In response to the recent Ft. Hood shooting, Republican house speaker John Boehner says people with mental illness shouldn't have guns.
My response to Mr. Boehner is: people with mental illness shouldn't be allowed to occupy public office. (Something tells me if this became law there would suddenly be a shortage of government representatives, including the US house speaker position). Yes, that's right - I said it. I think John Boehner is mentally ill and I think he needs to be booted out of office.
WHO exactly determines what a mental illness is and who is going to be classified as mentally ill? That's what I want to know. If we go down this road, what happens if a radical gun-grabbing nutjob gets put in a position to define what mental illness is and who has it? What if they put someone in charge like Leland Yee?
And why stop at the 2nd Amendment? If we can bypass one Constitutional right, why can't we do the same to other constitutional rights? Why can't we say if you are classified by some government official as being "mentally ill" that you no longer have the right to vote, to have free speech, or even to have freedom of privacy or entitled to due process?
It is a mental illness to think that others are out to harm you, we should therefore take away your guns. They took away the guns in other countries and they still exiest.
Please keep intelligence away from this heated, emotional subject.
Yup, they took the guns away from he native americans with a promise that they would take care of them. That worked out well for them didn't it? I do agree though that if someone is under mental health care they should NOT BE ALLOWED TO BUY A GUN!
Maybe someday they'll release what prescription drugs all these shooters were on and start there. howerver I share your skepticism about who is allowed to define mental health.
A discussion on the radio today basically said that if you have ever taken an antidepressant you should never be able to own a gun and if there is anyone in your household that has been on antidepressants for any amount of time, there should be no guns in the home. They went on to say that the best way to enforce this is through opening of medical records and house-to-house searches for verification. Do these people even know what they're suggesting?
I'm just curious as to where the line should be drawn. Obviously, there are some people who should not have guns. (Violent previous offenders come to mind.)
I won't dignify the troll's yellowstone's post with a comment. He has no credibility with me, whatsoever. None. I'm sure he's heartbroken.
quote
Originally posted by whadeduck:
A discussion on the radio today basically said that if you have ever taken an antidepressant you should never be able to own a gun and if there is anyone in your household that has been on antidepressants for any amount of time, there should be no guns in the home. They went on to say that the best way to enforce this is through opening of medical records and house-to-house searches for verification. Do these people even know what they're suggesting?
What the hell..? Seriously?
[This message has been edited by Raydar (edited 04-03-2014).]
I'm pretty sure a psychologist would be the one to determine one's mental health (or lack thereof). I'm not sure why you guys think the government is going to get in the business of defining what constitutes mental illness. That strikes me as just a bit paranoid... just a bit.
I think that barring mentally ill people from owning firearms is a good idea. I would even go so far as to suggest that someone using mood-altering or judgment impairing medications shouldn't be using a firearm, either. If you can't be trusted to operate a vehicle safely, then you definitely shouldn't be operating a firearm.
quote
Originally posted by yellowstone: But the people with the guns are the ones with the mental problems...!
So, what do you do with the people that acquire a firearm and THEN develop a mental illness or start to use mind-altering drugs?
I don't do anything with them. That's up to the legislators, but I could support terms that require doctors to submit information to the effect that a patient has mental issues, and that report be cross referenced to the FBI database. It wouldn't stop criminals who acquired their weapon outside the background checks tho.
A discussion on the radio today basically said that if you have ever taken an antidepressant you should never be able to own a gun and if there is anyone in your household that has been on antidepressants for any amount of time, there should be no guns in the home. They went on to say that the best way to enforce this is through opening of medical records and house-to-house searches for verification. Do these people even know what they're suggesting?
I wonder where that would leave me? This past year my Doctor added a very low dose of an antidepressant to my medication for my arthritis which I now take daily. I don't take it because of depression. I take it because studies have shown that taking a low dose of this antidepressant with your NSAID will increase the effectiveness of your NSAID. It has nothing to do with "mental stability" or with "depression".
I wonder where that would leave me? This past year my Doctor added a very low dose of an antidepressant to my medication for my arthritis which I now take daily. I don't take it because of depression. I take it because studies have shown that taking a low dose of this antidepressant with your NSAID will increase the effectiveness of your NSAID. It has nothing to do with "mental stability" or with "depression".
