Skip to main content

View Diary: Alright. I'll have a conversation. (217 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  would that be "crazy" with, or without meds? (4+ / 0-)

    the first of many, many, many near impossible questions on-topic.

    It seems curiosity has killed the cat that had my tongue.

    by Murphoney on Sat Dec 15, 2012 at 09:01:47 AM PST

    •  That would be mentally ill period, diagnosed, ... (4+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      beltane, bluedust, LeftArmed, gerrilea

      ever, under treatment doesn't mean recovered, mental illness is rarely episodic and should disqualify a person from gun ownership. The other actions posited, would be very difficult constitutionally, especially allowing warrantless search and seizure, this is tantamount to putting everyone who owns a gun in the status of a convicted criminal on parole. Interesting ideas...

      "Intelligence is quickness in seeing things as they are..." George Santayana

      by KJG52 on Sat Dec 15, 2012 at 09:12:04 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  if treatment wouldn't satisfy the censors, then (4+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        bluedust, PavePusher, gerrilea, rockhound

        neither would an indefinite lapse in symptoms.

        but, then, who's to say what kind of crazy is crazy-enough?

        Let's remember how many active service men and women (and police officers, and intelligence personnel) would be instantly disqualified from access to firearms, for untold numbers of reasons (like being in battle, for instance, and suffering from PTSD...or anxiety).

        It seems curiosity has killed the cat that had my tongue.

        by Murphoney on Sat Dec 15, 2012 at 09:21:44 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  Absolutely fucking not. (6+ / 0-)

        There is enough of a stigma attached to mental illness as it is. There shouldn't be anything more discouraging people who have had mental issues from seeking the treatment they need.

        A large number of Americans could benefit from mental health assistance who do not currently receive it; I want nothing to do with any measure that would effectively criminalize those who do.

        If their psychiatrist believes they are a clear and present danger, I believe they can already pursue a court judgment to that effect which will ban them from having guns.

        You can't medicalize away the Constitution, and requiring doctors to be judge and jury of a citizen's civil rights will destroy their ability to properly serve their actual profession, which is medical, not legal. I do not want a slippery slope where medical officials will not only judge but be required to judge everyone who comes before them of what kind of citizen they can be.

        The number of lives lost or ruined to a system which would do this, in the form of people who do not seek treatment where needed, even suicides, will dwarf what is lost to these shootings.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site