Calguns.net

Calguns.net (http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/index.php)
-   California 2nd Amend. Political Discussion & Activism (http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/forumdisplay.php?f=71)
-   -   Anyone else fearful of mental health laws? (http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=681109)

mikestesting 01-17-2013 9:44 AM

Anyone else fearful of mental health laws?
 
I, for one, am extremely fearful of mental health laws that may arise out of this gun control debate.

I am afraid that government could/would use this to detain and lockup and deny the rights to whomever they wanted.

CAL.BAR 01-17-2013 9:51 AM

OK.... just sit right there and someone will be there shortly to collect you. (lol) The ONLY thing ALL of the shooters have in common is mental illness. Most mental health workers have been crying for years that there is not enough resources for them to help (and incarcerate if necessary) people who are a danger to themselves or others. Don't you think that dealing with mental illness is a good place to start to stop such attacks (at least better than banning guns)?

Dave22 01-17-2013 9:52 AM

http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/s...20#post8865520

I brought this up in another thread months ago and was called a troll among other things.

Not many people were seeing the light then, I wonder if they are now?

Electronic health records are mandatory come 2014...

dreyna14 01-17-2013 9:54 AM

I fear that it leaves too much for interpretation and for others to make false and unjust claims against another person's mental health that the DOJ could use the prohibit gun possession.

luchador768 01-17-2013 10:00 AM

What is the threshold for not being "allowed" a gun?? Ever been on Prozac? Paxil? AA/NA meetings?? Anger management classes?? How low will they set the standard for "mentally I'll?"

CCWFacts 01-17-2013 10:37 AM

I'm definitely afraid of mental health laws.

If you want to greatly decrease gun violence (and violence in general), the solution is obvious: imprison violent people. When someone is caught bringing a gun to school, give him Federal charges as an adult and don't let him plea bargain, so he'll be locked up until his twenties. Same with other entry-level criminal activity. Whenever you see someone who committed murder, there's usually a ramp-up of smaller crimes over an extended period of time. Well, instead of letting that ramp go up until murder, get that violent person into prison for a long time. The parole system also needs to be fixed. To take an extreme and recent example, this guy raped and murdered several teenage girls, was sentenced to death, got out on parole, and killed his mother. Maybe, just maybe, someone who rapes and kills teenage girls should never see daylight again.

The problem with this simple and obviously effective solution is that, due to disparities in crime rates, it will result in too many people who look like Obama's sons spending much of their lives in prison, and the Democratic voter base does not want this to happen.

That's why the sudden emphasis on mental illness. It means that people who are not criminals will be evaluated by glorified DMV workers and denied their rights based on that. This lets the government "do something" about gun violence without having a disparate impact on the Democratic voter demographic.

Yes I'm worried about the emphasis on mental health. You would think everyone would see the obvious solution is to go after people who commit crimes, and yet that's exactly what the Democratic party does not want to do.

To see some more evidence of this, Jerry Brown recently gave a speech where he rightly points out, Oakland can't solve its problems because there are a lot of people in Oakland who don't want the problems to be solved. JB is just pointing out on a small scale what's happening on a big scale in the US with the Democratic voter base, and it's also exactly why the emphasis on mental health instead of focusing on demonstrated criminal activity.

Yes we should be scared of this.

sandbasser 01-17-2013 10:46 AM

I'm nervous because there are many people, probably including state-employed doctors would would say that just wanting to buy a gun means that a person is crazy.

