HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » Pew Reseach poll finds pe...
Introducing Discussionist: A new forum by the creators of DU

Mon Jan 14, 2013, 08:12 PM

Pew Reseach poll finds people favor more control on mentally ill over high capacity magazines

Link: http://www.people-press.org/2013/01/14/in-gun-control-debate-several-options-draw-majority-support/

Of course they don't actually say what more control means. But, it shows the gun-lobby is succeeding at driving down the urgency to ban assault weapons and high capacity magazines.




18 replies, 1111 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 18 replies Author Time Post
Reply Pew Reseach poll finds people favor more control on mentally ill over high capacity magazines (Original post)
HereSince1628 Jan 2013 OP
cthulu2016 Jan 2013 #1
HockeyMom Jan 2013 #2
HereSince1628 Jan 2013 #4
Posteritatis Jan 2013 #3
HereSince1628 Jan 2013 #5
d_r Jan 2013 #8
HereSince1628 Jan 2013 #11
Posteritatis Jan 2013 #12
OneTenthofOnePercent Jan 2013 #7
d_r Jan 2013 #9
OneTenthofOnePercent Jan 2013 #13
HereSince1628 Jan 2013 #15
NYC_SKP Jan 2013 #6
SayWut Jan 2013 #10
HereSince1628 Jan 2013 #14
hack89 Jan 2013 #16
HereSince1628 Jan 2013 #17
hack89 Jan 2013 #18

Response to HereSince1628 (Original post)

Mon Jan 14, 2013, 08:13 PM

1. No sale. I only give credence to polls that reinforce my prejudices.

Kidding aside, though, the way the question is phrased, who would say no?

There is no method specified. No definition of mental illness.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HereSince1628 (Original post)

Mon Jan 14, 2013, 08:15 PM

2. The problem with this is that

while they themselves if they are an adult and have been adjucated mentally ill, what about MINORS? They would pass a background check simply because of their age, but does that stop them from getting guns from family members, i.e., stealing them from legal adult owners?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HockeyMom (Reply #2)

Mon Jan 14, 2013, 08:19 PM

4. Yes, that's true but I see broader problems with polls that don't name

what the control is being promoted.

I think EVERYONE wants guns out of the hands of persons adjudicated to be prohibited from gun ownership for reasons of mental illness.

Leaving the additional control mechanisms unsaid is a devil's playground for people wanting to misuse the poll result.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HereSince1628 (Original post)

Mon Jan 14, 2013, 08:16 PM

3. I imagine a lot of people taking that poll couldn't say what "mental illness" means, either. (nt)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Posteritatis (Reply #3)

Mon Jan 14, 2013, 08:20 PM

5. That's true, but how many times do you think this poll will be quoted tomorrow by the gun lobby?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HereSince1628 (Reply #5)

Mon Jan 14, 2013, 08:40 PM

8. well considering

The majority of people favor everything except teachers with guns, I imagine they won't say anything.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to d_r (Reply #8)

Mon Jan 14, 2013, 08:48 PM

11. Cherry picking is what the lobbyists are up to in DC, and this cherry plays on fear of the unknown

The quick check data gap on the mentally ill is 2 million, the data gap on felons is 23 million

Yesterday , the Salt Lake Tribe, quoted DC sources (aka lobbiest) as saying 2 million people are missing in the quick check
and ignored other more serious holes in the combined databases used in the quick check system

The conspicuous other missing records are for:
23 million persons who are felons...felons make up 58% of gun purchase 987K denials from Nov 99 thru 31 Dec 2012.
14 million persons with records of use/addiction of unlawful substances...they make up nearly 9% of gun purchase of aforesaid denials.

The mentally ill make up 1.03% of the aforesaid denials

That looks pretty blatantly selective to me.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HereSince1628 (Reply #5)

Mon Jan 14, 2013, 08:53 PM

12. Or the other side. There's plenty for people to go "See? See?!" over with something like that. (nt)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Posteritatis (Reply #3)

Mon Jan 14, 2013, 08:36 PM

7. Is that any different than many people not really knowing what gun controls laws/terms

 

actually refer to in the real world and what effect they can have on crime?

