Mentally Aware

[GlockSpock]

Directly following the Sandy Hook Massacre, there immediately began a calling for the banning of guns. Mental health care was also brought up into the debate. I too feel that the mental health care program in this country isn't perfect. It is, after all, part of the bigger healthcare system that could use a lot of work. However, I wish to bring one point to everyone here today.

 

Be careful about generalizations.

Should we allow unstable people to purchase firearms? That is a tough question. Do they not have just as much a right to protect themselves and their family as anyone else? Also, much like when considering violent crime in general, if an unstable person is not able to acquire a firearm, will they not just find another means to their madness? A mentally unstable person could ram their car into a large group of people, does that mean that mentally unstable people should not be allowed to drive? I don't know. My first reaction is that if we can trust these people in society (instead of in an institution), then they should enjoy the same rights as anyone else. There is obviously a lot that needs to be debated, but that is not necessarily why I created this thread.

 

I simply see the following scenario as a possibility:

 

Obama and Co. attempt to ban guns, but it either does not work or they back out due to political ramifications. We consider it a battle won. However, Obama and Co. have the war in mind. So they continue on and really jump on the mental healthcare bandwagon. They take the path of "acceptable" gun control measures in the form of tighter and mandatory background checks (I heard a news anchor on Fox yesterday ask "And who wouldn't agree with that?" in regard to "tighter" background checks). All of this to keep firearms out of the hands of criminals and the mentally unstable. Now, after all of this has faded from everyone's mind, they change the rules a bit. At this point all they have to do to essentially enact a gun ban would be to declare anyone they wish to declare "mentally unstable". Perhaps the leading new research suggests that Viagra has been found to increase violent behaviors. Perhaps the leading new research suggests that anyone with a degree in Physics isn't quire all there. Perhaps the leading new research suggests that anyone that has went through a divorce is ten times more likely to develop bipolar tendencies. Then all of these groups of people can be put on the "unstable" lists. On a list and apply for a HCP? Denied! On a list and try to purchase a new Ruger? Denied! 

 

 

All I am saying is that I believe that we should fight all regulations regarding firearms.

[Sam1]

Not only does it make a huge grey area on ownership, how often is the denial due to mental reasons going to be used for people to get disability benefits? Cause if they are told no gun due to instability, they are a danger to others and shouldn't be working at all

[Guest cardcutter]

I can see any vet who was ever diagnosed with PTSD  being targeted.

[Sam1]

I can see any vet who was ever diagnosed with PTSD  being targeted.

 

They already have been, promoting disability benefits by suggesting this. That's why I say it's just a short time (if any at all) before the bums apply for a gun, check off the "i'm crazy" box, get denied, then stop by the SS same week and apply for their life-long gub'ment checks!

[LagerHead]

I believe we should fight all new regulations against firearms, but not for any of the reasons listed above. It is a God-give right and it is the government's job to protect, not assault those rights.