Wong gets 8 months

I won't disagree, I doubt a guy that is crazy and hell bent perpetrating another VT style massacre is going to be helped or thwarted much by spending 8 months in prison. I also have a problem with sending people to jail before they have broken the law... While some of his comments might be questionable and owning weapons might be dubious, I don't know how they could actually send the guy to jail and sleep at night. Why not push to get him som help from a doctor or something of that nature?

Why not push to get him som help from a doctor or something of that nature?

Click to expand...

Wasn't Seung-Hui Cho get pushed to get some "help from a doctor or something?"

That didn't work out too well...

BTW, the Wong case is strong support for a policy to avoid gun transactions with pre-21-year olds, even though such transactions might be "legal."

BTW, the Wong case is a strong support for a policty to avoid gun transactions with pre-21-year olds, even though such transactions might be "legal."

Click to expand...

I don't see why. I am 20 and own 3 guns. I am very responsible. I might be more mature than most my age but I still don't see a reason for this. If someone is immature and stupid at age 19 or 20 then most likely they will be the same at age 21.

BTW, the Wong case is strong support for a policy to avoid gun transactions with pre-21-year olds, even though such transactions might be "legal."

Click to expand...

Got any statistics/research to back up the inplied claim that people under 21 have a higher tendency to have mental problems, which magically disappear when they turn 21? Someone can be a whacko at 50, just as easily as they can at 19, and mental problems dont magically dissappear when you hit an arbitrary age.

the Wong case is strong support for a policy to avoid gun transactions with pre-21-year olds, even though such transactions might be "legal."

Click to expand...

FCFC do you even own a firearm. I find it hard to believe someone who believes in the 2nd ammendment believes it only applies to groups he deems fit.

So if Wong is crazy and believes he "need" to cause a masacre the day he hits 21 it goes away. His mental disorders are instantly erased like a computer rebooting?

What about Lee Harvey Oswald? He was 26 I believe when he shot Kenedy. Maybe the right should be restricted to those over 27?

Of course the many that murdered him; Jack Ruby was 54 when he committed his crime so should the legal age be 55?

Violence offenses are statistically higher among Blacks and Hispanics so should the right be restricted to only those ethnic groups who's violent offense rate is lower than the national average?

Hell even non violent crimes statistically lead to violent crime at a higher rate. People with multiple misdemeanor arrests or juvenile records move to more violent crime at a higher rate than national average. Some don't but statistically they are a risk. So maybe we should expand gun restrictions from just felons to any conviction.

Even those arrested but not convicted are a risk. Since criminals are only successfully sentenced a small fraction of the time statistically many of those arrested but not convicted are guilty. Why not revoke gunrights on a mere arrest just to be "sure"?

I also remember reading that crime rate among people that don't own their own home is higher than homeowners. Maybe we should restrict gun ownership to land owners? If they aren't responsible enough to own their home then they can't be trusted with guns, right?

Hell gun ownership is substantially lower among women so they "obviously" don't even care about their rights. If they don't care then they can't be trusted. So no guns for women.

So would you be for a push to have gun ownership limited to white landowner males over age of 55 with no previous legal issues? Sad thing is you probably would see no problem with that (as long as you are in the included class).

I go by the old rule that If I ever sell one of my guns, It will be to someone I know or a known firearms dealer.

Quote:
the Wong case is strong support for a policy to avoid gun transactions with pre-21-year olds, even though such transactions might be "legal."

Click to expand...

FCFC do you even own a firearm.

Click to expand...

Yes.

I go by the old rule that If I ever sell one of my guns, It will be to someone I know or a known firearms dealer.

Click to expand...

Not a bad policy...

BTW, the Wong case is strong support for a policy to avoid gun transactions with pre-21-year olds, even though such transactions might be "legal."

Click to expand...

Age has nothing to do with it. If you had had any interaction with him (as we did on a state firearm board), you would have known not to sell him anything.
He was a complete flake!

Whoa, whoa there big fellas! Aren't we getting just a tad off of the ORIGINAL POST?
The original post wsn't about "Should 18 year olds have the right to purchase guns but it tried to comment on the fact that Wong had fewer weapons than most of us here on THR and that the media is exploiting that fact rather than the idea that he may be mentally ill.

I love how the media jumped on the .50 BMG as

anti-aircraft ammunition

Click to expand...

and his

arsenal

Click to expand...

!! Wow. That means that anyone who owns a gun of anykind could own mass population slaying weapons or weapons capible of ritualistic farm animal sacrifices. Hell, for that matter, your living room couch could be referred to as a WMD (weapon of mass destruction) because if you threw it off a 10-story building and hit a couple of cars it would probably destroy them.

The media is all about selling papers by making everything sensational.

P.S. Please try to keep with the original post or start your own post.

As far as I'm concerned, the 26th Amendment made it clear that you are a legal adult at 18. Congress simply hasn't had the cajones to create the proper Civil Rights law to enforce it.

If 18's the age to vote, then it should be the same for handgun ownership, drinking, etc. We cannot ban Women or minorities from these activities, so why 18-21 y.o's?

so...did he actually get charged of a felony? They didnt exactly list the charge. I personally think this is bull****. Unless they actually nailed him with conspiracy to commit, then this just looks like furthering the media's demonizing sensationalism. Hopefully, there is more to it than "he had guns and a vest so therefore we believe he would have done it."

In the end, he said that he'll never touch a gun again.

The media again demonizing guns. Wong won't ever touch evil guns again because those are what caused the problem.

Wasn't Seung-Hui Cho get pushed to get some "help from a doctor or something?"

That didn't work out too well...

Click to expand...

No. He wasn't "pushed to get some help from a doctor". He was very sick. It was "suggested" he get help - with absolutely no follow-up or consequences if he failed to do so. Virginia's mental health statutes are some of the lamest in the country.

Had the court ordered him to get help and committed him if he did not do so voluntarily - the massacre might not have happened.

the sad thing is the statutes in va got that way with the diligent work from attorneys. in the name of protecting the rights of the unbalanced its become very difficult to get them help till after an "incident". i've got a friend who climbed the whitehouse fence baqbbling but he can't be commited