LovingTheYear1911 01-17-2013 10:50 AM

I agree with CCW. However I do think mental health needs to be considered but it's too broad. What is the line that says yes or no? If I've been depressed how is my doctor going to know or how is the State going to know if I don't report it? Its too broad. And yes lock up criminals for life especially for raping teenage girls. I wouldn't mind the death penalty in some cases. Put some fear in these criminals cause prison is like a vacation nowadays.

dunndeal 01-17-2013 10:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CCWFacts;
To see some more evidence of this, Jerry Brown recently gave a speech where he rightly points out, Oakland can't solve its problems because there are a lot of people in Oakland who [URL="http://blog.sfgate.com/nov05election/2013/01/16/gov-jerry-brown-former-ag-slams-oakland-praises-obama-on-gun-violence/"
don't want the problems to be solved[/URL]. JB is just pointing out on a small scale what's happening on a big scale in the US with the Democratic voter base, and it's also exactly why the emphasis on mental health instead of focusing on demonstrated criminal activity.

Yes we should be scared of this.

I was at Oaklander's house several months ago and this topic came up. There is in this country an enormous multi-billion dollar industry that Oak called "Poverty Pimping". It employs tens if not hundreds of thousands of people whose carreer is dependant on millions of people living in ignorance and poverty. If the government would actually get out of the way and allow these people to get into the economic system there would be a helluva lot of Pimps with Masters Degrees in Social Work who had nothing to do. Gee, what a shame, they'd have to enter the real world and compete for jobs like the rest of us.

jrock 01-17-2013 11:09 AM

Roommates depressed, get rid of your guns. Grandmas staying with you and she has Parkinson's, remove guns, you were suspended in high school for disruption,..time for some testing..inthe meantime, remove guns.

The military has been the test bed.

Exile Machine 01-17-2013 11:12 AM

Political abuse of psychiatry? Why it could just never happen...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Politic..._of_psychiatry

Bobio 01-17-2013 11:16 AM

Double edged sword. People who commit these massacres and a majority of criminals have sever mental health and or drug issues. They shouldn't have access to firearms. But, new laws may prevent people from getting help because thy are afford of loosing their guns.

Barney Fife 01-17-2013 11:17 AM

Yup, very little real science involved in psychology, very easy to simply catalogue those you disagree with as having a psychosis.

AyatollahGondola 01-17-2013 11:21 AM

I suggest that everyone concerned about this go sit through a few conservatorship or committment trials. The process is already in place, and has been for years. then go sit through a few restraining order hearings. It is something to think about, and try and keep some balance on. I agree with one poster that the system lacks the considerable funds for institutionalizing people, but that's not what we're talking about here. Like restraining orders, they don't lock you up. they just restrict you.

johnthomas 01-17-2013 11:24 AM

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Witch_t..._modern_period

If you are different, they will get you.

sakosf 01-17-2013 11:27 AM

In this State and I think likely most other States, a therapist or other health professional is already required to report any patient who has expressed a clear intent to harm themselves or others. I do not think anybody should lose their gun rights for life without due process. I think there needs to be a better process to weed out those who are truly a threat because of a serious mental health issue......providing they are given due process and adjudicated as being unfit to process firearms. I would hope that such a determination would also result some sort of commitment to mental health facility for a period of time

Moonshine 01-17-2013 11:37 AM

My understanding is that what is being done is addressing issues related with people who have been determined to be a danger to themselves or society by a licensed psychologist or psychiatrist. People who have been committed by the courts to a hospital. We already have these checks in place in California and I am not aware of any mentally ill mass shooters here since Patrick Purdy. However these checks are NOT in place in some other states... Particularly in some where mass shootings have occurred. It is important to note though that in some mass shootings (comlubine, newton) weapons were obtained through irresponsible family members... So nothing is really a complete solution in itself.

Vetteodyssey 01-17-2013 11:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bobio (Post 10234940)
Double edged sword. People who commit these massacres and a majority of criminals have sever mental health and or drug issues. They shouldn't have access to firearms. But, new laws may prevent people from getting help because thy are afraid of loosing their guns.

