Congresswoman shot, look out for new legislation attempts.

Look for a frenzied effort to pass a ban on gun ownership over psychological issues. While it sounds good, disenfranchising "the mentally ill" is actually not a good idea. Go to your Dr. for depression issues and you could see your guns confiscated and your CCW permit revoked.
Especially if you use VA health care like me. Bad cases result in bad law. This shooter is probably a disturbed person and this will not be good PR for guns. The next few days will be interesting politically.
I hope the NRA does not stab us in the back. It sounds like La Pierre is ready to.

Having worked in Mental Health while I was in grad. school, I can tell you that laws against "the mentally ill" are a slippery slope and it will prevent few future killings. Very few psych patients are dangerous. Yes, some are VERY dangerous.

Good points, KS.

It would only be a matter of time before "passes a mental health evaluation" is added to the list of qualifications needed to get a CCW permit, or later own a gun along with the backround check and the training requirements that already exist.

Of course, the proper course is to launch a counter-attack against the failed psychiatric industry. On second thought, one would not have to wait and make it a counter-attack. A full frontal assault on that industry's failings are already justified.

Citizen said:

Good points, KS.

It would only be a matter of time before "passes a mental health evaluation" is added to the list of qualifications needed to get a CCW permit, or later own a gun along with the backround check and the training requirements that already exist.

Click to expand...

I suppose our politicians will have to pass the same mental health evaluations before taking office? Many can't get past the background check! Doesn't stop them from thinking they know what's best for the rest of us.
Don

Here in Louisiana, we almost have to do that now as it is required to get a Dr.s signer report if you have ever been treated for depression (ANY level weather it required follow-up or not). Thank God, my VA doc had no problems with that. My NEW VA doc is a Hoplophobe though and should I need HER to fill out the form, she has already told me she wouldn't do it for ANYONE!

I open carry now.

They also might start weeding out people who seem to have radical polictical leanings like antarchists for example. Maybe they will expand caution towards those who are going through a divorce or have to deal with depression even if its grief related.

Its a good point though that reaction using this man's mental instability as the flagship in an attack on gun possession could very well lead people to not seek even minor assistance for problems they have with coping with difficulties associated with normal everyday life.

Its a real odd paradox that people (antis) are scared of other people solely because that "other people (looneys)" are scared. Now some of us out here (2A and/or liberty supporters in general) might have cause to be a little fearful of those "antis" who are fearful of (looneys) just because looneys are fearful. This now gives the one fearful group (antis) even more to be fearful about.

Look out indeed. This is interesting:

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0111/47294_Page2.html

One veteran Democratic operative, who blames overheated rhetoric for the shooting, said President Barack Obama should carefully but forcefully do what his predecessor did. “They need to deftly pin this on the tea partiers,” said the Democrat. “Just like the Clinton White House deftly pinned the Oklahoma City bombing on the militia and anti-government people.”

Click to expand...

Your quote is indeed interesting, so let us review it:

One veteran Democratic operative, who blames overheated rhetoric for the shooting, said President Barack Obama should carefully but forcefully do what his predecessor did. “They need to deftly pin this on the tea partiers,” said the Democrat. “Just like the Clinton White House deftly pinned the Oklahoma City bombing on the militia and anti-government people.”

Click to expand...

First, pinning this on the Tea Partiers when the perp wasn't a tea partier is ludicrous. It's insane. It's mindless. It's the epitome of rampantly flawed reporting.

It's akin to saying "the shooter was black!" when the shooter was white.

The perp in this case UNLAWFULLY gunned down six innocent victims. To be honest, I could care less if he's "insane" or not. He killed people, and if left unchecked, he may kill people again. Let's send him to meet his maker. If I ever "lost it" I would ask the public to do the same.

Second, if any of us who frequent this forum would have been there, the perp might have gotten off three shots before he was gunned down in response. That would have meant perhaps 3 or 4 lives SAVE by someone who chooses to respect our right to keep and bear arms.

since9 said:

First, pinning this on the Tea Partiers when the perp wasn't a tea partier is ludicrous. It's insane. It's mindless. It's the epitome of rampantly flawed reporting.

Click to expand...

LMAO, welcome to modern reporting. The same mainstream media that decries bloggers and other internet news sources as "rash" and "irresponsible" trips all over their own feet and each other rushing to report false information first.

How many sources reported that Rep. Giffords was dead? How many reported the shooter was dead? How many mis-spelled the shooter's name?

The MSM don't exist to provide news, they exist to sell air time to advertisers. The more viewers they have, the more money they get; the more controversy, or "newer newest latest breaking news" they have, the more viewers they get, thus more money. They prefer to pigeonhole and stereotype, because it beats the hell out of working; they can simply plug in "group X" or "party Z", and get someone to speak for each side, instead of doing any actual reporting.

That's why the first place they went was: Democrat Congresswoman, so the shooter must be Republican; if Republican, must be extreme right wing; if extreme right wing, must be Tea Party. This fits their stereotypes and pigeonholes, making it easier to get guests to debate each other. There are thousands of people out there waiting to jump in front of a camera; all they need is a studio or Skype. Sending an actual reporter out to gather facts and analyze them takes effort, money, and time. Network management would be failing their fiduciary responsibility to their investors if they undertook such things, which would probably reduce their profit margin.

This is why my BA in Journalism has been gathering dust since 1986.

http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=248829

Check out when it was posted. Both sides are guilty of trying to pin blame when, in fact, this guy was just bat-sh** crazy.