Quote:
Originally Posted by Traum
I am just asking the questions that I have in mind out loud -- so it isn't really directed at anyone in particular. So if anyone has any thoughts or responses on those questions, I appreciate them.
With #1, I am fully aware that people's medical history is probably consider pretty private information, and would not easily get disclosed, if at all. Still, if the outcome of the mental health assessment is known, that can shed some light on the motivations (or lack of) for the shooter's act of violence. And if the shooter received an all-clear assessment, then the public will know mental health is less likely to be part of the cause for his murderous rampage.
With #2, the gun ownership issue would directly shed light on how our criminal system as well as our gun control laws operate. It would have been insightful if the RCMP spokesperson had indicated whether the suspected shooter was not the legal owner of the guns that have been confiscated or not. If he was, that could potentially raise questions about how someone who might be suffering from (diagnosed) mental health issues to be eligible to own firearms -- that's a HUGE red flag in our gun control laws. If the gun weren't his, then it raises the quesiton of how we (ie. Canada) treat gun control when we are supposed to have laws around them -- for exaple, it might be appropriate to revoke the guy's legal gun ownership licence since he needs to be held accountable for the guns he owns.
|
100 percent. Good questions.
The first question that I had when I heard about the Tumbler Ridge mass shooting was
"How the heck can a person with a history of mental health issues and prior assessment by medical professionals get access to a handgun??"
I mean Canada has stricter gun laws than the U.S. right??
It's not like I can just walk into Walmart, show two pieces of picture ID, and buy a gun, a hunting rifle etc.