HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » Why are the same people w...

Mon Dec 17, 2012, 07:38 AM

Why are the same people who are so quick to advocate drug tests for welfare recipients....

...so adverse to the concept of mental health screening before someone can purchase a gun?

Last I know a welfare check never killed 28 people.

Riddle me that, Batman.

33 replies, 2758 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 33 replies Author Time Post
Reply Why are the same people who are so quick to advocate drug tests for welfare recipients.... (Original post)
Tommy_Carcetti Dec 2012 OP
hobbit709 Dec 2012 #1
Tommy_Carcetti Dec 2012 #2
Major Nikon Dec 2012 #17
Kurska Dec 2012 #3
Tommy_Carcetti Dec 2012 #4
LisaLynne Dec 2012 #5
Stinky The Clown Dec 2012 #6
greymattermom Dec 2012 #10
JustAnotherGen Dec 2012 #16
ode2joi Dec 2012 #19
Thav Dec 2012 #26
Remmah2 Dec 2012 #27
LisaLynne Dec 2012 #29
Freddie Stubbs Dec 2012 #7
tiredtoo Dec 2012 #8
jonesgirl Dec 2012 #13
Skidmore Dec 2012 #20
Crunchy Frog Dec 2012 #24
AnnieK401 Dec 2012 #9
loyalkydem Dec 2012 #11
Disconnect Dec 2012 #12
krispos42 Dec 2012 #14
Tommy_Carcetti Dec 2012 #32
krispos42 Dec 2012 #33
Atypical Liberal Dec 2012 #15
jeff47 Dec 2012 #18
Major Nikon Dec 2012 #21
hack89 Dec 2012 #22
Remmah2 Dec 2012 #23
TheKentuckian Dec 2012 #25
raouldukelives Dec 2012 #28
Hydra Dec 2012 #30
HereSince1628 Dec 2012 #31

Response to Tommy_Carcetti (Original post)

Mon Dec 17, 2012, 07:41 AM

1. Because they wouldn't pass.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hobbit709 (Reply #1)

Mon Dec 17, 2012, 07:41 AM

2. Good point. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hobbit709 (Reply #1)

Mon Dec 17, 2012, 09:50 AM

17. Perhaps more afraid they might pass and not be one of the group anymore.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Tommy_Carcetti (Original post)

Mon Dec 17, 2012, 08:02 AM

3. Drug tests are going to be looked back on as one of the great senseless oppressions of the age

I wouldn't use them as an example of a good equivalent thing.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kurska (Reply #3)

Mon Dec 17, 2012, 08:07 AM

4. I'm not saying they are equivalent at all.

One is a waste of taxpayer money (in Florida, drug testing has cost the state $200,000 all to show that very few recipients are actually drug users). The other is a valid notion concerning both mental illness and gun violence.

But I've found, via Facebook and such, that the people who scream that we need drug testing for welfare recipients are the same people who refuse to entertain any type of gun control measures.

There's a total disconnect there.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Tommy_Carcetti (Original post)

Mon Dec 17, 2012, 08:13 AM

5. Because they think the drug tests would only affect brown people.

Since they are the ones who are on drugs and welfare. Checks on people buying guns might affect some good old boys and we can't have that.

I'm not trying to be overly flippant, but I just ... more and more, I just think so many things come down to racism. :/

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LisaLynne (Reply #5)

Mon Dec 17, 2012, 08:18 AM

6. I agree with you

Race is tied in everywhere.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LisaLynne (Reply #5)

Mon Dec 17, 2012, 09:03 AM

10. Exactly

I was about to post the same thing. Good ol' boys need to have guns to protect themselves from the N people who get free stuff from the gubmint.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LisaLynne (Reply #5)

Mon Dec 17, 2012, 09:49 AM

16. +1

You nailed it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LisaLynne (Reply #5)

Mon Dec 17, 2012, 09:54 AM

19. Drug Testing and "brown" people

You are spot on! That is exactly how they rationalize this..they love dehumanizing "the other"

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LisaLynne (Reply #5)

Mon Dec 17, 2012, 10:29 AM

26. I'm not sure it's just the "good ol' boys" club...

It has the potential to affect THEM. See, drug checks for welfare recipients are fine cuz they don't do drugs or are on welfare.

However, a check to buy a gun, well that's unacceptable because it would affect them.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LisaLynne (Reply #5)

Mon Dec 17, 2012, 10:35 AM

27. Funny when I work the soup kitchen I don't see that.

 

In fact I work at two soup kitchens.

At the city mission 75% of the (men's shelter) are white burnt out alcoholics/drug users. The shelter is located a stones throw from a predominately black housing project.