^^ Ah you beat me to it. This is what scares me is that people won't talk to their DR because they are afraid of loosing their gun rights.

oakland1067 01-17-2013 12:04 PM

Problem is most people talking about mental health issues are arm chair therapist, who know nothing about psychology, this includes most politicians. Good luck if you see a doctor. Thanks to Obama and his health care reform these people will now be qualified to be therapist because he is DE-emphasizing degree's because he feels it is barrier for people accessing health care. Currently, the soon to be further expanded Obama care plan is to flood the field with Masters and Bachelors degree people who will be able to make decisions on people's competency based on their limited experience and watered down degree's that now have limited clinical course work (maybe one semester w/ 1-2 courses). Most of these "clinicians" or "therapist" are actually doing case management or child welfare work and know very little about psychiatric diagnosis and have to practice mechanized tx based on mechanized decision making.

Alan Block 01-17-2013 12:09 PM

I was listening to an interview with a psychologist on the radio about this. He was convinced that people would not seek treatment if they thought they would lose their rights. He said that psychological screening would not be effective but that restrictions on access to guns would be very effective. I wish I could have called in to refute that.

SuperSet 01-17-2013 12:20 PM

Not concerned but would like to see more research about the psychological makeup of the mass shooter and if there are any behavioral patterns that can help families and communities note who is going to be a problem. From there, steps can be taken.

We need information about it and that comes from research and dialogue, which can, but not always, drive policy.

Kyle1886 01-17-2013 12:27 PM

I have dealt with phychologist and other "mental health" personnel as well as having a relative in the field. To a person, I would NOT want any of these folks evaluating mine or anyone elses mental state for firearm ownership.

The majority are very anti-firearm to start with. If any of you have taken the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory (test), you know what I mean. There are more ways to interpret that test than there are interpretations of the Bible...

Respectfully
Kyle

Sunday 01-17-2013 12:39 PM

Everything the government is doing is dangerous for our freedoms .That is why the constitution was written , to limit the power of the government. Ever heard of the NEW WORLD ORDER / ONE WORLD GOVERNMENT under the UNITED NATIONS . I have little trust of the medical profession , There are some fine doctors don't get me wrong but so many are out to kill you.

kf6tac 01-17-2013 12:43 PM

I believe that addressing mental health is the key to preventing future mass shootings, but I also believe that any policy proposals regarding mental health and firearms should be watched closely to ensure that they do not unnecessarily broaden the types of conditions that would serve as disqualifying factors for possessing a firearm, or the ease with which the government can categorize a person as having a disqualifying mental defect.

Born To Glock 01-17-2013 12:44 PM

Another thing to consider is whether this opens the door for another slippery-slope situation like the bans on "high capacity" magazines (10 vs 7 rounds, etc.). Today, maybe the categories of mental illness that would preclude one from legally possessing a firearm might include one set of conditions, but as more incidents happen, the government may start adding to that list. For example, that shooter had ADHD; therefore, people with ADHD should not be allowed to own firearms.

What would be the process for adding (or removing) conditions from the list of mental conditions that are considered "dangerous" and would therefore restrict firearms ownership?

Will such a mechanism be used to gradually whittle away at the gun-owning population in a way that is systematically designed to disarm the American citizenry over the course of the next 20, 30, or 50 years?

And what about "fads" in psychiatry that lead to over-diagnosis of conditions like ADHD?

Another thing to consider is whether the government is justified in denying someone's constitutional rights on the basis of a potential to act, rather than on the individual's actions. In this way, it differs from the stripping of 2A (and other) rights from convicted felons. Here, the government is taking rights away based on something that a person hasn't done and which a person may or may not ever actually choose to do.

68Drop 01-17-2013 12:49 PM

The issue is that now psychologists have so much freaking power. They are typically basket cases themselves, so we shall see.
I have worked in one of california's "mental" facilities...err prisons, and NONE of these people ever get out. And not because all of them are bat crap crazy, but because there is so much money in them being there. And if psychologists can lie to earn money, whats to stop them from lying to keep guns out of the hands of people. Namely soldiers returning from Iraq or all war veterans. They have been labeled possible terrorists by the dept of homeland security. So a guy with PTSD shouldnt be able to defend himself?

