Mental Health Reform and Gun Ownership

JCV

Rating - 100%
20   0   0
Joined
Jan 11, 2011
Messages
5,100
Likes
837
We constantly hear how we need to get guns out of the hands of the "mentally ill", and of course it's back in the news again due to this past week's events. What does NES think about this?

I personally can't/don't support any more laws furthering the reach and control of the gov't over my life and anyone else's.
Maybe there are some black sheep on this site who believe we need a database of gun owners connected to a mental health database.
I'd like to hear from you. Hell I'd like to hear from anyone, on how this would[n't] work.
 

J.A.C

NES Member
Rating - 100%
5   0   0
Joined
Aug 27, 2013
Messages
1,988
Likes
566
I could see this devolving into anyone with a "mental health" flag can't own a gun. Say your child, spouse, or parent dies and you go see someone for help (maybe stress, depression,anxiety) or you mention it to your doctor and prescribes xanax or something one time. The stress, anxiety, depression, etc wasn'ta chronic issue but a temporary occurrence. Well that would be on the persons Medical Record and boom bye bye second amendment. I am all for crazies not having weapons but it could go off the rails quick.
 

JCV

Rating - 100%
20   0   0
Joined
Jan 11, 2011
Messages
5,100
Likes
837
I could see this devolving into anyone with a "mental health" flag can't own a gun. Say your child, spouse, or parent dies and you go see someone for help (maybe stress, depression,anxiety) or you mention it to your doctor and prescribes xanax or something one time. The stress, anxiety, depression, etc wasn'ta chronic issue but a temporary occurrence. Well that would be on the persons Medical Record and boom bye bye second amendment. I am all for crazies not having weapons but it could go off the rails quick.

Exactly.
It's a very slippery slope, one I don't feel we should venture down.
 
Rating - 100%
12   0   0
Joined
Mar 19, 2008
Messages
2,773
Likes
469
Location
Worcester, MA
I think most people agree with this in principal. But we also know the devil is in the details!

Who is going to be empowered to determine that someone is no longer "allowed" the free exercise of a fundamental civil right/natural right? Based on what objective criteria?

I have friends who grew up in the USSR, and it was common in that place to label dissidents as "mentally ill" and lock them away in "mental hospitals" (aka prisons). Don't say it can't happen here. Why should we be exempt from human nature, especially when it comes to politics and power? It has been done before and will be done again.

If we understand the primary purpose of the 2A to be defense against a tyrannical government, then why would we want to empower that same government with determining who is suitable to have firearms?
 

Revelationechc

NES Member
Rating - 100%
14   0   0
Joined
Feb 21, 2012
Messages
1,276
Likes
439
Location
Western, MA
My thoughts are simple on this. The gov should stay out of it. If someone wants to buy a gun and another person wants to sell that gun to them, then that's how it should be. Case closed.
 

Bill Katt

NES Member
Rating - 100%
6   0   0
Joined
Apr 4, 2009
Messages
10,541
Likes
2,987
Location
North central Mass.
I think most people agree with this in principal. But we also know the devil is in the details!

Who is going to be empowered to determine that someone is no longer "allowed" the free exercise of a fundamental civil right/natural right? Based on what objective criteria?

I have friends who grew up in the USSR, and it was common in that place to label dissidents as "mentally ill" and lock them away in "mental hospitals" (aka prisons). Don't say it can't happen here. Why should we be exempt from human nature, especially when it comes to politics and power? It has been done before and will be done again.

If we understand the primary purpose of the 2A to be defense against a tyrannical government, then why would we want to empower that same government with determining who is suitable to have firearms?

This^^
Especially the bold part.
 

92G

NES Member
Rating - 99.1%
108   1   0
Joined
Mar 19, 2014
Messages
8,009
Likes
5,394
Location
NC
The intention of gov't is not to TREAT mental illness.
The intention of the gov't is to DENY essential rights on grounds of mental illness.

therefore they have no business, under ANY circumstance, to examine anyones mental health history.
The generation that turns such power to the gov't just f***ed over all future generations.
 

dhuze

NES Member
Rating - 100%
8   0   0
Joined
Mar 26, 2006
Messages
9,506
Likes
3,795
Location
An island surrounded by land on three sides
They are going to let the Government decide who is sane and who isn't. Not doctors. That's how they are going to go about this. All anyone is trying to do is make as many people prohibited as they can until no one is allowed to own a firearm. They are already pulling this shit with the medical marijuana.

Isn't there something somewhere in the US Constitution along the lines of "Shall NOT be Infringed"? I wish there was some way to define those few words so I would know what they mean because I'm apparently wrong in my definitions.

I have friends who grew up in the USSR, and it was common in that place to label dissidents as "mentally ill" and lock them away in "mental hospitals" (aka prisons). Don't say it can't happen here. Why should we be exempt from human nature, especially when it comes to politics and power? It has been done before and will be done again....

Hitler did the same thing when he was rounding up the Jews. He also rounded up the undesirable, mentally ill, and non supporters.
 

92G

NES Member
Rating - 99.1%
108   1   0
Joined
Mar 19, 2014
Messages
8,009
Likes
5,394
Location
NC
They are going to let the Government decide who is sane and who isn't. Not doctors. That's how they are going to go about this. All anyone is trying to do is make as many people prohibited as they can until no one is allowed to own a firearm. They are already pulling this shit with the medical marijuana.

Isn't there something somewhere in the US Constitution along the lines of "Shall NOT be Infringed"? I wish there was some way to define those few words so I would know what they mean because I'm apparently wrong in my definitions.



Hitler did the same thing when he was rounding up the Jews. He also rounded up the undesirable, mentally ill, and non supporters.

may i add that all tyrants consider education and openmindedness to be forms of mental illness.
 
Top Bottom