Quote:
Originally Posted by Aleks
Backgrounding is effective at reducing bad firearms owners, but nothing is perfect. The interview on the phone my parents received from the RCMP on my background and headspace was quite in depth. So much so I got a call from my father afterwards to discuss how hard they were pressing to find any flaws. That same process goes to your spouse, or ex, room mates, etc. Its not perfect, but its again only as effective as those that report it (ie: this last guys spotty past of abuse, etc). Sometimes, some people just snap as well, not everyone is predictable, and not everyone has warning signs. I deal with mental health issues every single day at work, the entire spectrum of them.
Its a sad, tragic event that happened, we can all agree on that. But again, lets focus on the fact that this guy had issues. Hey, he could have run his truck through the front doors as well, and before anyone shrugs that off, its reality.
|
Okay. So you're saying that backgrounding is effective, but not perfect - so why is it so difficult to even pass THAT law in the USA?
Have you felt that having a relatively intrusive background test has in any way restricted your enjoyment of your firearms?
Also your truck analogy isn't particularly relevant. If he drove a truck through the front door, we'd be seeing a headline of "Insane person drives truck into church, injuring 2 people and causing thousands in damage." The analogy is crazy because we're talking harm reduction - a crazy guy with a knife will kill 2 people. A crazy guy with a gun will kill 58 and injure 500 more.