almost 200 years. But if I were to suggest that evil be held accountable the same folks who look down upon me for asserting my right to privacy and self protection would accuse me of every indiscriminate evil for being judgmental against those poor souls who simply have a mental health issue that we must learn to live with.

Sorry, but I guess I have no patience to sacrifice anymore of my personal freedom to an ineffective central government capable of only destruction of the very culture that allowed it flourish.

30 & 31 get it. It is the mental health of the people involved not their weapons of choice. I knew a family years ago where the Dad killed his whole family & then himself. At the time, anyone who knew him was shocked - his son was disabled & needed almost constant care. He was so loving & gentle with his son, when I would see them together that I felt he was very lucky to have a father who cared so much. When the facts came out & his suicide note was made known to those that knew him - he was overwhelmed with the boy´s care & his wife was leaving him. I think he felt that he was taking his whole family to heaven rather than risk a breakup. Side note - I am presently reading a book about some of the wildest characters in history & Vlad the Impaler with his pike poles, the ancient Romans & their poisons & Lizzie Borden & her axe & various other killers didn´t need guns to do their evil deeds - just a diabolical determination. I don´t know how restricting the 2nd amendment can change a killer mindset.

Rabbit,

Clip v magazine, Ok. It´s the "yeah but" part that requires additional commentary. You should note that the killer killed his mother first so he could access her firearms. Many other mass killers did the same. One might retort that "she shouldn´t have firearms in the house." Recall that mass shooting in Red Lake Minnesota started with the killer killing his police officer grandfather and stealing his weapons and patrol car. While there many things that can be done to possibly prevent some of these acts, there are only three things known to stop such a killer, a stern resolve, good sight alignment and hot lead.

Insanity and delusions are the roots. Of course. Just wait until the civil war begins. You ain´t seen nothin´.

#31 seems to think we can reach perfection here on earth in terms of preventing crime.

LOL.

Drug prohibition gives the government the opportunity to arrest anybody of suspicion.
Gun confiscation and prohibition, will give the government the opportunity to arrest anyone they please; simply plant a pistol in their car. Busted. Losing liberty is the job of the Feinsteins, Obama, all those opportunistic decriers. Charles says rules of what can and cannot be legal, will never work, have never worked. It´s almost as if this beyond-horrifying-act was staged just as Heilary and the UN are circling the US wagons in the insane hopes of the UN controlling US gun ownership and the internet. Talk about timing. The more impossible the impostition, the more crazed and nightmarish the crime. Staged? You say that´s crazy. Maybe it is, but the forces against guns now have the opportunity to say whatever they please in this tragic climate. Remember both "Manchurian Candidates" with the mother as "handler" of the killer. Remember "Telefon", Charles Bronson´s film about killers pre-programmed to kill with just a simple phone call. Qui bono can never
be overlooked in any crime assessment. Keep note of all the opportunistic auto crazies out there now campaigning for more loss of liberty....celebrities, politicians, so many of them with their own armed bodyguards

Bravo, Southernboy (#20 & #23)
There are far too many people acting out of ignorance (including me, sometimes). Nobody ever defines "assault weapons", but they want them banned, whatever they are.

My comment about banning weapons because they are misused by crazy people: there is a soldier currently going on trial for getting drunk and going into several villages in Afghanistan and indiscriminately killing 16 innocent women and children in their homes
http://tinyurl.com/c5z6r6p
So, should we take weapons away from the military? (there are plenty of leftists who would like to do just that).

Krauthammer speaks of the roots of mass murder. But is there is a solution, presented in a way to make us take notice, that this is what must be done to end "mass murder" and "cultural insanity." Liberals always have that non-negotaible solution. Liberalism, what Micheal Savage calls, "a mental disease," has its roots in godlessness, group think, risk avoidance, and fantasy fairness. The predictable liberal solution is to identify a bogeyman, and that would be Constitution supporters, and then offer a solution to help society while it actually solves a totalitarian transformational need: in this case the all important "take away your guns" solution. That makes perfect sense to liberals who are overthrowing the country -- and their low information supporters, revolutionaries, and maternalistic do gooders. Republicans could win if they argued every issue from this position of strength: Society has lost its belief in Absolute Truth. The people do not have a traditional American understanding of right and wrong anymore. We must immediately return Truth and Prayer to our schools where it belongs, and put an armed policeman in schools and other sensitive campuses to protect the innocent. The truths in our Constitution, and the God of Gods who gave them, can heal all our problems. We must return to them, and make sure we justify all our laws and actions with them in mind. Another thing. House and Senate leaders: wear a "2 Chronicles 7:14 lapel pin" from now on.

