Dealing with Mental Health

[Red Dirt Walker]

Yes, and I have done so. Especially when we found dad in the bowling alley in his tidy whities and socks with a borrowed Safeway shopping cart walking the alley lanes "shopping".

I would surmise from that description that he was deemed mentally unstable or some other title.
How would to do that for the bank shooter for example that was seeking treatment but clearly not having enough issues to be committed. Take their firearms and they disagree so they report the firearms as stolen by you. Then what?
As they go out and buy new firearms?

 

[GC7]

Adequate training is different than mental health. More training can improve a persons skill and doesn't generally play a factor in shooting sprees.

My point was that there are mentally sane people who still should not own guns.

Keeping guns away from the mentally ill should theoretically be easier to do.

 

[Red Dirt Walker]

Older video but very instructive

I know I have said this in this thread more than once so its old, but here it goes again. I agree with Trey. When a shooting happens though and the person has a history of mental health problems and we point that out and we are then asked.....ok how would to deal with the issue of firearms in the hands of people with mental health problems and our answer is.......*chirp* * chirp*, I just don't think that helps our cause.

 

[Red Dirt Walker]

I think what we have in place for mental health is acceptable when it comes to guns. If a person has been institutionalized by a court they shouldn’t have access to a gun. At least until they are cleared by a doctor. Other than that, I think we’re good. We can come up with a million reasons not to let citizens have the right to have firearms. The answer is….it’s our right, period. Once you start compromising who can or can’t defend themselves (other than what is currently illegal) you might as well give up that right. The question should be how to stop mass shootings, not how to take rights away from free citizens. We’ve had enough school shootings. How are these people getting in? Nobody should be able to get into a school unless they’re buzzed in at a central access point. Nobody should be able to leave an outside door open without an alarm going off to notify armed security (armed with rifles). We must come up with better security solutions for schools, it’s that simple. This shouldn’t be this hard! So instead of politicians making excuses and blaming guns, they should be the ones answering how are these people getting into our schools! Then, what changes have they implemented to keep these people out. You can’t kill people you can’t get to.

And perhaps, ultimately that is the only answer to the question, but to be honest, that answer doesn't sit well with many people in the US. In an Article V convention voting will be based upon emotions more than data and the belief in Rights?

 

[trekrok]

If we want people to see it for what it is though....mental health, we need to address the subject of firearms as they are not screaming about mental health and vehicles or bombs.

It doesn't make any sense to try and solve the 'gun' issue if guns aren't the issue. So, I address the subject of firearms by arguing it is NOT about firearms.

 

[Red Dirt Walker]

It doesn't make any sense to try and solve the 'gun' issue if guns aren't the issue. So, I address the subject of firearms by arguing it is NOT about firearms.

I'm not arguing it's the firearm either. It is the person, clearly. That's why I ask....if a person is being treated for mental health issues, is there a way to limit their ability to purchase a firearm that we within the firearm community could accept?
I knew a woman that was prone to seizures. She was forbidden to have a drivers license until she had been seizure free for 3 years.
Now I realize that driving is not a Right, but can a similar process be established when a person is under some mental health care that we can agree with?

 

[GC7]

There's a lot of controversial things that society could do to make life 1000% better for the majority of us, but fringe groups have really strong lobbying by virtue of being fringe groups.

For example:

- (This one is going to be very unpopular on OSA) Driver license tests should be enforced every 5 years starting at age 60 because there are a lot of elderly people who should NOT be behind the wheel.

- Alcoholics should not be able to own guns. (due to rage, frequent intoxication, etc)

- Women and effeminate men shouldn't be allowed to make decisions that affect large populations. (emotions)

 

[Glocktogo]

I know I have said this in this thread more than once so its old, but here it goes again. I agree with Trey. When a shooting happens though and the person has a history of mental health problems and we point that out and we are then asked.....ok how would to deal with the issue of firearms in the hands of people with mental health problems and our answer is.......*chirp* * chirp*, I just don't think that helps our cause.

The answer to your question is involuntary commitment, followed by listing on NICS as prohibited. If ANYONE is unwilling to admit that this is the solution, then they're not serious about fixing the problem. Their "feelings" are irrelevant to the issue and the Constitution.

I'm not arguing it's the firearm either. It is the person, clearly. That's why I ask....if a person is being treated for mental health issues, is there a way to limit their ability to purchase a firearm that we within the firearm community could accept?
I knew a woman that was prone to seizures. She was forbidden to have a drivers license until she had been seizure free for 3 years.
Now I realize that driving is not a Right, but can a similar process be established when a person is under some mental health care that we can agree with?

See above. /thread

 

[okcBob]

Well if someone is mentally ill, they shouldn’t be voting either. Add that to the 2A restrictions.
Also, any treatment for mental health as a requirement is a pretty wide net. I would think the patient’s mental condition should have to be severe enough to be medically deemed to be at risk for suicide/homicide or clinically insane/disabled -hallucinations, etc. Simple anxiety & getting Xanax for sleep shouldn’t meet the 2A restriction threshold.

 

[HMCS(FMF)Ret.]

And perhaps, ultimately that is the only answer to the question, but to be honest, that answer doesn't sit well with many people in the US. In an Article V convention voting will be based upon emotions more than data and the belief in Rights?

How many people were killed in mass shootings last year? Around 670? There were around 7000 killed crossing the street. Over 106,000 died of drug overdoses. You don’t see drug overdoses on the news every day. I’m not saying mass shootings are unimportant, but there are ways to protect people against being victims of mass shootings. This country has around 350 million people. I think people need to take precautions and move on.