Republicans always say we should focus on "mental illness" after a mass shooting

@HoraceGreenley HIPAA? how is that interfering?

@samueltyler2 Difficult to share information with government agencies like law enforcement.

@HoraceGreenley Subpoenas can get through HIPAA, but they aren’t used often.

@HoraceGreenley There is a written exclusion for just that in the HIPAA regulations, in fact, it is the legal responsibility of a health care provider to report if someone is a risk to themselves or others. HIPAA rules do not impair the function of public health activities. Many use the excuse that HIPAA says thus and so, but such people really don't understand HIPAA, it is a very dense document to read and then to read all of the subsequent opinions based on the law.

But, it is true, that "we" do not spend enough attention to mental health problems, we underfund programs for such.

@HoraceGreenley
I got no idea why there so many loose kunts running around hurting themselves and others? 🤷‍♂️

@HoraceGreenley When you're right, you're right.

@TheOneyouwerewarnedabout But, many, if not most, are in out-patient facilities, group homes, etc. In addition, modern medical-psychiatric treatment is very successful in allowing some to live normal lives. Most mass murderers do not actually have diagnosable "mental illness," as in psychosis.

@HoraceGreenley In total agreement there.

@TheOneyouwerewarnedabout
You forgot to post homicide rates next to your inpatient graph. Turns out they don't correlate at all, LOL!!!

@ElwoodBlues you need to post data subsequent to 2010 and correlate that to weapons purchased.

@samueltyler2 Homicide numbers in the US do climb steeply from about 2014 to 2020


Firearm sales during that period
[image=https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/KYzEE3Pc3Kx_5sInzH9FPvwKj5A=/1400x0/filters:no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/19866828/gun_sales.png]

Firearm background checks, a proxy for sales:

@ElwoodBlues have you looked at the CDC data on top 10 causes of death by age? You can also use it to look at state data or national. I think it is called WISCR. It is appalling!

@TheOneyouwerewarnedabout I knew that was the answer. I just wanted to see who had the balls to state it.

@HoraceGreenley Still, all those crazy people could be a lot less harmful if they were prevented from owning guns. @TheOneyouwerewarnedabout

@LordShadowfire I agree. Screen out the people with mental issues. But don't take away everyone's firearms.

@HoraceGreenley define "mental issues? " Do you think an 18 year old should be allowed to purchase 2 AR15s and 300 rounds and fcammi?

@samueltyler2 Yes

@HoraceGreenley how about a 12 year old?

@samueltyler2 no. 18 is the minimum age

@HoraceGreenley why do you feel that?

@samueltyler2 18 is legally an adult. These ages reflect purchasing firearms and not their use.

@HoraceGreenley [quote]But don't take away everyone's firearms.[/quote] Did anyone suggest that? Or is that the just the standard straw man fallacy that gun lovers always try to wedge into any debate?

[quote]18 is legally an adult. These ages reflect purchasing firearms and not their use.[/quote]
Today all 50 states require one to be 21 or older to purchase alcohol. Why not the same for handguns? Also would you consider it acceptable to ban magazines larger than 10 rounds? How about banning assault weapons like we had in 1994? How about national uniform gun licensing and registration? How about getting rid of the law blocking a federal electronic database of gun ownership?

@ElwoodBlues No banning of magazines
There are no su h things as assault weapons in private hands. So what are you referring to?
There already is national gun licensing.
You need to define the database. Too often local and state officials use such information for personal vendetta.

@HoraceGreenley
[quote]No banning of magazines[/quote]
This is what the Dayton shooter used to kill 9 and wound another 17 in 32 sec. You really think you can make a case for this killing machine to be in private hands?

[quote]There are no su h things as assault weapons in private hands.[/quote]
I'm referring to the 1994 assault weapon ban. Modernize it and bring it back, and to hell with the NRA's fiddly definitional disputes.

[quote]There already is national gun licensing.[/quote]
The NRA disagrees with you, but maybe you know better, LOL!!!

Perhaps you can convince the NRA to correct their literature, ROTFL!!!
[quote]Less registration and licensing, less crime. There is no universal, national gun registry or federal license required to own a gun, and the vast majority of states don’t require registration or licensing. [/quote]
[b]https://www.nraila.org/get-the-facts/registration-licensing/[/b]

[sep][sep] [center]UPDATE[/center] [sep][sep]

Despite HORsesASSS' claims
[quote]A 2019 study from the University of New York’s School of Medicine said there were fewer mass shooting deaths during that time period compared to anytime between 1981 and 2017.

Other studies, like one from the nonprofit RAND Corporation, found that banning assault weapons and high capacity magazines would reduce mass shooting deaths[/quote]
And the ban was never repealed. It had a 10 year horizon, after which it expired. Dude, you're a FOUNT of misinformation!!

@ElwoodBlues the 1994 bsn did nothing which was why it was repealed.