We don't want to take your guns...read H.R. 4269

France has 1/5 as many inhabitants as the US.  For the most recent year I could find they had 831 murders, 183 of which were by firearms. Firearm suicides numbered over 1600.

All lower than the USA per capita but also demonstrates that the world is a violent, messy place no matter how you look at it.

Also, Australia has had at least 4 mass shootings since port arthur including a highly publicized ISIS sympathizer taking hostages in Sydney CBD within the last couple years.

What they don't get is that criminals don't buy firearms
 legally. They buy them from other criminals. Stopping lawful citizens from purchasing isn't going to stop criminals and the black market. If anything, it will create a larger black market and increase in  smuggling and the gang wars that come with it.
Once again, look at prohibition and all crime / murder related to smuggling and territorial disputes.

More people are killed by fists and feet each year than by rifles. Ban fists and feet!

Yes, there is a black market where criminals buy and sell guns. BUT, where did every single last one of those guns come from? They were all legally purchased at some point before they entered the black market. Maybe the original owner sold it on Craigslist (no background check)? Brought it to a gun show or swap meet (no background check)? Gave it to their friend/relative/neighbor/son/daughter (no background check)? Used it to commit a crime then ditched it in some ally to be found by whoever (no background check). Maybe it was stolen from their house? Or, maybe the first guy who bought it scratched off the serial and sold it to his buddy who has an axe to grind...

You are beyond niave Alex, if you think they were all bought legally to start. Illegal weapons importation has been alive and well here for over 300 years. 

And where might those illegally imported weapons have originated? Unless the gun manufacturers themselves are pumping guns into the black market (jury is out on that one...), each and every one of those guns was legally purchased at one point, whether in the US or abroad. I stand behind what I said.

I just don't understand the leap from "more extensive background checking" (which I support) and "a complete ban on firearms".

What is the old saying "how do you eat an elephant?" answer one bite at a time.

In a plot that sounds like it came from Machiavelli or the Godfather, this Bill is proposed, the President announces new restrictions.  The next shooting comes along and their is an all out media frenzy to push this Bill through.  A few more shootings occur (because we have yet to address the root cause, mental health), oh we must have everyone turn in their Semi Auto's.  Sound far fetched, not to me.     

I don't think this is correct unless it is an indictment of the entire healthcare system right down to the access to medical care and stigmatization of mental illness. 

For a conservative's take, see:

http://thefederalist.com/2015/10/19/the-problem-with-blaming-mass-shootings-on-mental-illness/

For the liberal take, see:

http://www.salon.com/2015/06/18/its_not_about_mental_illness_the_big_lie_that_always_follows_mass_shootings_by_white_males/

Anyway, I don't think that blaming mental illness or focusing on it in any way is the answer to solving mass shootings and gun violence, but improved mental healthcare access is a noble goal in its own right.

If you think the root of the problem is mental illness, wouldn't it make a whole lot of sense to do universal background checks to make sure mentally ill people are not accessing guns?!?

Of course we should improve mental health care, too. That is a given.

And where might those illegally imported weapons have originated? Unless the gun manufacturers themselves are pumping guns into the black market (jury is out on that one...), each and every one of those guns was legally purchased at one point, whether in the US or abroad. I stand behind what I said.

Do you honestly think every Kalashnikov made it here legally?  I assure they didn't, think old Leland Yee was going to get those firearms into this country legally?

I'm not sure what point you're trying to make, other than trying to contradict whatever I say...

Yes there is an illegal gun trade, and yes some of the guns involved come from other countries. The point I'm trying to make is that each weapon in that worldwide illegal gun trade started it's life somewhere, LEGALLY. The Kalashnikovs  started their lives (I assume...) as Russian military weapons. Then they entered the black market somehow.

it`s already been brought up but.....and I`m not a lawyer but..

when you say mental illness...you would have to define exactly what it is or type of mental illness that would get an individual excluded from purchasing /owning a firearm ..there are obvious forms and the not so obvious..

consider that a  persons medical history is private , that could possibly mean having to gain access to a potential buyers medical records...

example..if a person suffering from mild depression wishes to purchase a firearm  how would you know unless that was public knowledge..how would that work , since again a persons medical record is private..

might that not require the care giver to report the "patient'' to an authority which could in turn block the sale of a firearm.... thus again more legislation to require ALL mental health patients regardless of severity of the condition..and losing their right to have their medical history private.... a loss of a right ..it snow balls ..

 many combat veterans have PTSD in various levels of severity..

some own firearms..many are documented through being treated...many are not being treated...

some of those veterans have committed suicide using a firearm. because suicide is against the law their death is counted as a violent crime not due to mental illness..

should their right to own a firearm have been rescinded and the "proper authorities" been notified  because of the PTSD...and at what level of severity do start the "list"

Mental health care professionals are already required by law to notify "authorities" if their patients make a "valid" claim of intent to harm themselves or others...

one might argue being sick is not a crime and it is illegal to discriminate against someone with an illness

tough one indeed..

The mental health professional reporting requirements increase the stigma on mental illness and create a disincentive to seek treatment for a vulnerable part of society that really needs our support and compassion, not our judgment and paternalism.

Good point Vic.

Ok... So you don't want universal background checks and you don't want to inquire about people's mental health before they purchase a gun...

What do you recommend? Do nothing?

If you think the root of the problem is mental illness, wouldn't it make a whole lot of sense to do universal background checks to make sure mentally ill people are not accessing guns?!?

Of course we should improve mental health care, too. That is a given.

HIPA laws.....

and, what mental illnesses are you screening for?

Ok... So you don't want universal background checks and you don't want to inquire about people's mental health before they purchase a gun...

What do you recommend? Do nothing?

Doing nothing is better than all of the alternatives that have been presented so far.  Instant universal background checks to CLETS and NCIS are fine.  Everything else is just for show and will only inconvenience people without actually having any effect on gun violence whatsoever.

Ok... So you don't want universal background checks and you don't want to inquire about people's mental health before they purchase a gun...

What do you recommend? Do nothing?

Doing nothing is better than all of the alternatives that have been presented so far.  Instant universal background checks to CLETS and NCIS are fine.  Everything else is just for show and will only inconvenience people without actually having any effect on gun violence whatsoever.

Best comment in the last 8 years regarding gun control, besides using two hands.

I am not a mental health expert, but I think denying gun access for people suffering from schizophrenia makes good sense.

I also think it makes sense to actually study and track gun violence and even gun ownership (even if it's 100% anonymous). Without good scientific data, I can't tell you what mental illnesses we should look out for.

I am not a mental health expert, but I think denying gun access for people suffering from schizophrenia makes good sense.

I also think it makes sense to actually study and track gun violence and even gun ownership (even if it's 100% anonymous). Without good scientific data, I can't tell you what mental illnesses we should look out for.

People who have been involuntarily committed already have their guns taken away and are already entered into the DOJ system to be denied gun purchases. 

...

The obvious bottleneck attack point isn't gun ownership anyway, its access to ammunition.  Look forward to that coming to california very soon.

Ok... So you don't want universal background checks and you don't want to inquire about people's mental health before they purchase a gun...

What do you recommend? Do nothing?

Doing nothing is better than all of the alternatives that have been presented so far.  Instant universal background checks to CLETS and NCIS are fine.  Everything else is just for show and will only inconvenience people without actually having any effect on gun violence whatsoever.

That just your opinion, man... (The Dude)