The other kitchen is 50/50. There are two regularly stoned white (pregnant) ladies who stand out like a sore thumb. Not because they're pregnant but because they're incoherent. (BTW the rules of the second kitchen are that if someone is noticibly impared they're not supposed to be let in. Some of us say screw the rules. )

Across the board testing might be a good idea. It would allow those that need counseling/help to be identified early. I would have no problem peeing in the cup at the gun store. I do have a problem with the judgemental stereotying of people.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Remmah2 (Reply #27)

Mon Dec 17, 2012, 10:49 AM

29. Hey, man, you can't cloud the issue with actual facts.

That hurts peoples' heads, now.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Tommy_Carcetti (Original post)

Mon Dec 17, 2012, 08:20 AM

7. Because the government isn't using our tax dollars to give guns to civilians

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Freddie Stubbs (Reply #7)

Mon Dec 17, 2012, 08:46 AM

8. Well then

Based on your theory all defense contractors should be subject to drug testing and for that all drivers and all medicare recipients/providers and i could go on but hopefully you get the message.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Freddie Stubbs (Reply #7)

Mon Dec 17, 2012, 09:14 AM

13. True, but our tax dollars pay for the damage the gun slingers cause. Now what?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Freddie Stubbs (Reply #7)

Mon Dec 17, 2012, 09:55 AM

20. It already does through the way the laws are made.

We pay for those legislators to park their butts in those seats in congress and gain personal wealth off of pandering to special interests while disregarding what is beneficial to society as a whole.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Freddie Stubbs (Reply #7)

Mon Dec 17, 2012, 10:17 AM

24. No, they're just using our tax dollars to clean up the resultant mayhem.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Tommy_Carcetti (Original post)


Response to Tommy_Carcetti (Original post)

Mon Dec 17, 2012, 09:03 AM

11. Can we ask for drug test for those who want government help for their businesses

Looking at the big companies who are a drain on our system.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Tommy_Carcetti (Original post)

Mon Dec 17, 2012, 09:04 AM

12. GPO = G.ang O.f P.uppets!!!!!!!!!!!

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Tommy_Carcetti (Original post)

Mon Dec 17, 2012, 09:18 AM

14. Because mental health screening are far more involved than peeing in a cup?

Just a point.


I'm not in favor of either, by the way.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to krispos42 (Reply #14)

Mon Dec 17, 2012, 03:22 PM

32. And the implications of 28 dead people is far greater than....

....the possibility that a welfare recipient may have a trace of drugs in his/her system.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Tommy_Carcetti (Reply #32)

Mon Dec 17, 2012, 10:39 PM

33. 44 people a day are murdered in the US

Why don't we give everybody a mental health screening?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Tommy_Carcetti (Original post)

Mon Dec 17, 2012, 09:40 AM

15. Are there any mental health screenings that can predict violent behavior?

 

Serious question.

Are there any mental health screenings that can accurately predict violent behavior?

Would any health care professional grant a clear pass for anyone if they would be held liable if a person they passed turned violent?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Atypical Liberal (Reply #15)

Mon Dec 17, 2012, 09:53 AM

18. Yes and yes.

It's not nearly as hard as you think to create diagnostic criteria.

And there's going to be plenty of pressure for "health care professionals" to rubber-stamp applications - it's faster and gets lots of people giving them money.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Atypical Liberal (Reply #15)

Mon Dec 17, 2012, 10:01 AM

21. Predicting is kind of tricky

However you certainly can test people for psychopathy which is strongly associated with violent behavior.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Tommy_Carcetti (Original post)

Mon Dec 17, 2012, 10:03 AM

22. It might work but I suspect it will be easy to circumvent

mental health problems are not usually black and white problems that are easy to diagnosed with single short assessment.

It would be easy to screen for those with a documented history of mental health issues but for a person with no record of mental health problems I can't see how it can be done.

Who will pay for these screenings? Who will actually conduct them? How do you establish a national set of standards that everyone agrees on?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Tommy_Carcetti (Original post)

Mon Dec 17, 2012, 10:04 AM

23. Actually many jobs require drug test before employment.

 

Equipment operators, truck drivers. I see in ads for security guards that some require drug screening as well, some of the guard positions may/may not be armed. In some corporations it's an across the board requirement. Very common in professional and amateur sports.

Drug testing for potential firearm owners, workers of potentially dangerous/responsibble jobs; no problem.

I do see a problem w/the welfare system. If you're using drugs, what about your priorities of nutrition and feeding the family?

If someone wants to smoke, toke or shoot up my only request is that they stay clear of me and nothing they do crosses my path. This would include people under the influence on the road.





Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Tommy_Carcetti (Original post)

Mon Dec 17, 2012, 10:24 AM

25. I've never supported either. I'm more supportive of mental health screening for purchasing guns

as long as safeguards are in place to prevent turning it into a political test and there isn't creep to turn everyone into unfit.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Tommy_Carcetti (Original post)

Mon Dec 17, 2012, 10:44 AM

28. Because they both equal profits for corporations.

Corporations they and anyone else with a 401k are invested in. As usual, all it will mean in the end is greater expansion of corporate deregulation, more funding of the NRA, more climate change deniers and more criminal actions to gain wealth with the only expense being peoples lives.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Tommy_Carcetti (Original post)

Mon Dec 17, 2012, 12:38 PM

30. Because the people advocating drug tests are idiots

They're buying the line that people on social services are bankrupting the country rather than the 1%.

Regarding mental health screening, good idea in theory, bad idea in practice. Why? Because "sanity" is subjective. The revisions in standards point to some horrific issues both in the past and currently, and many diagnosis criteria are blatantly wrong because they can't get a sample size to go off of.

RWers like simple answers to problems. So do I- the difference is where they get their "facts" from.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Tommy_Carcetti (Original post)

Mon Dec 17, 2012, 02:02 PM

31. I'm not one of those same people but I think MH screening is problematic

Right up front it's important to realize that screening is only going to interfere with a murder (mass murder, or otherwise) wherein a currently mentally challenged perpetrator(s) needs to make purchase of a weapon. Many murders will slip past that.

Nonetheless, if screens were good enough to just stop those. I'd say hey, every bit helps we ARE talking about people's lives and every life we save is a huge victory.

The best predictor of violence is previous violence. Is the screen set up to filter mentally ill with prior histories of violence, or do we enter into the age of the Matrix and use mental health screening as a means of filtering out anyone who _could_ represent a heightened risk of violence because of an association with a mental illness?

It's important to remember that even among persons with serious personality and emotional disorders only about 7% show up in the crime stats used for epidemiological studies of violence and mental illness. There could be, and probably would be civil rights challenges by multiple advocacy groups to anything that looks like heavy handed class-based discrimination.

Maybe that could get past the Robert's court...Assuming that it did...

What would a mental illness screen for a gun purchase involve?

Would it be a check in a new database of the American mentally ill or would it be a line on a gun purchase permit that asks "Ever diagnosed with mental illness?"

Most mentally ill Americans are UNDIAGNOSED. Is it really fair and reasonable to discriminate against some of them and not others? I foresee lawsuits. The percent of people diagnosed certainly varies somewhat with the illness, and illnesses that are either very disruptive to daily functioning or otherwise dramatic tend to get diagnosed somewhat more than others.

It follows that most people filling out an application would also answer, No. Worse, any person planning to commit a murder and wanting to buy a gun would seem motivated to lie about that. How to control for lying on screening? There are tests for things like response time to questions on computer driven tests, but then we are into requiring every gunshop or license examiner to have such things. Cost will create some resistance, maybe that can be overcome.

If the screening involved asking questions to identify personality types or psychological disorders what questions would you ask? People might find it astounding considering television crime shows, but forensic psychologists haven't found a set of core characteristics for mass murderers that really distinguishes them from the many more people who fit such descriptions but don't represent a risk.

Does society just go ahead with some generic screening for symptoms of mental illness that non-expert lawmakers choose to include? Do we go for the top ten mental illnesses associated with crime? Or do we go for any and all mental illnesses that include hostility, whether or not that hostility is reactive and un-targeted? Again I foresee advocacy groups stepping in with many lawsuits to protect their interests arguing unfair and unjustifiable discrimination.

Forensic psychiatry does know a lot about common violent behavior (attacks with weapons and physical assaults). And they know that substance abuse (including alcohol) is the most highly correlated feature. Maybe you've never seen such a supplement to a personality test. I have and I found the questions about substance abuse not very subtle. Most substance abusers could easily lie when they encounter them.

Many of these tests are now done on computers and the time to answer a question is evaluated as much a variable as is the answers when attempting to evaluate truthfulness from the respondent. But with a bit of practice that's easily confounded.

Setting all that aside even after passing a screening problems could certainly arise.

A person could certainly become intoxicated and dangerous without an habitual substance abuse problem, after honestly answering those questions, and be subject to the increased impulsivity that is associated aggressive violent behavior.

Perhaps of most concern is that people get seriously emotionally challenged at various points in their lives. Those may distort their thinking and lead to deviant behavior. Think about the guy who flew the airplane into the building, or the guy who gave us the phrase "going postal". Screening can look backward and at current conditions, but it really can't see forward in any more than with very very poor resolution. There's really no way to know that the guy who today seems to be a duck hunter will a decade later take that shotgun into his former place of business.

Again, I say if the ATF and Homeland Security can come up with screen that saves some lives, GREAT. Lives are important.

I just don't expect to see a big drop in mass murder, or murder in general, using a new and improved mental health screening system.









Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread