Gun Show Undercover: Arizona

The Guardian article concludes:

In the case of the Tucson shooting, Loughner did pass background check before he bought the Glock 19. However, he only managed to do so because the US army, which rejected him because of his history of drug abuse, failed to pass on that information to the FBI's national database.

Based on what the rest of the article says, I guess Loughner would've been able to buy the Glock even if the US Army had informed the FBI of the drug abuse, but the information shouldn't be withheld from the FBI; not until whatever drugs were abused are legalized or decriminalized, anyway. I don't know what the stats are for who commits more murders, drug abusers, or non-abusers, but consuming drugs doesn't turn someone into a killer or even make a person violent. Perhaps some drugs would or do, but marijuana, cocaine and heroin, natural drugs, don't automatically make consumers dangerous. Drug consumption might, however, possibly make people with violent tendencies to begin with more prone to committing violence once they start consuming drugs. I don't know if that's true or how serious it'd be if it is at all true though.

I think that in the "world" of drug consumers, violence mostly occurs between rival drug dealers, f.e. Most consumers aren't violent.

Did more "straighties" vote for Obama, or more drug consumers? What about voters for the Bushes, Clintons, and so on?

What about people illegally and, in other terms, unethically selling guns? Do they tend to be drug consumers, or "straighties"?

A lot of people in the military consume drugs, but then a lot of these people were naive citizens living in very serious poverty and believed Washington's lies. The Bushes are a drug-trafficking family, profiteers anyway, and Jr was a serious or heavy drug user, and he held the title of C-in-C when commanding wars of aggression, only two of many extreme crimes against humanity that the family is guilty of or for. Bill Clinton was purportedly into drug trafficking while the msm corporate news media has been silent about this, and he's a serious war criminal, C-in-C of a lot of murder, et cetera. What about Obama? And many "straighties" voted these criminals into office.

A lot of "straighties" support wars of aggression and there are drug consumers who also did and do.

What was Loughner's drug abuse charge for; marijuana, cocaine, heroin, pharmaceuticals, ecstasy, crack, speed, pcp, or some other drug or drugs, or liquor, the abuse of which would surely be treated as alcoholism, rather than drug abuse? Maybe it was a combination of drugs, and being in the military, liquor was likely one of them.

The US is a violent culture and has long been one; and hollywood is a big pusher of violence on the screen.

The criminal gun sellers at gun shows might all consume liquor, but consuming liquor doesn't turn all consumers into being violent people, either.

I believe that there's something else that's needed to explain these crimes, why they're committed; f.e. considering how American society is, as well as people's individual mental health and upbringing. Several years ago, I read that psychologists have said that [many] people in North American societies have schizophrenia. It's to varying degrees, but apparently a lot of people have mental, psychological problems. Being poor doesn't help and the US being a society that, at the top, promotes violence, albeit not in an explicit manner, surely makes the situation much worse; perhaps especially because the US is a very partisan-oriented society, politically, f.e.

This is just a layman sort of guess; not a studied psychologist's input or word.

Gun sellers illegally and carelessly selling guns should definitely feel very ashamed of themselves though. Many of them don't seem to care that guns they sell illegally may be used for other than self defense. I wouldn't want one for self defense, but [many] Americans will psychologically freak out without their "security blanket" that they don't seem to be able to live without.