Psychology controlling who gets guns is basically opening up pandora's box

chris 01-17-2013 12:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bobio (Post 10234940)
Double edged sword. People who commit these massacres and a majority of criminals have sever mental health and or drug issues. They shouldn't have access to firearms. But, new laws may prevent people from getting help because thy are afford of loosing their guns.

Think about of all the combat vets we have. Maybe having PTSD from service in combat lose their guns. People are going to be afraid to seek treatment in fear of losing their rights. This is a very slippery slope we are on.

CCWFacts 01-17-2013 12:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dunndeal (Post 10234772)
I was at Oaklander's house several months ago and this topic came up. There is in this country an enormous multi-billion dollar industry that Oak called "Poverty Pimping".

Yes. It is an enormous industry and it seeks to defend and perpetuate itself. The poverty-industrial complex is part of the Democratic foundation. The poverty industry is also heavily unionized in the public sector unions.

Quote:

Originally Posted by dunndeal (Post 10234772)
a helluva lot of Pimps with Masters Degrees in Social Work who had nothing to do. Gee, what a shame, they'd have to enter the real world and compete for jobs like the rest of us.

They couldn't get real jobs. What possible employer, other than taxpayer-funded employers, would hire entitlement-addicted professional victims with masters degrees in social work? No one.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kyle1886 (Post 10235590)
I have dealt with phychologist and other "mental health" personnel as well as having a relative in the field. To a person, I would NOT want any of these folks evaluating mine or anyone elses mental state for firearm ownership.

The majority are very anti-firearm to start with.

Psychologists and especially social workers are highly left-wing. Most social workers are minorities. Social work degree programs are the easiest degrees you can get, and they are all based on agreeing with a religion of Marxist victimhood.

NRA members and people who own AR-15s are a demographic with very low crime rates. The last thing Obama wants is to go after his demographic, which has a high crime rate. He wants to target NRA members, even though they are irrelevant to crime.

This whole gun control fight, and the idea of using mental health assessments instead of criminal records, is based on the most ugly brand of identity politics and racism. I wish the NRA could address this more directly.

SGTKane 01-17-2013 1:08 PM

I've been saying this for years. As a Psychological Operations Specialist in the Army, I've learned just how easy it is for a psychologist to brand someone "crazy". And exactly how hard it is to get that label lifted once you have it.

There is just so much we don't know about the workings of the mind, and while we've learned to manipulate certain aspects of it (marketing in its purest form is psychology) we've granted a great deal of power to those who claim to have any understanding of this process.

And the truth is, unless you are talking about physiological imbalances (and even there you have to read carefully), its more magic than science. Diagnosis are often very subjective, influenced, and weighted by the personal bias of the psychologist.

To an anti-gun psychologist, any desire to own a gun is a sign of mental illness, or at least subjectively so. Why do you want a gun? Fear? You are paraniod. Paranioa builds until you lash out, therefore you are the last person that should own a gun.

skyscraper 01-17-2013 1:30 PM

Nope, not at all. It's been necessary change for a while.

AVS 01-17-2013 2:26 PM

There's too much over-generalizing going on in this thread in terms of mental-health workers. There are plenty of mental-health workers who are pro 2A.

donny douchebag 01-17-2013 2:29 PM

No. That would be paranoia...which is a form of mental illness.

David13 01-17-2013 2:34 PM

I am not afraid of the mental health laws.
I am just generally paranoid.
And the fact that I am paranoid does not (n o t) mean they are not out to get me.
dc

Born To Glock 01-17-2013 2:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by donny (Post 10236624)
No. That would be paranoia...which is a form of mental illness.

