oh, i don't know.. perhaps a "mental health" qualification?

seems all the "mass shooters" have one thing in common.

they all suffer from mental illness.

Actually, the Ft Hood shooter was a Muslim terrorist, which may be an insanity.  But, one for which millions in the Middle East suffer. 

So, I get from your statement that gun control is not the solution? 

I thought making it more difficult to buy a gun, to buy ammo, or to shoot more than a couple rounds in a magazine at a time were the solution to all our mass shooting problems?  I thought that expanding the background check process to private gun sales was the solution?  I thought banning concealed weapons on school campus' and other places (like this Naval installation) was the solution?  Funny, all of these gun control initiatives would have done little to prevent any of the recent tragedies, including this one.

Turns out, maybe investing in our mental health programs might help reduce some of the gun violence in the US?  Maybe developing a way to identify and help treat mental health issues is a better approach than limiting law abiding citizens 2nd amendment rights?

Ohh, and to expand upon Road Puppies belief in the power of the element of surprise - it is believed that the gunman only had the shotgun when he arrived.  If that is the case, there were no large capacity magazines on him, no large capacity handguns.  Just the shotgun.  The rest he would have taken from his victims at some point or another after the shooting began.....

The gunman was armed with an assault-style rifle, a shotgun and a handgun when he was killed, authorities said. But law enforcement officials told NBC News they believed he arrived packing only the shotgun, which he bought last week from a gun dealer in Lorton, Va., about 20 miles from Washington.

http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/09/16/20522196-gunman-kills-at-least-12-at-washington-navy-yard-gathering-weapons-along-the-way?lite&gt1=43001

more americans have died from domestic gunfire than all wars in u.s. history.

i'd say, that fact alone, says we need to have more control over our nations firearms.

The vast majority of those were self inflicted.  How many have died due to the use of alcohol in the past 60 years?

crash,

Please tell us how you would define "adequate mental health" and who will be selected to make that determination?  Today, because of rules that were placed into action by liberl lawmakers, it is darned near impossible to force someone to even go to counseling.  A physician who labels someone as mentally unbalanced can likely face a lawsuit because the patient feels differently.  Mental health is one of the most abstract of diagnoses.  It is basically a perspective and subjective diagnosis.  I might think you are unbalanced, you could feel the same about me.

If this man answered the questions asked to him during his pre-purchase questionaire, it is very unlikely it would have uncovered the true motive behind buying this firearm.  This is not an issue of the "mind", but one of the "heart".  People have lost respect for human life, theirs as well as other's.  You can put all the strict control rules you want out there, and if these people want to kill someone whom they feel has "ruined their life", they are going to do it, whether they use a gun, a rock, or a knife.

if just ONE life is saved, is it not worth it being just a little bit harder to purchase a firearm? i'm not , in any way, suggesting we BAN FIREARMS! perhaps adding one more step to the process.... some form of mental evaluation. as i said, if it saves just one human life, is it not worth it?

First, prove that it will save that one life.

Second, explain to me where that line of thinking ends.......

Why stop there, why not force mental evaluations prior to purchasing alcohol?  Why not force car buyers to spend an extra 5 grand to install a breathalyzer on there cars that they have to blow into before the car will start.  After all, if it will just save one life.

hoob, can you explain why cars are more regulated than guns?

remember, this is your argument.

Because the words 'shall not be infringed' aren't used anywhere in the Constitution to describe your right to own or operate a car.

Now back to my other two questions........

The man had a criminal record and acknowledged mental problems.  No way should he have had a firearm, nor a secret clearance.  Liberals fight using the mental health issue so that many are not included in the database.  Security clearance checks seem to be lax.  Otherwise, he wouldn't have the job or entrance to the naval yard..

He used an AR-15 variant, shot a security guard and took his pistol complete with high capacity magazines. 

You took the words right out of my mouth.

My argument has to do with alcohol.  It kills just as many people as a guns and all you need to buy it is an ID showing you are older than 21. No background checks, no mental illness checks, no checks to determine alcoholism, etc....Same goes for smoking, 50,000/year have died due to second hand smoke enduring a much more miserable death than being shot.

http://www.cdc.gov/tobacco/dat...o_related_mortality/

The mental health questions are to easy to bypass, and it is obvious from this man's history that he was a troubled individual who should not have slipped thru the cracks.  Why were the charges dropped when he fired into the ceiling in 2004 of his downstairs apartment?  Did that not warrant further investigation?  or when he shot out the tires of an automobile, why did these things not register in the applicantion to get the shotgun?  Of course none of that mattered in the obtaining of the handgun or the AR-15 since he took those after he entered the base.

