No matter which side of the gun debate, can you understand why this is degrading to MI patients? [View all]

[Denninmi]

Current gun permit laws require a background check of potential buyers under some circumstances. As a rule, these checks are designed to screen out people adjudicated "mental defectives" and those involuntarily committed. Please note that both of these actions against a person with mental illness require due process through a probate court of jurisdiction, and are done through official court orders upon a finding of legal incapacity or an order of commitment. These are relatively rare procedures. Also, please note, this is VERY different from just being diagnosed with a mental illness or mental health issue by a physician or psychologist.

Some states have tighter restrictions on issuance of gun permits, but many just mirror the Federal Firearms Act of 1968 and the Brady Acts, which adhere to the standards of incompetency or involuntary commitment under court order as the standard to deny a gun permit to a "prohibited person". Also, please note these laws already put the names of persons afflicted with mental illness AND under court order in the same database as convicted felons. I personally find this in and of itself degrading and demeaning, even if it hasn't happened to me. It suggests to me that, should my bipolar/PTSD condition worsen, I could end up there lumped with pedophiles and rapists, and I have never been so much as significantly disrespectful to a woman or child, I consider myself to be "quietly a gentleman", to borrow a snippet of lyrics from a favorite song if mine by the band OAR.

I personally find the term mental defective extremely derogatory as well, but that was the terminology in use in 1968. They could at least update it to the more contemporary "legally incapacitated individual".

I strongly suspect in the current witch hunt atmosphere that seems to exist post-Newtown that very ugly things targeting the mentally ill are coming down the pipe from DC and many state capitols.

I don't support ownership in general except in limited circumstances, such as for hunting or recreational or competitive target sports. Hunting doesn't bother me, in fact it can be good, my neighborhood is overrun with deer, in fact a herd of about a dozen crossed the road ahead of me about five am this morning. No hunting here because of the suburban nature.

But, I do feel that as long as the 2nd is the law of the land, it, like all laws, should be applicable to everyone across the board who has not had their rights restricted under court adjudication.

It seems grossly unfair to take a right away based on class membership - if the same proposal were made to restrict African American males between 18 and 35 , a class population arguably statistically more likely to be involved in gun crimes either as perpetrators or victims than are people with mental health issues, it would never fly. The outrage would be tremendous, rightfully so.

But i feel those of us with a mental ilness/mental health diagnosis will be thrown under the bus, we will be pre-judged without due process, we will be lumped together in databases with sex offenders, common felons and drug dealers, and those databases will be open or at least vulnerable to improper access without adequate safeguards, IMHO. That leads to the potential for abusive discrimination in many areas, jobs, housing, access to benefits. I for one do NOT want to end up under a bus, to quote the character of Mysterion aka Kenny from my favorite episode of South Park (yes, I am 47 and still watch cartoons), "It fucking hurts".

And then, there is the question of how this information will be gathered. Will we be required to register with local, state, or federal law enforcement like sex offenders? Or worse, so will our medical records, health insurance records, and pharmacy records be required to be turned over, in violation of our cuurent privacy and HIPPA rights, and in violation of the trust we place in our our healthcare providers? Will we be required to go to the post office or appear before a local board to register, as I had to do in 1983 with Selective Service?

So, I ask this one question - do you understand why these proposals hurt like Hell and terrify me to the core of my soul? Because I for one do not want to be a second class citizen or worse just because I have a treatable chronic medical condition which I contracted through no fault of my own.