Poll: Gun Owners With Mental Illnesses

[xdom125x]

Depends on the mental illness really. If it is something that makes the person delusional and manic and stuff, they shouldn't have guns. While if none of those are happening the person should go through the usual process.(I am biased here because I have the A.D.H.D. and still think I am competent enough to own and operate a gun safely)

 

[viranimus]

Instead he smoked a bunch of pot, which is like giving someone with a peanut allergy Reese's peanut butter cups.

As someone who has in the past smoked pot, I take offense at that notion. Dont blame the drug for the actions of a nutjob who would have likely done the same had be been completely lucid. I wager, if anything Pot likely helped this guy keep from going off the deep end as long as it did, instead of doing it when he was 16. Also note that he had given up tobacco, alcohol and pot since 2008.

As for the OPs notion, Honestly I have no problem with more stringent requirements being placed on gun ownership, but how exactly do you go about doing that? As it stands theres already a waiting period and a background check, which for example Loughner passed. Perhaps the background check could also include an existing medical records check, but even that isnt likely to yield much better results. It might catch a few here and there, but not really enough to merit the extra time and cost.

Simple fact is, this gun hysteria is getting rather outlandish. Guns dont kill people, People kill people. A gun is little more than a tool. An automatic hole digger with a point and click interface. Fact is... If someone is already mentally unstable, and determined to kill someone, having gun prohibition will NOT deter them from acting out on that ambition. All it really does is ensures they will end up planning more carefully, say by having to ambush someone with a knife.. Or taking more extreme measures, by upgrading to a home made bomb. Should we outlaw bleach, and other household cleansers too while were at it?

Honestly this really reminds me of being a kid. When you were a kid, and if you had siblings, and you whine cried and bellyached because a sibling was getting to do something you couldnt. Did your parents just let you go ahead and do it too? No they took it away, and ensured both of you wouldnt get it. So do you really think its fair to screw the tens of thousands of legitimate gun owners who use their guns for practical and recreational purposes, just because a small handful of whackjobs go overboard? Do you really think that is going to stop those whackjobs from doing what they intended to do?

 

[viranimus]

Instead he smoked a bunch of pot, which is like giving someone with a peanut allergy Reese's peanut butter cups.

As someone who has in the past smoked pot, I take offense at that notion. Dont blame the drug for the actions of a nutjob who would have likely done the same had be been completely lucid.

Are you a paranoid or non-paranoid schizophrenic? No? Than the no pot smoking rule does not apply to you. It specifically harms schizophrenics because it rapidly advances their disconnect from reality. Thus the peanut allergy reference.

It is assumed, there is a lacking of empirical evidence to support it. Beyond that.. My point is still the same, Saying pot had something to do with it only really flies if the guy had been smoking recently, Not a 2-3 year gap since last usage, or else he would have been more likely to do it 2-3 years earlier.

 

[Souplex]

Welcome to the Escapist!
Rule 1: Don't talk aboot the Escapist.
Rule 2: No outside food.
Rule 3: Don't be a jerk.
Rule 4: Don't repeat my threads.
http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/18.146207-Poll-Fun-control#3329136

 

[latenightapplepie]

No. But neither should people who don't have mental illnesses really.

 

[Xsistence13]

All mental illnesses, without a doubt not. Just revise a Florida policy where the people who have been bakeracted cannot own a gun.

 

[Blindrooster]

It doesn't matter, really. Keep the laws the same. Someone with serious mental illniss couldn't get guns anyways. besides, we usually diagnose them as mentally ill AFTER they do something stupid. On the other hand, if the person is smart enough and determined enough to kill somebody it's not that incredibly difficult to get a hold of a gun.

 

[RaphaelsRedemption]

A lot of mental illnesses are utter bullshit and/or improperly diagnosed by asstards out of medical school that want some reason to give Big Pharma enough money to justify all the kickbacks they get from them.

Fuck the American Medical System. I'd rather live in Canada...sooner rather than later.

If you're mentally-unstable enough to have to see someone that says you're mentally ill, you thereby give up your right to own guns. Sucks to be you. Should be required to give up voting as well, and perhaps a few months in shitty minimum-wage jobs might do ya some good...

Please tell me you're joking.

