What Restrictions Would You Accept?

[stringofbull]

I have been reflecting on the recent shootings that have taken place. One common factor in these shootings is the people who carried out these crimes are identified as having mental issues after the fact. Those familiar with the people are often interviewed and say, " I knew he was crazy and feared he may do something like this. "

As of right now, there is no restrictions on people who have not been diagnosed with mental disorders from getting firearms. There are restrictions in place for those who have been diagnosed with mental disorders. Although the 2A has no restrictive language to who may or may not enjoy this right, restrictions exist nonetheless. The problem as I see it is unless you yourself seek treatment, or someone else calls your mental health into question and forces you to seek treatment, how do we keep these people from obtaining firearms? Here are my questions regarding mental health.

1. Would you accept as a requirement to own a firearm a mental health evaluation?
2. What level of mental health deficiencies are acceptable?
3. What level of mental health deficiencies are unacceptable?
4. Can you seek a second opinion?
5. What if the opinions differ from good to go, or no way no how he's batshit crazy?

I'm sure I can come up with more questions if I didn't have to get off the toilet and jump in the shower. I'm very pro 2A, so don't confuse me with an anti. You can see how complex the mental health issue is going to be.

 

[Name Taken]

The same restrictions that would disallow someone from getting a license, buying a steak knife, or buying a baseball bat.

It's not the weapon that's used it's the tool bag using it. When we start locking these cooks away where they belong I'll be willing to accept more hassle for buying a firearm.

Until then....let the good guys buy as many as they can make and hopefully we'll start putting down the crazy gun man before their body counts hit the mark that the national media wants so they can sensationalize it.

Clear enough?

 

[Norton]

Mark my words, this stigmatization of people...in this case gun owners...is going to have the unintended consequences of creating more problems.

If you tell a man that he's going to lose his job, his license or in this case his guns if he is declared to have whatever this week's definition of a mental illness is, he is simply going to avoid seeking any kind of treatment, even low level counseling.

So, you end up with a guy who would have otherwise sought treatment, but because of the potential repercussions, decides not to. Now you've got someone with guns and no treatment.

Brilliant.

 

[snavematt]

When my Dad passed suddenly 6 years ago ( I found him) I was depressed, because of the stupid laws, I did not seek any professional counseling for fear that it would interfere with my ability to legally own firearms. The problem will be it is not clearly defined as to what mental issues constitute a mental disqualification.

 

[Inigoes]

I am not willing to compromise anymore of my rights away!

If you do, soon there will be nothing left to compromise.

 

[Indiana Jones]

When my Dad passed suddenly 6 years ago ( I found him) I was depressed, because of the stupid laws, I did not seek any professional counseling for fear that it would interfere with my ability to legally own firearms. The problem will be it is not clearly defined as to what mental issues constitute a mental disqualification.

Sorry to hear about that man. I can't imagine.

As far as restrictions, none.

 

[Ab_Normal]

None since I don't see any when I read the 2A.

What other people will accept is their choice.

Flame away?

 

[eyesinpines]

When the rights of the majority are impinged by the wrongs of the minority, freedom is threatened and tyranny readies to take its place.

"Give me freedom or give me death".

Do whatever is necessary to deal with the minority problems but leave my freedom ALONE!

 

[eruby]

When my Dad passed suddenly 6 years ago ( I found him) I was depressed, because of the stupid laws, I did not seek any professional counseling for fear that it would interfere with my ability to legally own firearms. The problem will be it is not clearly defined as to what mental issues constitute a mental disqualification.

If you have an employee assistance program at work, they often can provide some counseling sessions without having to go through medical insurance and it 'seems' to be very confidential.

I guess that would have been better advise 6 years ago. Still might be worth a shot anyway. I did it two years after pulling the plug on my mom.

 

[snavematt]

Sorry to hear about that man. I can't imagine.

As far as restrictions, none.

Thanks man, it still stings, but I'm all good now. True mental illness should be a disqualifier as it is today

 

[SCARCQB]

I am not willing to compromise anymore of my rights away!

If you do, soon there will be nothing left to compromise.

I agree. No more compromises

 

[travistheone]

none

 

[Inigoes]

First, they went for Machine Guns, and miltary grade weaponry.
Then they went after semiautomatic firearms

What do you think they will go after next?

 

[LadySmith]

Mark my words, this stigmatization of people...in this case gun owners...is going to have the unintended consequences of creating more problems.

If you tell a man that he's going to lose his job, his license or in this case his guns if he is declared to have whatever this week's definition of a mental illness is, he is simply going to avoid seeking any kind of treatment, even low level counseling.

So, you end up with a guy who would have otherwise sought treatment, but because of the potential repercussions, decides not to. Now you've got someone with guns and no treatment.

Brilliant.

This post is spot on! I was talking with family members at Christmas about the effects of releasing mental health records and/or requiring a mental health screening. My family included 1 state trooper, a retired sheriff, a social worker, an RN (me), and several teachers. Strangely enough, we all were of the same opinion that this would become a barrier to those who should seek health care. I also want to point out the liability for an psychiatrist who would give a green light to someone who may "appear" healthy but in fact is either a good actor or having a good day! I can't conceive why any doctor would take the risk and responsibility associated with saying someone is heathy. People are emotionally impacted by varied situations and may be fine one day but a month later they could be struggling. This is just a bad idea all around. In many cases, the shooters who did these horrible things STOLE the guns. As gun owners we need to be more responsible with security and more proactive in identifying people around us who may need mental health services. I believe these are the two biggest and easiest things we can do to impact the risk of these tragedies.

 

[Mark75H]

First, they went for Machine Guns, and miltary grade weaponry.
Then they went after semiautomatic firearms

What do you think they will go after next?

We already know what will be next on the list ... everything

 

[AMStrick]

The premiss of your question is flawed. Your premiss is also what has become flawed with the society as a whole here in the USA.

The Progressives have convinced a large segment of our population that it is okay to punish the majority with more legislation to prevent horrible acts committed by what I call defective DNA (insane person).

A simple fact remains, you can not legislate good behavior. Let's go back to punishing those that misbehave and reward good behavior. But, this requires our society to expect people to accept personal responsibility for their actions and inactions.

Like the others have said, I am not willing to give up any more of my rights or freedoms.

 

[gamer_jim]

I would accept:
-no violent felons.
-reasonable training requirements for CCW (like Utah + FL)
-lift 1986 restriction for machine guns but keep tax stamp and paperwork
-Liability laws such that you cant fire within cetain distance of a dwelling and loose rights if you point at someone negligently
-Additional training requirements for teachers to carry in schools
-NICS check for all transfers (make it free and easy, like online, no serial number on form)
-require firearms to be secured if children could have access (doesnt preclude a biometric safe)


Sent from my DROID2 GLOBAL using Tapatalk 2

 

[LadySmith]

When my Dad passed suddenly 6 years ago ( I found him) I was depressed, because of the stupid laws, I did not seek any professional counseling for fear that it would interfere with my ability to legally own firearms. The problem will be it is not clearly defined as to what mental issues constitute a mental disqualification.

I'm so sorry for your loss. What you described is exactly what I fear will happen. I suffered post-partum depression when my first daughter was born. I waited way too long to get help because of what you described. This is truly a rock and a hard place. I still take a low dose medication, talk to a counselor a couple times a year, and remain very stable. It's truly frightening to think I may need to give up a treatment plan that is effective to remain active in a sport I love! And keep in mind, most (many) are not in favor of guns in the home. So good luck finding one who will sign off that you are "safe".

 

[rac74]

This is just a small version of the UN small Arms Treaty ban....

 

[snavematt]

I'm all good now, I went they way of just using my pastor as support, he is a big 2a supporter and I know the confidentiality stays with him. If anyone on here just needs to talk and get shit out, I am available anytime