How many people being polled about supporting Assault Weapons Bans even understand that the rifle used in the Sandy Hook shootings was NOT an assault weapon and that an AWB would not have restricted it's possession at all. How many of those same people understand that an overwhelming majority of mass shootings in the past 25 years are NOT committed with an assault-style rifle? How many of those same people are aware that 97%+ of all gun homicides are NOT committed with assault-style rifles? Hell, congresswoman Carolyn McCarthy (an author of previous passed AWB legislation) couldn't even correctly answer some questions about HER OWN LEGISLATION.

So while your point is entirely valid; persons being polled are not informed as to what they are actually responding to... do you think that polls of the general population revolving around new AWB legislation are any more meaningful than this poll. I think this is nothing more than one of those 'pot-meet-kettle' scenarios.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to OneTenthofOnePercent (Reply #7)

Mon Jan 14, 2013, 08:41 PM

9. so we need a wider definition og assaut weapon nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to d_r (Reply #9)

Mon Jan 14, 2013, 08:57 PM

13. The definition of assault weapon is irrelevent.

 

The point of my reply is to agree with your response - people cannot legitimately respond to this poll without further understanding of what the responses actually imply. I'm also simply stating that the same public ignorance also renders the AWB support-polls moot as well.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to OneTenthofOnePercent (Reply #7)

Mon Jan 14, 2013, 09:02 PM

15. In some respect no, but I suspect people know less about the mental illness.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HereSince1628 (Original post)

Mon Jan 14, 2013, 08:27 PM

6. No way to conclude that "gun-lobby is succeeding at driving down the urgency"...

Where is that indicated by the data?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HereSince1628 (Original post)

Mon Jan 14, 2013, 08:41 PM

10. Sounds reasonable and makes sense.

 

Banning a particular class of firearms is ineffective as long as the wrong people still have other options available to them (ie. handguns, shotguns, bolt action rifles).

Enhanced and improved background checks that include mental health records, would reduce firearms fatalities far more than singling out a category of firearms that is amongst the least used in crimes.

The problem lies in what mental health disabilities would serve as a "disqualifier", whom would make that determination and if there is any avenue for relief once that person is deemed fit.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SayWut (Reply #10)

Mon Jan 14, 2013, 09:01 PM

14. The problem is how you maintain due process and equal protection

Currently, prohibitions for mental health reasons follow from case by case decisions which can result from various things such as an involuntary commitment, or a court accepting a plea of not guilty by reason of insanity.

What gets proposed on the street and in chat rooms isn't due process.

A diagnosis by a licensed therapist social worker is a process. That doesn't make it due process. A computer search through medical or insurance records is a process. That doesn't make it due process.

17,000 Americans commit suicide by gun each year. 90% have on investigation some association with mental illness either a diagnosis or 'signs' that never were diagnosed. Most often that symptom is depression. 30 million Americans are estimated to have symptoms of depression every year.

Efforts to capture data for such a category (most of whom currently do not seek treatment) for entry into NICS would require Orwellian-like tactics. The danger of 'overly-broad' definitions is fairly large, and is likely to threaten equal protection.

Surprisingly arguments about due process and equal protection are used by the NRA to defend the rights of gun-owners.






Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HereSince1628 (Original post)

Mon Jan 14, 2013, 09:09 PM

16. NY is proposing a state database for people with mental health issues, gun owners or not.

It would also, among numerous other regulations, give New York the nation’s “broadest and deepest” mental health background checks for gun purchases, the source said.

Under the plan, if a mental health professional believes someone--gun owner or not--poses a threat, they will be able to report that to their county mental health office, which would then convey the warning to law enforcement.

The information would then be included in a database that is used for background checks for gun purchasers. Should that person already be found to have a licensed weapon, police could suspend or revoke the license and confiscate the firearm.


http://www.nydailynews.com/blogs/dailypolitics/2013/01/gun-control-deal-close-could-come-as-soon-as-today-source

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hack89 (Reply #16)

Mon Jan 14, 2013, 09:16 PM

17. States are free to make gun permitting rules of their choice.

Piles of data, like piles of money, attract people with an interest.

The data base will be huge for a state with a population like New York. About 1 in 4 persons have a mental illness during their life. Between 1/4 and 1/3 seek treatment. Imagine all those diagnositic records accumulating over 70 years. Maintenance on the data...keeping it up to date (most mental illnesses DO resolve, medication types do vary over time), and keeping the security on private information is going to cost big bucks...or it won't be kept up to date or secure.

Expect things to go wrong.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HereSince1628 (Reply #17)

Mon Jan 14, 2013, 09:17 PM

18. I have no doubt it will enrich lawyers for years to come. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread