Mental health and gun laws.

[Perd Hapley]

I know many people here worry that mental health restrictions on gun ownership will go too far, or just be misused. Are the current laws (state or federal) ok on this issue, and if not what would you change?

[Ron]

It is incumbent upon us to demand that any action be directed at who is committing the gun crimes.

The focus must be laser like on WHO IS COMMITTING VIOLENT CRIME?

The overwhelming vast majority of not just crimes using guns but all violent crime come from very identifiable demographic parts of our nation.

Interesting video:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ooa98FHuaU0

Until the real problem is addressed I oppose any further restrictions on self defense/RKBA.

We must refuse the lefts choosing of the battlefield and refuse to even acknowledge the legitimacy of their narrative. Period.

[ArfinGreebly]

I know many people here worry that mental health restrictions on gun ownership will go too far, or just be misused. Are the current laws (state or federal) ok on this issue, and if not what would you change?

Is it just me, or is it kinda ironic trusting the psych "sciences" with our "mental health" considering that this field is predicated on a philosophy having the view that religion -- basically any belief in god/God/gods or a human "soul" -- is a mostly harmless delusion?

I've actually posed that question to clergy who were fond of recommending that people "seek professional help" for their emotional distress, and found that none of them, not one, had ever even bothered to notice this discrepancy.

For this, and a gift basket of other reasons, I have no faith in the world according to psychiatry or psychology.

Consequently, I have great difficulty recommending a subscription to their authority in determining who shall be permitted to have rights.

There's a longer rant on this subject, but I haven't written it yet.

You've all been subjected to my observation about the psych "sciences" and their involvement in public education, and the question of why, if their stuff has any validity, their unfettered access to the education system has resulted in the increasingly awful results from that quarter.

Given their history and their performance to date, I submit that they are very much the wrong people for the job.

With that in mind, I don't see any utility in writing new laws to give them more power and authority.

Maybe we could employ some actual judgment with regard to who's crazy, and not duck that responsibility in favor of incompetent "experts" who will be biased in favor of their funding source.

[drewtam]

I don't know how the actual current system works. I get the impression its not terribly fair once one is blackballed, but it is also hard to get noticed by the "system".

But from a first principles perspective, rights should only be removed in a court of law, determined by a jury of peers, facing the accuser, and judgement of rights removal should be limited to pre-defined times proportional to the issue as defined by law (not regulatory power).

[Jamisjockey]

I'm not big on conspiracies, but this one grinds my gears.
1) Government takeover of healthcare, including mental health services
2) Big push for gun control, with even the so called "right" bringing up mental health issues
3) profit?

I am highly suspicious of any push for mental health restrictions on firearms ownership.  Especially when government-paid doctors (even if indirectly) will be the ones deciding your mental health status.  The AMA is anti gun.

Too many moving parts.  It all looks bad for gun owners.  I don't like the implications.

[Scout26]

IIRC, you have to be adjudicated as Coo-Coo for Coco-Puffs.  Meaning that not any mental health "expert" cann put your name on a piece of paper and turn you in to NICS for the "No Gun List".   

Even the 72 hour involuntary, doesn't put you on the list.  Self reporting/seeking treatment doesn't put you on the naughty list. 

You have to be adjudicated crazy by a judge.  You have to have legal representation and full on hearing. 

At least that's how it is now.

[AZRedhawk44]

IIRC, you have to be adjudicated as Coo-Coo for Coco-Puffs.  Meaning that not any mental health "expert" cann put your name on a piece of paper and turn you in to NICS for the "No Gun List".   

Even the 72 hour involuntary, doesn't put you on the list.  Self reporting/seeking treatment doesn't put you on the naughty list. 

You have to be adjudicated crazy by a judge.  You have to have legal representation and full on hearing. 

At least that's how it is now.

That's just statute, and easily changed, once you have a registry system put in place.

[Jamisjockey]

IIRC, you have to be adjudicated as Coo-Coo for Coco-Puffs.  Meaning that not any mental health "expert" cann put your name on a piece of paper and turn you in to NICS for the "No Gun List".   

Even the 72 hour involuntary, doesn't put you on the list.  Self reporting/seeking treatment doesn't put you on the naughty list. 

You have to be adjudicated crazy by a judge.  You have to have legal representation and full on hearing. 

At least that's how it is now.

For now.  All they gotta do is change it.  Require psychiatric evaluation to purchase.  Require NICS check to include psychological medications (including ADD meds, etc etc).  *expletive deleted*ck, they already have a database of that, since those are all "controlled substances".
While people like Feinstein and McCarthy are blithering jackwagon aholes, they have a whole army of people pushing this legislation. 

Me, I'm not scared of them banning "assault rifles", magazines, legislating ammo purchases, etc. 
My biggest concern is if they take that leap on "mental health".

[Ron]

If the murder and mayhem is to stop then a good first step is not letting convicted murderers and convicted attempted murderers out of jail, ever.

Armed robbery? Maximum sentence that has to be served in total, no early release.

Multiple violent felonies on your record and you get convicted of another? Maximum sentence plus more for being a repeat offender.

This is not a violent country. We have pockets of violence in our urban areas skewing the numbers.

Quit putting non violent druggies in jail and fill em up with violent offenders, then keep them there.

Any mental health legislation should be a non-starter.

Mental health issues have little to do with our skewed violent crime stats.

[cassandra and sara's daddy]

cut way back on plea bargains or rons changes are eviscerated

[Lee]

Good question...I wish I had a good answer. For starters, I think that personal responsibility (ad perhaps legal liability) lies with the families of the mentally ill. You can't do much with an adult who lives on their own - but you can, and should, be aware that someone in your own household who is unbalanced (and more importantly, has demonstrated violent delusional tendencies) should be denied access to any guns in the household...and if of legal age, should be on a "red flag' list...requiring some type of review of recent arrest and/ or treatment history. It's a slippery slope for sure...but so are many things.
   

[RoadKingLarry]

Of all of the spree killings in recent history were there any of the perpetrators that hadn't displayed "red flags" that should have set in motion preventative measures?

I might exclude the DC "snipers" as I consider that to be an act of terrorism.

[Perd Hapley]

I was hoping that some of those who have concerns about being disqualified for mental health reasons would comment on this, and maybe tell us what would or would not be acceptable, from their point of view.

Is it just me, or is it kinda ironic trusting the psych "sciences" with our "mental health" considering that this field is predicated on a philosophy having the view that religion -- basically any belief in god/God/gods or a human "soul" -- is a mostly harmless delusion?

I've actually posed that question to clergy who were fond of recommending that people "seek professional help" for their emotional distress, and found that none of them, not one, had ever even bothered to notice this discrepancy.

There is a noticeable amount of suspicion toward psychology/psychiatry among American Christians. But then there is James Dobson, who made his reputation as a child psychologist.

[Gewehr98]

Fistful,

I do have concerns.

The VA has treated me for PTSD and Adjustment Disorder.

It's all in my VA records.

From what I've studied so far, it isn't going to be a disqualifier. 

Feinstein and crew could change that in short order.   

[Frank Castle]

Fistful,

I do have concerns.

The VA has treated me for PTSD and Adjustment Disorder.

It's all in my VA records.

From what I've studied so far, it isn't going to be a disqualifier.

Feinstein and crew could change that in short order.

I understand your concern !

I had my knee looked, after the normal question......... Are you upset , do you feel like hurting someone or you're self ,do you drinking a lot , and do thing you have PTSD.

No Doc i'm fine. Can you look at my knee now.

[Fly320s]

I know many people here worry that mental health restrictions on gun ownership will go too far, or just be misused. Are the current laws (state or federal) ok on this issue, and if not what would you change?

No, the current laws are not OK on this issue. The only laws that should apply to firearms are those laws that apply to other consumer items such as TVs and blenders.

Think about this: Would you want your worst enemy to have this law to use against you?

Edit to add: If a free adult can't be trusted with a firearm, then he can't be trusted with a knife/car/shoe/phone/internet/anything, and therefore he can't be trusted to be free.

[Perd Hapley]

No, the current laws are not OK on this issue. The only laws that should apply to firearms are those laws that apply to other consumer items such as TVs and blenders.

Think about this: Would you want your worst enemy to have this law to use against you?

What law? The whole point of this thread is that I don't know this area of the law, so I don't know what people are objecting to. 

[zxcvbob]

Things worked pretty well before the Omnibus Crime Bill of 1968 and GCA '68.

I truly believe that gun control laws cause most of the problems they claim to address -- perhaps an indirect cause, but still they always make the problem worse.  (Here comes the conspiracy theory: that's what they are supposed to do)

[MicroBalrog]

Things worked pretty well before the Omnibus Crime Bill of 1968 and GCA '68.

Give this man a cee-gar.

But seriously, is there really such a big problem? Violent crime is declining, clearly America is doing something right.

[Balog]

What law? The whole point of this thread is that I don't know this area of the law, so I don't know what people are objecting to. 

Each state's laws vary.

[SADShooter]

Give this man a cee-gar.

But seriously, is there really such a big problem? Violent crime is declining, clearly America is doing something right.

Don't go clouding my visceral emotional reaction and misinformation-fueled misperception with facts! LALALALAIcan'thearyouLALALALA...

[HankB]

They'll put as much thought and care into adding names to the mental health "No Gun List" as they do adding names to the "No Fly List."

[ArfinGreebly]

They'll put as much thought and care into adding names to the mental health "No Gun List" as they do adding names to the "No Fly List."

Are you referring to the "people with whom I disagree politically" list?

[kgbsquirrel]

Multiple violent felonies on your record and you get convicted of another? Maximum sentence plus more for being a repeat offender.

Instead of giving the judge a window of 8-25 years for armed robbery (a number I pulled out of a hat for this demonstration) narrow up the spread, so say 10-12 years and them multiply that by X+1, where X is the number of prior violent convictions. Same for violent offenses committed while in prison.

Further, since there is a culture in prison of lifers dicking over guys with short sentences by coercing them into violent and other illegal acts the prisons need to be more strictly segregated. First violent conviction? You should be in a population ONLY with other first time offenders serving similar sentences. Penitentiary. That name comes from penitence. If these are to truly be places of penitence and rehabilitation then they need to have an atmosphere conducive to that. Tossing fellas who have screwed up, but not totally thrown their life away, into the same box with a bunch of oxygen thieves is a recipe to make more oxygen thieves, not productive members of society.

[longeyes]

Individual liberty is an affront to the Collective Good, not to mention toxically selfish, often delusional--haven't you heard?  I think we all know where the wind's blowing...  Just give 'em time.  We cannot turn our freedom over to "experts."