Sure, but purporting not to be fearful of mental health laws may be indicative of extreme paranoia, insofar as you are fearful that any admission of fear would be construed as an admission of guilt. Either that, or you're in denial, which may be indicative of losing your grip on reality.

savannah 01-17-2013 2:48 PM

I would like to know who is judging whether or not someone has a mental illness. Most of the men that committed school shootings or theatre shootings were deemed mentally ill. Ok, I buy that, nobody in their right mind would commit a crime like those. But, we need to know what agency is doing the reporting and what the criteria will be for calling someone mentally ill. Yes, I am worried. The young men that did mass shootings were called mentally ill before or after the shootings?

There is no blood test or machine that can diagnose mental illness. So we are depending on someone's opinion to determine our rights. If that doesn't scare you, nothing will.

SgtDinosaur 01-17-2013 2:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by luchador768 (Post 10234297)
What is the threshold for not being "allowed" a gun?? Ever been on Prozac? Paxil? AA/NA meetings?? Anger management classes?? How low will they set the standard for "mentally I'll?"

This causes me some concern.

Merkava_4 01-17-2013 6:56 PM

I take PROZAC everyday and have been since June of 1994. I take a very high dose of 80mg a day. I have been diagnosed with chronic depression and moderate to severe obsessive compulsive disorder. I see a psychiatrist every 3 months.

How dangerous am I to society? You tell me.

I bet some of you reading this right now would be scared to death to let me have a gun.

I have no criminal felony convictions, none.

I have never been arrested or taken to jail.

Got caught speeding doing 58mph in a 40mph zone one time. Cost me lots of money. Learned my lesson.

Do I own any guns? No

Do I expect to ever be allowed to own a gun? Not now I don't!

Why am I here on this board? Because I believe in the 2nd Amendment; the Bill Of Rights; and the United States Constitution.

blakdawg 01-17-2013 7:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Merkava_4 (Post 10239429)
I take PROZAC everyday and have been since June of 1994. I take a very high dose of 80mg a day. I have been diagnosed with chronic depression and moderate to severe obsessive compulsive disorder. I see a psychiatrist every 3 months.

How dangerous am I to society? You tell me.

I bet some of you reading this right now would be scared to death to let me have a gun.

I have no criminal felony convictions, none.

I have never been arrested or taken to jail.

Got caught speeding doing 58mph in a 40mph zone one time. Cost me lots of money. Learned my lesson.

Do I own any guns? No

Do I expect to ever be allowed to own a gun? Not now I don't!

Why am I here on this board? Because I believe in the 2nd Amendment; the Bill Of Rights; and the United States Constitution.

I don't see anything that you mentioned that would disqualify you from owning a gun - and there are a lot of people walking around in exactly the same circumstances, except they're unmedicated, unmonitored, and untreated; or they self-medicate with OTC and illegal drugs.

yellowfin 01-17-2013 7:17 PM

If you get diagnosed with megalomania and narcissism, chances are you'll be elected to the legislature w/ the current majority party of CA, NY, and NJ.

sakosf 01-17-2013 8:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Merkava_4 (Post 10239429)
I take PROZAC everyday and have been since June of 1994. I take a very high dose of 80mg a day. I have been diagnosed with chronic depression and moderate to severe obsessive compulsive disorder. I see a psychiatrist every 3 months.

How dangerous am I to society? You tell me.

I bet some of you reading this right now would be scared to death to let me have a gun.

I have no criminal felony convictions, none.

I have never been arrested or taken to jail.

Got caught speeding doing 58mph in a 40mph zone one time. Cost me lots of money. Learned my lesson.

Do I own any guns? No

Do I expect to ever be allowed to own a gun? Not now I don't!

Why am I here on this board? Because I believe in the 2nd Amendment; the Bill Of Rights; and the United States Constitution.

As the other poster already stated, I see nothing in what you posted about yourself that would disqualify you from owning a gun. There have been a lot of people in this country, at one time or another, have been prescribed SSRI type meds. This class of prescription drugs has even been prescribed to help with chronic pain. If I remember my history correctly, Churchill & Lincoln both had to struggle with depression.


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 10:03 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2016, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.