There is the fear. Gun grabbers will use anything to get your guns.
It is a fact.
A general level of education and awareness needs to be prevalent in a society to utilize reasonable laws and measures of control. We don't have that. Most if not all of our problems stem from this rot.
Nearly one in five high school age boys in the United States and 11 percent of school-age children over all have received a medical diagnosis of attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, according to new data from the federal Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
For starters, there is no scientific basis for the diagnosis of ADHD. We need to also discuss discriminating against the handicapped as that is against Federal law. And HIPPA medical privacy concerns. Perhaps we should ban people who have violent behaviors as well as those that hate society. Thought police anyone ? The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. Then there is the fact that in all shootings involving a mentally ill actor, only in gun free zones are the death rates high, and, the deaths stopped right after the actor was confronted by someone else with a gun.
Sure, leave it up to a psychiatrist. You still have to ask yourselves, who will be calling for these evaluations? Who will be funding these evaluations? When these doctors see that these evaluations are a cash cow and that rubber stamping "DISAPPROVED" on them ensures a steady flow of patients, the objectivity collapses. Add to that any sort of backlash to the psychiatrist when one of his "approved" subjects goes postal, the deal will be sealed. It wouldn't even need to be legal backlash. Just the publicity of his practice being associated with the shooting would be enough to sway those evaluations.
It was an NPR program. I tuned in just after it started, listened for a while, but then had to get back out when I got to my destination. Never heard an ID as to what the name of the program was or the people involved.
Sure, leave it up to a psychiatrist. You still have to ask yourselves, who will be calling for these evaluations? Who will be funding these evaluations? When these doctors see that these evaluations are a cash cow and that rubber stamping "DISAPPROVED" on them ensures a steady flow of patients, the objectivity collapses. Add to that any sort of backlash to the psychiatrist when one of his "approved" subjects goes postal, the deal will be sealed. It wouldn't even need to be legal backlash. Just the publicity of his practice being associated with the shooting would be enough to sway those evaluations.
I have never met a shrink that didn't need one more than anyone else I have ever met and you want to let them decide if you are mentally competent to own a gun, hell most of them don't want anyone to own a gun or know anything about guns.
I was seeing one after the nut next door attacked me with that sickle and mentioned that "my Glock was in the bedroom or I would have shot her had I had it on me" He asked me what a Glock was? WTF I explained "Its a mostly plastic pistol" He said "aren't those illegal?" I had to have him look it up on the net and prove to him it was a real and legal gun. and you want them to say who can and can't have a gun.
I know you don't want that from your post and were questioning them doing so.
Steve
------------------ Technology is great when it works, and one big pain in the ass when it doesn't
Detroit iron rules all the rest are just toys.
[This message has been edited by 84fiero123 (edited 04-04-2014).]
Maybe someday they'll release what prescription drugs all these shooters were on and start there. howerver I share your skepticism about who is allowed to define mental health.
A general level of education and awareness needs to be prevalent in a society to utilize reasonable laws and measures of control. We don't have that. Most if not all of our problems stem from this rot.
look I'm not anti gun at all... I believe in the 2nd amendment but it needs common sense.
1) I have no problem with making people register there guns. We register our cars and pets why not guns? If you want a weapon that can kill someone with the simple pull of a trigger that's fine. It's a lot of responsibility and we should know who has them. You can have whatever guns you want..but you need to register it.
2) How the hell isn't it common sense that mentally ill individuals shouldn't have a gun? lol Seriously? I'm fine with it. Make it law today..
Originally posted by firstfiero: look I'm not anti gun at all... I believe in the 2nd amendment but it needs common sense.
1) I have no problem with making people register there guns. We register our cars and pets why not guns? If you want a weapon that can kill someone with the simple pull of a trigger that's fine. It's a lot of responsibility and we should know who has them. You can have whatever guns you want..but you need to register it.
2) How the hell isn't it common sense that mentally ill individuals shouldn't have a gun? lol Seriously? I'm fine with it. Make it law today..
I explained "Its a mostly plastic pistol"
