MRA gets it wrong on mental health gun bill

[JimBowie1958]

Mental health gun bill goes to Scott's desk | News - Home

Supporters said the bill will only cover people who would otherwise be committed under the Baker Act. Commitment requires a diagnosis of mental illness and is considered harmful to themselves or others.

Opponents worry the new bill creates unreasonable time frames for doctors to make life altering diagnosis.

Mental Health professionals worry if the governor signs the bill into law, fewer people will seek mental healthcare treatment.

“I think the people who have to implement this bill will find out it’s a lot more complicated and difficult to implement than anyone envisioned,” said Bryant.

Hammer said after a person with mental illness is treated, they’ll be able to petition the court to get their gun rights back.

“They will not be able to purchase a gun until they have been treated, and a psychiatrist says they need relief from disability,” said Hammer.

The problem is that gun grabbing tugs often make restrictions retroactive. ie you are diagnosed with a mental illness today but can still use your gun because you were nonviolent. Ten years later the libtards change the law so that any mental illness violent or not disqualifies you and then apply that new standard to all past diagnosis, then millions lose their gun rights.

And it doesn't have to be a serious mental illness as so many new harmless mental disorders have been added to the manual with more to come I am sure.

15 New Mental Illnesses in the DSM-5

15 New Mental Illnesses in the DSM-5

Binge Eating Disorder
One of the less controversial new entries, this disorder is similar to other eating disorders but is not the same as overeating or bulimia. The disorder is characterized by eating large amounts of food, usually when alone, very quickly, often to the point of creating physical pain.

Caffeine Withdrawal
Controversial, to say the least, critics often include those who have had serious addictions to illicit drugs, alcohol, or nicotine who scoff at the idea that caffeine can have much of a withdrawal effect. Nevertheless, this is one of the appendices to DSM-IV that is now official in DSM-5.

Cannabis Withdrawal
Similar to caffeine above, this one has generated much controversy. Some studies have shown that marijuana addiction, though not necessarily serious, does likely exist in some users. It can now be treated in a way similar to how withdrawal from other prescribed drugs are handled.

Central Sleep Apnea
One of the major revamps the DSM-5 makes is to separate and make more clear many sleep disorders. This new disorder is not actually new, just more precise, and is meant to match current medical knowledge of sleep disorders.

Disinhibited Social Engagement Disorder
Often mistaken for ADHD, this is a disorder in children marked by impulsive, inattentive behavior. It has been removed from Reactive Attachment Disorder, as the American Psychiatry Association says it may not actually include a lack of attachments.

Disruptive Mood Dysregulation Disorder
Limited to children under 18, it is meant for kids with chronic temper tantrums defined as "extreme, explosive rages."

Excoriation (Skin-picking) Disorder
Added to the list of obsessive-compulsive disorders (OCDs), this condition is characterized by the chronic picking or scratching of skin. Enough so that if it causes wounds (scabs), it is a disorder when not a symptom of another disorder.

Hoarding Disorder
The subject of much commentary and late night jokes, Hoarding Disorder is considered very real by many psychologists and is defined as "persistent difficulty discarding or parting with possessions due to a perceived need to save the items and distress associated with discarding them."

Yeah, it is plausible that with a solid Democrat congress and governor in some future period in Florida they could pass a law that , in effect, makes you unqualified to own a gun because you once had temper tantrums when a child, or you have had Marijuana withdrawal, or currently have sleep apnea.

No fucking joke.

 

[whitehall]

You can make it easy and cut through the B.S. Court ordered psychiatric treatment should automatically exclude gun ownership. The monster who committed the worst act of mass murder on a college campus at Blacksburg Va. Tech was under court ordered psychiatric treatment for incidents that should have led to arrest but that's another story. PTSS (Veterans) patients should be barred from purchasing a firearm while they collect government pensions.

 

[JimBowie1958]

You can make it easy and cut through the B.S. Court ordered psychiatric treatment should automatically exclude gun ownership. The monster who committed the worst act of mass murder on a college campus at Blacksburg Va. Tech was under court ordered psychiatric treatment for incidents that should have led to arrest but that's another story. PTSS (Veterans) patients should be barred from purchasing a firearm while they collect government pensions.

The most extreme cases are easy to call worthy of being disarmed, but should we trust that role to a bunch of liberal elitists like the psychiatric/psychologists of the US?

No, we should not. And it wouldn't stop with these violent mental diagnosis; within a few decades (if that long) the shrinks would have people banned from possessing guns for having any mental disorder whatsoever, or having EVER had one. And the number of different disorders will grow and the scope their use will grow as well.

No, taking someone's guns away on the advise of some shrink that just might not like someone is bullshit.