If anything the company who hired this guy and then got him his clearance to get onto the base should have their employment policies scrutinized.  I would have thought some of these issues should have raised a red flag.

Regardless, it sounds like he managed to get cleared to buy a gun in one of the strictest of areas, and then managed to smuggle onto a very important naval base in the heart of the our nation's government complex.  That in itself is a testament to the fact that you are not going to prevent these types of actions with simple rules.

Per this CNN report, an AR-15 was not used at all.  Instead he was found with a shotgun and two pistols. 

HIS WEAPONS

What we know: Federal law enforcement sources say authorities have recovered three weapons from the scene of the mass shooting, including one -- a shotgun -- that investigators believe he brought in to the compound. The other two weapons -- handguns -- the sources say, may have been taken from guards.

What we don't know: The sources, who have detailed knowledge of the investigation, cautioned that initial investigation information that an AR-15 rifle was used may have been incorrect. It is believed that Alexis had rented an AR-15, but returned it before Monday morning's shootings. Authorities are still investigating precisely how many weapons Alexis had access to and when.

http://www.cnn.com/2013/09/17/...index.html?hpt=hp_t1

There have been 10 separate shootings in Washington, D.C., since the night of Wednesday, Sept. 11, 2013, not counting the rampage at the Navy Yard on Monday morning, police told The Huffington Post over the phone. The number reflects only those shootings to which police responded.

Those 10 shootings left two dead and an additional 13 wounded.

Metropolitan Police Department spokesman Chris Kelly told HuffPost no arrests have been made in any of those shootings. Police have not identified suspects in several of the incidents, including both homicides, Kelly said.

The shootings did not capture the attention of the national news media. Even among many local outlets, most of the shootings were ignored.

Five separate shootings occurred between 10 p.m. Thursday night and 8 a.m. Friday morning in various neighborhoods across the city. One of the incidents occurred on 14th St. Northwest, a popular area full of bars and restaurants, but most were in lower-income areas.

Last year, Washington's murder rate was 13.91 murders per 100,000 people, according to calculations made by D.C. Homicide Watch, a community reporting project that aims to cover every murder in the city. Homicide Watch points out that this is the eighth-highest murder rate per capita among U.S. cities with populations greater than 500,000. In early January, Washington Mayor Vincent Gray said there were only 88 murders in the city in 2012, which officials boasted was a "historic low."

Still, 88 murders per year equates roughly to a Navy Yard-sized tragedy about every two months.

At press time, the death toll of the Navy Yard massacre was at least 13 people, including the alleged shooter.

WATCH: Local coverage of a series of shootings that occurred Thursday night in Washington D.C.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/...Crime&ref=topbar

======

Actually, there is a qualifier to that: More Americans have died from domestic gunfire SINCE ROBERT KENNEDY WAS ASSINATED (1968) than all wars in US History.
Just sayin'

Eliminate suicides and see how the numbers compare to alcohol and tobacco use.

===============

And they are only used in the 2nd Amendment following the words " A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State", which is proceeded by Article 2, Section 2 which states that "The President shall be Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the Militia of the several States,"

For some reason you always seem to forget to mention that part.

.....so logically, the reason we have so many handgun deaths is because Robert Kennedy is dead???.....

And for some reason, you seem to forget to complete the entire text...

"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed".

Could it be that the people whom can "keep and bear arms" are different "people" than the "other people" in your mind?

Amendment I

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

Amendment IV

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

Amendment IX

The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained bythe people.

Amendment X

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or tothe people.

For some reason you always forget to mention this part:

The right of the PEOPLE to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.  Notice it does not say the right of militia members.

Hmm...that seems like a reasonable proposal. Lets see how that works...

The District of Columbia (“District&rdquo has enacted some of the strongest gun violence prevention legislation in the nation. Among other things, District law:

• Requires that any person or organization obtain a valid registration certificate in order to lawfully possess or control a firearm. The registration process serves also as a licensing process and is rigorous and detailed, including a background check on the prospective transferee and firearms safety training and testing requirements;
• Deems certain firearms unregisterable, meaning they cannot be owned or possessed in the District, including assault weapons, .50 BMG rifles, machine guns and handguns not registered to the current owner prior to September 24, 1976, with certain limited exceptions, including the registration of handguns for self-defense within the registrant’s home;
• Prohibits the possession, sale or other transfer of a large capacity ammunition magazine;
• Prohibits the carrying of any firearm in public;
• Imposes a 10-day waiting period between the purchase and actual transfer of a firearm;
• Licenses and strictly regulates firearms dealers;
• Imposes detailed design safety standards on handguns;
• Limits the number of handguns a person may register to one per 30-day period;
• Allows an individual not licensed as a firearm dealer to sell a firearm only to a licensed dealer, and only if the unlicensed individual has a registration certificate for the firearm; and
• Requires gun owners to report to law enforcement the loss, theft, or destruction of a registered firearm.     
• http://smartgunlaws.org/washington-d-c-law-summary/

Now...

