- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Why hasn't the NRA endorsed mental health screens for gun owners?
Posted on 5/27/14 at 4:04 pm to AbuTheMonkey
Posted on 5/27/14 at 4:04 pm to AbuTheMonkey
quote:
The risk/reward isn't remotely close enough to justify the intrusion into constitutional rights
Well, I'm not going to get into a battle of wits with an unarmed man.
But bookmark it or write it down, for every incident where an unstable citizen guns down innocents you get closer and closer to Australia.
2
Posted on 5/27/14 at 4:06 pm to Lakeboy7
quote:
Lakeboy7
The horrible view you have about mental illness and how to handle it is the problem in this country.
1. If a person is a threat to themselves or others they can be legally committed by a physician. This is basically handling the issue you are talking about with someone being free to roam around with weapons if they are psychotic.
2. Maybe your real issue should be how our society does a poor job of helping people with mental illness. Many times it is treatable with medication and therapy, but our society would rather treat them like shite and dismiss them as a lower class citizen. You know this is one population that can't necessarily help themselves as their condition is no fault of their own. Out system makes it hard for them to receive treatment and return to society as a healthy contributor.
Posted on 5/27/14 at 4:07 pm to monsterballads
bet his victims and their families wished they did
/thread
so whats to keep a sane person or a criminal from getting a gun and killing innocents? what about innocent victims from drunk driving? no mental health check to see if you are an alcoholic
/thread
so whats to keep a sane person or a criminal from getting a gun and killing innocents? what about innocent victims from drunk driving? no mental health check to see if you are an alcoholic
Posted on 5/27/14 at 4:12 pm to Stringer Bell
quote:
It should when the right gives mentally unstable people the access to kill.
Do the mentally unstable have access to the ballot box?
Posted on 5/27/14 at 4:20 pm to antibarner
quote:
If some of the victims had been armed this tragedy might have been averted or ended sooner than it was
DING, DING, DING!!!!
When did this tragedy in Cali end? Oh yea it was when someone else (a good guy) showed up with a gun, this whacko ended his own life or the cops did. (The report I read sayed they didn't know if the fatal shot was self inflected or not)
Look at all of the mass shootings you know of. Try to name one that didn't end when another gun showed up in the hands of a good guy? I'll start if off with a few:
Columbine
Virginia Tech
Fort Hood #1
Fort Hood #2
D.C. Shipyard
Sandy Hook
This Whacko in Cali
I'll pose another question. Why can't we make it legal for law abiding citizens to possess guns where only criminals do.
I know this doesn't really apply to this case but in many (if not all) of the other cases it does.
Cali has extremely strict gunlaws. Magazine limits, "Assault Weapons" ban, Limited concealed carry (may issue state) and the list goes on. Yet they did nothing to stop this guy in Cali.
This post was edited on 5/27/14 at 4:23 pm
Posted on 5/27/14 at 4:26 pm to FightinTigersDammit
so Rex and cohort gun control advocates
how do you see this: a person buys a gun in the 1980s or 90s but has no psychological problems until much later, they bought the guns legally, how do you control that? do you propose every legal gun owner has an evaluation every year, every five years? who determines who is an APP? who pays for the evaluations? how is this not an invasion of privacy how is this not a degradation of rights?
how do you see this: a person buys a gun in the 1980s or 90s but has no psychological problems until much later, they bought the guns legally, how do you control that? do you propose every legal gun owner has an evaluation every year, every five years? who determines who is an APP? who pays for the evaluations? how is this not an invasion of privacy how is this not a degradation of rights?
Posted on 5/27/14 at 4:37 pm to Colonel Flagg
quote:
real issue should be how our society does a poor job of helping people with mental illness. Many times it is treatable with medication and therapy, but our society would rather treat them like shite and dismiss them as a lower class citizen. You know this is one population that can't necessarily help themselves as their condition is no fault of their own. Out system makes it hard for them to receive treatment and return to society as a healthy contributor.
Man I agree with all of that, but unstable people don't have lobbyist so they will NEVER get the treatment they need unless they can do so privately. Are you saying having a weapon is some sort treatment or therapy?
Posted on 5/27/14 at 4:42 pm to Lakeboy7
There is not lobbying for greater healthcare? where the f have you been?
The NRA lobbies to preserve rights, thats why they make the libs so angry because they cant get what they want, which is total disarmament of the population.
The NRA lobbies to preserve rights, thats why they make the libs so angry because they cant get what they want, which is total disarmament of the population.
Posted on 5/27/14 at 4:43 pm to ninthward
Many firearm related activities can be used as therapy and it does not matter if that does not fall into your ideal of what therapy is.
Posted on 5/27/14 at 4:44 pm to Lakeboy7
quote:
Well, I'm not going to get into a battle of wits as an unarmed man.
You still haven't responded to the argument and just diverted, diverted, diverted.
We aren't anything close to Australia and are, if anything, headed in the opposite direction. Have you checked polls among young people concerning the Second Amendment? Have gun rights expanded or contracted within the last twenty years?