As someone with bipolar disorder, I can tell you this: you've obviously never experienced a mental illness, or you would be more sympathetic.

I DO work a shitty minimum-wage job, and pay for my own treatment. I DO take responsibility for myself, and know some things are unwise for me to do (such as own a gun).

However, my having a mental illness does not automatically mean I am stupid and cannot think for myself. I'm quite intelligent enough to make decisions for myself and do not need other people to restrict my freedom and tell me what I can and cannot do.

So, while I hope you were joking, I also hope you realise that suggesting that people with mental illnesses have their freedoms curtailed and be treated like inferior citizens is quite offensive.

 

[Gruevy]

They should make a special case for people whose OCD routine involves shooting a politician once a day.

 

[AK47Marine]

It's already illegal in most states for people listed as dangerous to themselves/others due to mental complications to own firearms, in the case of Mr. Laughner he was undiagnosed and even if he was the system that supposedly funnels mental health info in to the same giant info pool of the NCIC (where are firearms background checks go) is to say the least pretty jacked up. Not the fault of the federales but more to do with issues with privacy laws and the mental health care side of the equation.

So should dangerous individuals be allowed to purchase firearms is really the question and the answer is no of course not, but like everything else there's always issues with that. Especially with undiagnosed individuals.

 

[Wintermoot]

it shouldnt be sold to people with disseases like hearing voices and stuff like that (the people that say stuff like "the voices made me do it")

 

[Ham_authority95]

Welcome to the Escapist!
Rule 1: Don't talk aboot the Escapist.
Rule 2: No outside food.
Rule 3: Don't be a jerk.
Rule 4: Don't repeat my threads.
http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/18.146207-Poll-Fun-control#3329136

So, why the fuck are you railing your 1 1/2 year old thread for anyway? There where threads before yours...

 

[Simskiller]

It really depends on the mental illness. Most people with OCD or ADHD aren't unstable. This should be taken on a case-by-case basis. If you're stable and functional, go right ahead I say.

I don't know... I have ADHD and if I owned a gun with a laser sight... well lets just say I MIGHT get distracted and wave the shiny light around and it MIGHT go off in the direction of some people... purely by accident. Honest.

If no, I cannot own a gun because of people deciding because of who I am(even though it isn't an illness), I don't need to defend myself from people trying to stab me or burn my house down for said previous reason.

If yes, I can.

Depends on how you define "Illness".

I demand my right to defend my house from the nutjobs in my neighborhood(Read: Everyone) who want to take away my daughter while killing me in front of her to prove a sick point.

Ahh, America, how I hate most of your citizens.

You have a daughter? Cool, I tip my hate to you good sir. Keep Child and Family services away.

I don't think a ban would apply to all mental illnesses, in the case of OCD; the worst thing that would come of that is needing an even number of guns.

I hope that was intended as a pun.

... *Squints* I... see no pun there?

 

[Something Amyss]

... *Squints* I... see no pun there?

Sorry, was giving you the benefit of the doubt that you understood OCD and were merely making a bad joke.

 

[Koeryn]

I said 'undecided', because you have no 'depends' option. Because it really depends. Paranoid Schizophrenic? No, you should absolutely NOT own firearms.

I believe that mental illnesses and their current state of treatment should be a required part of the background check, with a list of "ABSOLUTELY NOT" items.

 

[badgersprite]

The reason I think people with the more severe mental illnesses and psychological disorders shouldn't be allowed to own guns (and I'm speaking as a bipolar person here) is that we're way more likely to commit suicide when we have access to firearms. Guns account for a huge proportion of suicides in the US. And presumably in other countries with similar laws and similar mental illness figures.

I'm not saying that the absence of guns makes people less likely to kill themselves. My own grandfather hung himself after the government reclaimed his firearms, but, hey, the next time I sink into a depressed state and my condition renders me unable to think or reason clearly, the last thing I want to have in the house then is a lethal implement like a gun. I damn well want to live, but my disorder very much overrides me the person when it strikes. If I don't trust myself around guns, then it goes without saying that I don't really trust people in similar mental health situations either...

 

[mindlesspuppet]

Eh, pretty much anyone can/would be diagnosed with some mental illness. There's a lot of money to be made in medicating people who aren't sick.