Gun crime statistics by US state: latest data

The figures show that California had the highest number of gun murders last year - 1,790, which is 68% of all murders that year and equivalent to 3.25 per 100,000 people in the state. Big as that figure is, it's still down by 3% on the previous year. Other key findings include:

• While gun crime is down in the vast majority of states, it is up in Indiana, Arkansas, North Carolina, Louisiana and several of the smaller states
• If you look at the firearms murder rate per 100,000 people, District of Columbia comes out top - with 12 firearms murders per 100,000 men, women and children in the state. There were 77 firearms murders in DC in 2010, down 22% on 2009
• DC is followed by Louisiana (10.16) and Mississippi (7.46)
• DC is also top for firearms robberies per 100,000 people - with 242.56
• If you look at aggravated assaults involving a firearm, Tennessee (137.58) and South Carolina (127.88) come above Arkansas (100.56)

Now, for a few of the toughest States on gun ownership. In BOLD of course.

Data summary

http://www.theguardian.com/new...0/gun-crime-us-state

I guess some of the others here, as well as SCOTUS, addressed your concerns about the 'militia' reference.

Good try though....

.....

If fascism comes to this nation, it will come wrapped in $25 billion, bearing dead children as ornaments, and dripping vulture tears.  A true representation of Progressivism.  FYI, vultures don't cry, they just drool!

___________________________________

prove it? really? so, you think making sure guns aren't in the hands of mentally ill people with violent tendencies needs to be "proven to save lives?" really? imma just throw my hands up at that one and call it done. ....

next.. tell you where this line of thinking ends... well, it ends at "mental evaluations". exactly where i started. plain and simple. keeping guns away from the mentally ill. i know, it's shocking!

This was your argument, remember?  Surely you can come up with one piece of hard evidence that says that your plan will save a single life.  Not assumptions, not 'but it just makes sense', hard proof of your claim that it will save lives.  Just one life.

You see, you can't.  It's an assumption on your part that, if you make it more difficult to get a gun, then those crazy, mentally unstable folks wont be able to get a gun and wont commit the horrible acts that they are trying to commit.  Again, your laws only affect law abiding individuals.  Criminals tend to ignore them.

As for where your line of thinking goes - assuming we pass a law preventing crazy people from buying guns, when the next mentally unstable person commits a mass shooting using a stolen gun, or a gun he previously owned, your next battle cry will be even more progressive.  After all, if just ONE life is saved, is it not worth it to create a database of all gun owners?  iI just ONE life is saved, is it not worth it to further impede on gun owners rights?  If just ONE life is saved, is it not worth it to ban guns completely? 

See where your line of thinking always ends up?

Again, are you going to push for mental evals prior to buying liquor or require training for smokers so as to not kill with second hand smoke?  Your argument, "if it will save just one life it's worth it".  

___________________

hoob, can you show me where "liquor or smoking" were invented to kill people?

you can't compare apples to oranges. they're not the same thing.

Obama seems to be on the side of the criminal.

http://www.washingtontimes.com...ng-ex-cons/?page=all

Firearms are tools. Some were made for target practice, some for hunting, some for defending oneself and some for defending the nation.  None were made specifically to murder the innocent.  That's a human prerogative.  Tools do not have motives, will or the ability to act independently of their user. 

If guns were made to kill people, then alcohol was made to make people drunk and cigarettes were made to give you cancer.  and forks were made to make you fat.

Obama worshipers

you can lead a conservative to facts, but you can't make them think.

how in the world does anyone believe guns were invented for "target practice"?

join us all in reality.

cars were invented to make long distance travel easier.

forks were invented to make eating more sanitary.

cigarettes were invented because, they're easier than smoking a pipe.

and alcohol... was probably invented to make people like you, hoob, more tolerable.

(it could have been to help ugly ppl get laid!)

Bald Guy is a different kind of tool.