This post was edited on 5/27/14 at 4:45 pm
Posted on 5/27/14 at 4:45 pm to Stringer Bell
quote:
Mentally unstable
Define this.
Posted on 5/27/14 at 5:36 pm to RogerTheShrubber
As many have said, there are multiple problems with this issue.
The definition is one. Saying that someone who is crazy shouldn't have a gun is fine in theory, but there are multiple issues in practice, not the least of which is define it.
What sort of mental instabilities are going to curtail this right?
Can someone get this right restored, and how difficult is it?
Who decides if the person is crazy?
Can the government decide that someone is crazy?
Who is going to pay for these screenings?
As has been brought up, will people who have already purchased guns have to undergo a screening test yearly?
Will getting turned down permanently be noted on someones record?
The biggest deal is if going to see a therapist can take away one of your constitutional rights, how many people are going to go see therapists? How much will this curtail people seeking help when they actually need it?
How easy will it be for the government to say, oh, he's a little nervous, he shouldn't have a gun. Oh, he can't sleep. He shouldn't have a gun. Oh, he cleans his hands too much, he shouldn't have a gun. Or even something like he is afraid of heights, he shouldn't have a gun.
Finally, how difficult would it be to pass such a screening exam? You understand that even crazy people aren't necessarily stupid and can play the game an appear normal and pass these things.
This most recent crazy guy was interviewed by a couple of cops who thought he was a nice polite kid.
What is the liability of the person performing said mental health screen?
No good health care provider is going to want to do this, and there will likely be liability involved and it could be extensive liability. So, the exams could be quite expensive.
Or the other idea would be have government examiners. Well, that isn't a great idea, because then you have the government that can decide that no one should have guns.
It is a very tricky situation. As bad as it sounds, the best situation may be what we have now where yes, crazy people can get guns. But they can also freely get the help they need.
If you have a solution to the above stated questions, please answer them...
The definition is one. Saying that someone who is crazy shouldn't have a gun is fine in theory, but there are multiple issues in practice, not the least of which is define it.
What sort of mental instabilities are going to curtail this right?
Can someone get this right restored, and how difficult is it?
Who decides if the person is crazy?
Can the government decide that someone is crazy?
Who is going to pay for these screenings?
As has been brought up, will people who have already purchased guns have to undergo a screening test yearly?
Will getting turned down permanently be noted on someones record?
The biggest deal is if going to see a therapist can take away one of your constitutional rights, how many people are going to go see therapists? How much will this curtail people seeking help when they actually need it?
How easy will it be for the government to say, oh, he's a little nervous, he shouldn't have a gun. Oh, he can't sleep. He shouldn't have a gun. Oh, he cleans his hands too much, he shouldn't have a gun. Or even something like he is afraid of heights, he shouldn't have a gun.
Finally, how difficult would it be to pass such a screening exam? You understand that even crazy people aren't necessarily stupid and can play the game an appear normal and pass these things.
This most recent crazy guy was interviewed by a couple of cops who thought he was a nice polite kid.
What is the liability of the person performing said mental health screen?
No good health care provider is going to want to do this, and there will likely be liability involved and it could be extensive liability. So, the exams could be quite expensive.
Or the other idea would be have government examiners. Well, that isn't a great idea, because then you have the government that can decide that no one should have guns.
It is a very tricky situation. As bad as it sounds, the best situation may be what we have now where yes, crazy people can get guns. But they can also freely get the help they need.
If you have a solution to the above stated questions, please answer them...
Posted on 5/27/14 at 5:40 pm to thetempleowl
Yeah, I don't want to lose the right to carry a firearm into the woods simply because I was prescribed Seroquel at some point. Not sure where you draw the line with this kind of stuff.
Posted on 5/27/14 at 5:51 pm to Lakeboy7
quote:
But bookmark it or write it down, for every incident where an unstable citizen guns down innocents you get closer and closer to Australia.
I generally see statements like this uttered by incompetents that don't have a firm grasp of the legal or political constructs of the US.
Posted on 5/27/14 at 5:52 pm to thetempleowl
There are what, 150-200 million gun owners in America. How many doctors and physiatrist would be needed to even attempt such a project....
Posted on 5/27/14 at 6:13 pm to Stringer Bell
quote:
Mentally unstable
This is not a diagnosis nor is it sufficient to describe what would be used to deny someone gun ownership.
What do you mean by mentally unstable?
Posted on 5/27/14 at 6:22 pm to Rex
quote:
Do you deny that one of the principal techniques of the NRA is to instill fear in people?
Fear mongering is not unique to the NRA.
Posted on 5/27/14 at 6:32 pm to NoHoTiger
Why is this all of a sudden an issue? The number of mass murders in this country hasn't really risen in the last three decades.
Posted on 5/27/14 at 6:40 pm to Stringer Bell
I've not gone through this thread but in case you haven't kept up, the NRA is not in the mental health business.
Posted on 5/27/14 at 6:41 pm to Antonio Moss
quote:
Why is this all of a sudden an issue? The number of mass murders in this country hasn't really risen in the last three decades.
Exactly especially when you consider that the population has added 125 million people and many millions of guns...
Page 6 of 7
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News