HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » Keeping people with menta...

Mon Nov 6, 2017, 11:44 AM

Keeping people with mental health problems from having guns...

How can that really be done? We have to wait until they have already done something bad to identify them, right? In many of these cases the mass shooting (think paddock) is the first bad thing and then it is too late. The other option is to create a mental health database where we compromise everyone's confidentiality so some macho fools can own assault weapons.

I have an easier solution: ban assault weapons. Before you hit me back with the "we can'ts" and the gunsplaining, understand I will not be convinced that this is anything short of a lack of political resolve.

85 dead, 547 wounded in two shootings. How many would that have been if they only had hunting rifles?

12 replies, 1365 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 12 replies Author Time Post
Reply Keeping people with mental health problems from having guns... (Original post)
HopeAgain Nov 2017 OP
gopiscrap Nov 2017 #1
HopeAgain Nov 2017 #2
Not Ruth Nov 2017 #4
janterry Nov 2017 #3
ck4829 Nov 2017 #5
Doreen Nov 2017 #6
fescuerescue Nov 2017 #7
Hoyt Nov 2017 #8
HopeAgain Nov 2017 #12
aikoaiko Nov 2017 #9
HopeAgain Nov 2017 #11
maxsolomon Nov 2017 #10

Response to HopeAgain (Original post)

Mon Nov 6, 2017, 11:50 AM

1. ban everyone from having a gun

except in course of employment

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to gopiscrap (Reply #1)

Mon Nov 6, 2017, 11:51 AM

2. I could live with that.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HopeAgain (Reply #2)

Mon Nov 6, 2017, 11:55 AM

4. Single payer would provide additional services for diagnosing and treating mental illness

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HopeAgain (Original post)

Mon Nov 6, 2017, 11:54 AM

3. I agree

though there are SOME people that could be flagged when they appear on an in-patient unit. They'd have to be people who were severely mentally ill and/or dangerous. You can't just flag anyone who shows up with depression.

As far as I know, this would stop few mass killings. Nevertheless, it makes sense. People are routinely evaluated when they come in on commitment papers (they are called different things, in different states - 3 day forced evaluations). But, prior to discharge, the team could review the case and make a recommendation.

It should only take a phone call................

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HopeAgain (Original post)

Mon Nov 6, 2017, 11:57 AM

5. Drain the swamp - Cure mental illness

* Provide treatment for good health for everyone, including the mentally ill. No right to healthcare is conflicting with the right to not shot.

* Remove stigma from mental illness. The mentally ill are less violent than the non-mentally ill. It is nothing to be ashamed of if one needs help here. We need to say there is nothing truly wrong with a person just because they are ill; not genetically, not spiritually, etc. There should be no obstructions to treatment; money or social.

* We need to de-normalize the effects of mental illness that can and do lead to violence though. Paranoia, isolation, black and white thinking, etc. There is plenty of 'neurotypical' institutions and norms which sadly normalize the most damaging effects of mental illness... reinforcing xenophobia, confirmation bias, binaries, and more.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HopeAgain (Original post)

Mon Nov 6, 2017, 12:30 PM

6. I think that ALL guns are an assault weapons.

If you can go out and kill people with any gun then they are assault weapons. Ban them all.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HopeAgain (Original post)

Mon Nov 6, 2017, 12:36 PM

7. I don't think we need to convince people like you

We need to convince people who make the laws.

And for better or for worse, if someone is going to write a law, they need to understand guns well enough to write a law effective enough to ban them.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HopeAgain (Original post)

Mon Nov 6, 2017, 12:42 PM

8. Howabout just assuming someone with lots of guns, ammo, ballistic vests, etc., are unstable until

proven otherwise.

I realize that would be profiling ignorant white wing racists who don't give a damn about society, but I don't really have a problem with that.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hoyt (Reply #8)

Mon Nov 6, 2017, 12:54 PM

12. A registry of gun owners I could deal with.

Good point. Let's monitor the gun owners, not those who receive mental health services.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HopeAgain (Original post)

Mon Nov 6, 2017, 12:45 PM

9. Ban "assault weapons" only if you really don't want to stop mass shootings, but want to feel good.


There hasn't been an "assault weapon" that would actually stop it.

Connecticut had a state-level AWB equivalent to the 1994 Federal AWB and the Lanza family legally owned an AR15 because they bought a rifle changed enough irrelevant cosmetic or ergonomic features to be legal.

The attempt to "strengthen" the AWB in 2013 required only that an AR owner changed the grip to something less ergonomic. AR15s would still have been legally bought and sold in the most recent attempt at a federal AWB.

The way I see it, you have to ban all semi-autos (or at least the ones with detachable magazines) to even reduce their effective firing rate. And there is no political will to do this because it would also include many popular rifles and shotguns.

You would do better address better, deeper NICS checks where prohibited persons are availed due process.







Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to aikoaiko (Reply #9)

Mon Nov 6, 2017, 12:51 PM

11. All the guns involved in Las Vegas and Sutherland Springs

were clearly assault weapons. And I grew up around excellent hunters who used bolt-action rifles. But I understand that you agree with me, there is no political will.

I will note, however, that the Right has been very successful in creating "political will" for some damn crazy stuff by just taking a position and repeatedly sticking with it. The left is not very good with that.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HopeAgain (Original post)

Mon Nov 6, 2017, 12:50 PM

10. Its just a distraction

A way to deflect from the real issue - the Militia is NOT well-regulated.

Firearm possession should come with RESPONSIBILITIES.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread