Sad case here but a lack of access to firearms could not have prevented it.
Anecdotes are fun. Especially when they’re about a mother killing herself and her three kids. Let’s use that as a reason to abandon gun control measures. Sounds reasonable.
We have endless better reasons to abandon the proposed gun control measure.
There’s just a whole lot of irony in this example.
Had this woman been forcibly committed she would not have been able to legally possess a firearm and with treatment would not have been a threat to herself or her children.
So if she didn’t have a gun she could still shoot herself and kids with a gun. Got it.
“Had this women been committed?” She wasn’t. Why are you combining a mother killing herself and her children with a hypothetical situation? Maybe you can make some posters of her and her children and hand them out around town. Looks like you’ve found a wonderful way to prove whatever point you think this shows.
You don’t need a gun to kill young children or yourself.
The point is that under existing law she could have been forced into treatment, disarmed and rendered ineligible to own/bear.
From the OP link:
The Washington Examiner discovered the murderer’s avid support for stricter gun control.
So yay! for the Washington Examiner figuring out a way to politicize this family tragedy.
And then it gets dragged here. Of course.
It’s news, get over it.
That part isn’t news.
It’s sick politicization of a tragedy.
Let’s see… .
Is it an usual or notorious event? Yes.
Was it a crime? Yes.
Is there a newsworthy angle? Of course there is.
By any definition it’s newsworthy.
I believe the NRA had fought against that ruling. (And the ACLU). They think the mentally ill still have the right to own/bear.
Completely incorrect. What the NRA opposed was disarming them without due process.
From your own article.
Under this scheme, these folks would lose their constitutional rights without due process and with no finding that they are a danger to themselves or others — the standard that the government must meet before banning people from gun ownership. And contrary to media reports, these individuals are not severely mentally ill — qualifying conditions for Social Security disability are eating disorders, anxiety and insomnia.
But that’s just the slippery slope to not disarming them at all.
The Obama Era rule if left to stand would have been that slippery slope.
The house properly and lawfully rescinded it.
When people want to kill they will kill. If she hadn’t had access to a gun she would of found another way.
Almost certainly so. But if she used a hammer it wouldn’t be a cudgel for the anti gun crowd to use.
A horrible tragedy. May the Lord embrace the souls of the children.
And maybe changed her mind while looking. Or do people never change their minds?
Well she didn’t.
It’s not like she murdered them all and killed herself with her eyes closed.