Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Are_grits_groceries

(17,111 posts)
Mon Sep 23, 2013, 04:03 AM Sep 2013

I do not want a gun, BUT

I really don't want my name on a list that will lable me as mentally ill and unstable.

I do not trust the people who will come up with the criteria for inclusion on that list. I also shudder at the thought of what the gun lobby will do in pushing this issue.

If they have to convince people that a better method to control gun violence is to control the mentally ill, they will spend eleventy billion dollars to do so. They will scare the bejesus out of people, and fear can make people irrational.

"Mentally ill" is a catchall phrase for many conditions. They can be very different. I don't trust others to make distinctions. In addition, don't tell me that psychiatrists will not allow this. They don't write the laws or choose who legislators consider to be experts. Unfortunately, I have run into some real loons with MDs in psychiatry who have ideas that are waaay out of the mainstream. I have run from them as quickly as I could.

I have never had any thoughts of hurting others. When I am deeply depressed. I am more a danger to myself. Guns make it so easy to choose "a very bad way" to escape the pain. The are quick and final. They offer no way to recover if you do try or have a really bad moment and completely give up. Many people do choose other ways but survive and feel the dark clouds lifting.

There are untold numbers of people who have problems that do need help. Some may just need counseling to get them through and stop the possibility of these problems from becoming a scary issue. Others need more intensive help that can still be provided as out patients. Then there are those in extremis that do need hospitalization.

The cuts in programs to help those with mental issues have consigned many to a living hell. It is beyond cruel to the person with the problem, their families, and others who are close to them. Giving in to continual cuts in these programs and to the sequester have made it exponentially worse. The funds for these services are a drop in the bucket compared to money spent on other wasteful programs.

Sermonette over.

8 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
I do not want a gun, BUT (Original Post) Are_grits_groceries Sep 2013 OP
The mentally ill are most often victims of violence Recursion Sep 2013 #1
What about if it were very specific? dkf Sep 2013 #2
I'm not against a limited list. Are_grits_groceries Sep 2013 #4
When talking about background checks we keep the discussion at an "either or" level Half-Century Man Sep 2013 #3
Who's "WE"? Are_grits_groceries Sep 2013 #5
I meant in the general conversation of the nation Half-Century Man Sep 2013 #6
Better stay away from NY hack89 Sep 2013 #7
The solution is to require a mental health examination before a gun purchase is allowed. DanTex Sep 2013 #8

Recursion

(56,582 posts)
1. The mentally ill are most often victims of violence
Mon Sep 23, 2013, 04:13 AM
Sep 2013

Not perpetrators.

La Pierre is wrong as always here. The mentally ill are not who we should fear.
Edit: whom? Mixed case correlatives always got me.

 

dkf

(37,305 posts)
2. What about if it were very specific?
Mon Sep 23, 2013, 04:20 AM
Sep 2013

Schizophrenia, paranoid, hearing voices.

I think that specific diagnosis should be acceptable criteria for not allowing gun purchases.

Are_grits_groceries

(17,111 posts)
4. I'm not against a limited list.
Mon Sep 23, 2013, 04:30 AM
Sep 2013

However, I really fear that many people will end up on it who don't belong.

In addition, who determines who meets these criteria. It's not as cut and dried as it may seem.

Half-Century Man

(5,279 posts)
3. When talking about background checks we keep the discussion at an "either or" level
Mon Sep 23, 2013, 04:24 AM
Sep 2013

Isn't there room for
1: background clear, can purchase firearms after waiting period of 5 days
2: some "tags" by designated persons (police, therapists, social workers) which required further explanations before purchase.
3: some condition or circumstance which requires further counseling, training, recompense, or judicial action before approval.
4: some condition of behavior or ability which prevents approval of owning a firearm.




Half-Century Man

(5,279 posts)
6. I meant in the general conversation of the nation
Mon Sep 23, 2013, 04:36 AM
Sep 2013

As I have read things, we do seem a bit "dedicated" to one side or the other. I think there are several solutions to all the aspects of the questions/concerns we have on the armed citizen issue. I should have been more specific, gomen.

hack89

(39,181 posts)
7. Better stay away from NY
Mon Sep 23, 2013, 05:10 AM
Sep 2013

one of their responses to Sandy Hook was an online database where mental health professionals can report potentially dangerous patients.

DanTex

(20,709 posts)
8. The solution is to require a mental health examination before a gun purchase is allowed.
Mon Sep 23, 2013, 06:18 AM
Sep 2013

I agree, putting people on a list for seeking mental health treatment is a bad idea, and it would probably discourage people from getting mental health treatment in the first place.

But letting mentally ill people purchase guns is also a bad idea. So a gun purchase should require being examined and cleared by a mental health professional as part of the background check.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»I do not want a gun, BUT