 

[KissMy]

I am all for taking gun rights from crazy people. It is much better than gun registration for everyone. They just need to limit the percent of the population they deem crazy to 6 percent at any given time so government can't abuse it.

 

[whitehall]

You gotta start somewhere so we should agree that court ordered psychiatric treatment and Veterans who admit to psychiatric problems to the extent that they collect disability should be excluded from possessing firearms.

 

[JimBowie1958]

You gotta start somewhere so we should agree that court ordered psychiatric treatment and Veterans who admit to psychiatric problems to the extent that they collect disability should be excluded from possessing firearms.

Why do you have to start with anything short of a crime or threat of a crime?

 

[whitehall]

What sort of mental illness would be acceptable? Are you going to authorize the sale of a gun to a diagnosed schizophrenic and wait for him to commit a crime? How about a person who avoids prosecution for a felony with court ordered psychiatric counseling like the Va Tech shooter?

 

[dilloduck]

You gotta start somewhere so we should agree that court ordered psychiatric treatment and Veterans who admit to psychiatric problems to the extent that they collect disability should be excluded from possessing firearms.

Not this one again. What do you have against Vets who have psychiatric issues ?

 

[RetiredGySgt]

You gotta start somewhere so we should agree that court ordered psychiatric treatment and Veterans who admit to psychiatric problems to the extent that they collect disability should be excluded from possessing firearms.

Veterans that receive disability pay for mental disorders are not for the most part violent. Yet you would make them all suffer. Once again it takes a Judge to make that determination under federal law.

You want my weapons come try and take them.

 

[whitehall]

You gotta start somewhere so we should agree that court ordered psychiatric treatment and Veterans who admit to psychiatric problems to the extent that they collect disability should be excluded from possessing firearms.

Not this one again. What do you have against Vets who have psychiatric issues ?

I have nothing against Vets and I think their psychiatric issues are private and of concern only to themselves. The problem is when psychiatric issues are so acute that some Vets become mentally disabled to the point that they are awarded a disability pension. How on earth could a sane person recommend the sale of firearms to persons who are so mentally unstable that they are awarded a government pension? The Gunny sez that mentally disabled Veterans are "for the most part" non violent. Is that reassuring to anyone?

 

[RetiredGySgt]

You gotta start somewhere so we should agree that court ordered psychiatric treatment and Veterans who admit to psychiatric problems to the extent that they collect disability should be excluded from possessing firearms.

Not this one again. What do you have against Vets who have psychiatric issues ?

I have nothing against Vets and I think their psychiatric issues are private and of concern only to themselves. The problem is when psychiatric issues are so acute that some Vets become mentally disabled to the point that they are awarded a disability pension. How on earth could a sane person recommend the sale of firearms to persons who are so mentally unstable that they are awarded a government pension? The Gunny sez that mentally disabled Veterans are "for the most part" non violent. Is that reassuring to anyone?

Federal Law is clear. To be adjudicated mentally incompetent requires a JUDGE. To remove 2nd Amendment rights requires a JUDGE. You got something against the law?

 

[JimBowie1958]

You can make it easy and cut through the B.S. Court ordered psychiatric treatment should automatically exclude gun ownership. The monster who committed the worst act of mass murder on a college campus at Blacksburg Va. Tech was under court ordered psychiatric treatment for incidents that should have led to arrest but that's another story. PTSS (Veterans) patients should be barred from purchasing a firearm while they collect government pensions.

What is the evidence that PTSS vets are more inclined to violence than average folks in say DC?

If the mental cases are not more violent than DC is, then how do you justify stripping them of their rights?

I am truly sick of these trumped up media cases. Used to be that type of case was considered an anomaly and not something you could categorically respond to.

But now, everyone seems OKJ with the idea of stripping millions of people of their rights due to the depravity of a few. And it is depravity, not mental illness.

 

[JimBowie1958]

You gotta start somewhere so we should agree that court ordered psychiatric treatment and Veterans who admit to psychiatric problems to the extent that they collect disability should be excluded from possessing firearms.

Not this one again. What do you have against Vets who have psychiatric issues ?

I have nothing against Vets and I think their psychiatric issues are private and of concern only to themselves. The problem is when psychiatric issues are so acute that some Vets become mentally disabled to the point that they are awarded a disability pension. How on earth could a sane person recommend the sale of firearms to persons who are so mentally unstable that they are awarded a government pension? The Gunny sez that mentally disabled Veterans are "for the most part" non violent. Is that reassuring to anyone?

Because that 'mental disability' could be any number of nonviolent and nonthreatening things, like constant headaches or recurring nightmares.

Why should someone lose their gun ownership rights because they have migraines or sleeplessness because they served our country in a time of war?

 

[whitehall]

That's not true. The government restricts the possession of firearms for all sorts of reasons related to mental incompetence. Read an ATF application for the purchase of a firearm. You are not doing the Nation a service by allowing Veterans or anyone else to possess firearms who admit to being so mentally impaired that the government awards them a pension.

 

[whitehall]

We are all adults here. Let's admit that there are degrees of PTSD. There are the PTSD Veterans who wake up in the middle of the night screaming and instinctively reach for a gun. There are PTSD patients who are detached from reality to a degree that they are unable to function in society. There are PSTD patients who are heavily medicated by V.A. doctors and there are the guys (in the majority?) who are pretty good actors who swallowed their pride and managed to convince Uncle to send them a check every month in exchange for a visit to a psychiatric clinic every so often. Do we authorize them all to purchase weapons?

 

[JimBowie1958]

We are all adults here. Let's admit that there are degrees of PTSD. There are the PTSD Veterans who wake up in the middle of the night screaming and instinctively reach for a gun. There are PTSD patients who are detached from reality to a degree that they are unable to function in society. There are PSTD patients who are heavily medicated by V.A. doctors and there are the guys (in the majority?) who are pretty good actors who swallowed their pride and managed to convince Uncle to send them a check every month in exchange for a visit to a psychiatric clinic every so often. Do we authorize them all to purchase weapons?

You're asking the wrong question.

The right question is, 'On what basis do we strip away God given rights to bear arms and defend yourself?' IMO, some very serious problems have to justify taking away those rights.

For comparison, imagine you were a Democrat and we were talking about taking way voting rights; capice?

 

[whitehall]

We are all adults here. Let's admit that there are degrees of PTSD. There are the PTSD Veterans who wake up in the middle of the night screaming and instinctively reach for a gun. There are PTSD patients who are detached from reality to a degree that they are unable to function in society. There are PSTD patients who are heavily medicated by V.A. doctors and there are the guys (in the majority?) who are pretty good actors who swallowed their pride and managed to convince Uncle to send them a check every month in exchange for a visit to a psychiatric clinic every so often. Do we authorize them all to purchase weapons?

You're asking the wrong question.

The right question is, 'On what basis do we strip away God given rights to bear arms and defend yourself?' IMO, some very serious problems have to justify taking away those rights.

For comparison, imagine you were a Democrat and we were talking about taking way voting rights; capice?

I doubt if the Founding Fathers or King George would have authorized the possession of firearms by crazy people. We are at a time in society where we have to determine how crazy you can admit to being and still buy a freaking gun. Well, how crazy can you be?

 

[RetiredGySgt]

We are all adults here. Let's admit that there are degrees of PTSD. There are the PTSD Veterans who wake up in the middle of the night screaming and instinctively reach for a gun. There are PTSD patients who are detached from reality to a degree that they are unable to function in society. There are PSTD patients who are heavily medicated by V.A. doctors and there are the guys (in the majority?) who are pretty good actors who swallowed their pride and managed to convince Uncle to send them a check every month in exchange for a visit to a psychiatric clinic every so often. Do we authorize them all to purchase weapons?

You're asking the wrong question.

The right question is, 'On what basis do we strip away God given rights to bear arms and defend yourself?' IMO, some very serious problems have to justify taking away those rights.

For comparison, imagine you were a Democrat and we were talking about taking way voting rights; capice?

I doubt if the Founding Fathers or King George would have authorized the possession of firearms by crazy people. We are at a time in society where we have to determine how crazy you can admit to being and still buy a freaking gun. Well, how crazy can you be?

The law already covers that. You think someone is to crazy to own a gun? Get a Judge to rule so. Otherwise you are nothing but a petty tyrant.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

That's not true. The government restricts the possession of firearms for all sorts of reasons related to mental incompetence. Read an ATF application for the purchase of a firearm. You are not doing the Nation a service by allowing Veterans or anyone else to possess firearms who admit to being so mentally impaired that the government awards them a pension.

Unless charged with a domestic violence charge, convicted of a felony, or ordered by a Judge as incompetent or required to stay at a mental facility, no one loses their rights.

You don't like the law? To damn bad.

 

[whitehall]

We aren't talking about a nut case who happens to be a neighbor. Who are we to judge what is crazy unless they commit a crime? We are talking about people who admit that they are suffering from a mental illness so severe that they are awarded a disability by the government. The Attorney General and the Pentagon signs off on PTSD disability cases and presumably there are psychiatrists employed by the federal government who testify to the mental incompetence of PTSD patients. Which ones should be allowed to purchase a firearm? Mild PTSD patients or drooling psychopaths?