What #11 said. The Constitution is about the creation of a federal government and defining it´s limited role. Period. The Bill of Rights deals with containing that federal government that can and will run amok without tethers. Period. A citizenry armed well enough to seriously challenge the natural drift toward tyranny is one of the tethers.

Period.

Wasn´t the AK-74 the last version, #23?

Gee doc, thanks for highlighting the already blindingly obvious. How about some, what´s the word I´m looking for, oh yeah, suggestions? Everything in the article has been talked about before. And before that. And before that. And before that. But as long as he makes his word count....

The only way this can end up is with the repeal of the 2nd Amendment. I expect bidet to recommend that, and scumbama has the grassroots organization to make it happen. You didn´t seriously think all that was just for the reelection campaign, did you?

Here´s a great web page with quotes from the founding fathers and their views on gun ownership. Everyone should read these and understand the founders intent and wisdom they possessed. You´ll never hear these from the liberal media. It goes against the narrative! http://www.buckeyefirearms.org/gun-quotations-founding-fathers

Just a side note, the homicide rate would be much higher but for the advances in medical technology.

The most important thing is to change the mental health laws. Period.

Charles Krauthammer is strong gun control advocate. He and bilious Ø´really agreed that curtseying queen Ø´blo should restrict and/or confiscate "assault weapons".

I going to miss my Beamer, 4X4 Chevy pick em´ up, bathtub, machette, carving knife, hammer, chain saw, crowbar and all the other men´s assualt toys in my house.

I exclude the chicago murderers weapons of choice razors, spears, and pimp guns.

The ignorant dokter must be pleased though that my Wilson Combat 45 has an eight shot only clip, my favorite deer rifle is a single shot, my bow only shoots one arrow at a time, my dangerous gameheavy 600 Nitro Express is a two shot double, and my air rifle is a single shot. None of my hundred plus using firearms have a bayonet mount or RPG launcher.

Plus they are secured in a feral gummit proof walk in safe.

Is that PC or whut?

Fact: Charles Whitman did not use an ´assault weapon´ in August 1966.
Fact: The Columbine H.S. massacre occurred DURING the Feinstein-Clinton 1994 ´assault weapons ban´.
Fact: Every month in Chicago, there is a Newtown, CT, massacre when you add up the deaths.

During the 60´s, New York city schools had gun clubs. Kids would take their weapons to school on the subway, the teacher would collect and put in a corner of the class room (so people weren´t stumbling over them), kids would go to gun club after school and that means actually SHOOTING with the guns, then take the guns home on the subway. The question that needs to be answered is....how has our culture changed since then????

Hypocritical to worry so much about crazed killers when a full class of 24 Kindergarten kids is murdered every hour, 24/7/365- in this country alone- through abortion.

Phony liberal sanctimony in light of this is infuriating.

They should actually be happy. More dead humans helps ´The Planet´ after all.

#43 "..Wasn´t the AK-74 the last version, #23?.."

Yes! I do remember that. Sometimes in the ´70´s, if I remember correctly. Thanks!

When you boil all the pro and anti gun rhetoric and histeria out of the issue and get down to the logic of it we know that in today´s libertine culture there will always be nuts out to kill and make a name for themselves. What do we do about it? We protect our President with men with guns. We protect our congress with men with guns. We protect our governors with men with guns. We protect our celebrities with men with guns. We protect our sporting events with men with guns. We protect our nuclear plants with men with guns. We protect our banks with men with guns. We protect our government installations with men with guns. We protect our office buildings with men with guns. We protect our factories with men with guns. We protect our entertainment venues with men with guns. We protect our seven/eleven stores with men with guns. We protect our most precious children with a sign that reads "GUN...FREE...ZONE"
HOW...UTTERLY STUPID!!!!

POSTSCRIPT:
Maybe we ought to make the White House, The Capital Building and Mayor Bloomberg´s office GUN FREE ZONES. Let them live in the terror of some nut coming in and shooting up the place with impunity.

All men are equal in the eyes of God and the law.

Samuel Colt made them equal.

(Haven´t seen that in a while.)

#53, I like that idea.