is there any way to keep firearms from the mentally ill?

Slippery slope but someone committed to a mental institution on lithium should not own a firearm.

There is not a mental health system in this country right now. It's politically incorrect to say someone is fricking crazy. Right now if a person is on anti-psychotic meds that information is only available to him, his/her doctor, and his/her pharmacist.

Make it where the background system has access to a revamped mental health system and he overwhelming majority of the mass shootings would stop.

They won't until then but the democrats want to get rid of all guns so they are more than happy to let the crazies get guns. It advances their agenda.

that sounds like a cop out to me
drug law is a failed policy that any non-moron can see only makes the problem worse. so I agree that non-specific illegality of firearms is doomed to fail

what I am asking is if there is a workable solution to restricting access to whack jobs that we as gun owners would be willing to support

when the gun grabbers wring their hands and rend their garments, they point to the rack of rifles at Walmart/academy/etc and the gun show free for all. in many states, if you want a bottle of whiskey you can't just pick it up at the gas station you have to go to a state liquor store

would we, if it helped ease the hysteria, agree to firearm sales only at firearms-only dealers, and would we accept registration and an extensive background check with specific disqualifiers for mental illness (along with providing to the database access to medical records)?

quote:

---

what I am asking is if there is a workable solution to restricting access to whack jobs that we as gun owners would be willing to support

---

The problem with your line of thought is that it isn't these whack jobs who commit the most murders in the US. Sure, they get the most attention because of the number of casualties, but the problem of gun murders in this country is confined mostly to two demographic groups: Urban blacks and drug dealers, and in some cases these two groups overlap.

This latest incident wasn't the result of some whack job. It was several people, probably quite sane and rational, who wanted to get rid of other people, for reasons as yet unknown. Crazy mass murderers don't generally travel around in groups.

Now, be that as it may, I am all for ensuring that crazy people can't get their hands on guns. But until the mental health system and the HIPAA laws are changed, that is going to be very tough to do.

LC

cocaine is illegal

addicted people get it every day

if guns were illegal

bad or ill people would still get them every day

quote:

---

The problems I see stems from what is the definition of mentally ill?

Anyone who has ever been on antidepressants?

Someone diagnosed who is bi polar, post partum depression, depressed from losing a loved one, etc.....

A minor committed for psych evaluation?

Someone who rants on social media?

This is the true issue defining mentally ill or mentally unstable.

Whose to say someone in their 20's that is deemed mentally unstable isn't stable enough in their 40's to own a gun.

---

This. All of this. We all go through ups and downs. Some seek help, some don't.

A background check prying into medical records is asking for a huge backlash. Just because someone is taking Zoloft doesn't mean they're a threat.

I think expanding laws concerning the lawful carry of a firearm could deter more criminal activity because a lot of gun crimes are committed in gun-free zones.

Will there still be instances where a bad guy goes into a building with bad intentions? Absolutely. But if you've got several people legally carrying, the odds are much more favorable for the good guys. You reduce the number of casualties from 10-30+ to maybe a handful, or possibly none if someone is quick enough to respond.

I just don't get the anti-gun crowd's logic when they think total disarmament is going to change anything.

Define mentally unbalanced and you have your answer

Aren't there already measures in place to report those deemed mentally ill by a court, panel, or board? It's more a matter of states failing to report the information.

Just because you go to a doctor after a shite storm in your life doesn't mean you are adjudicated. Hell, doctors write all kinds of shite in their records anyway. They may treat symptoms of a condition such as bipolar, but are you really bipolar? Or are you just going through a rough patch?

I think appropriate funding for such a project is a start, but exhaustive analysis of an individual must be taken into consideration before a panel of some sort. Doctors sometimes have agendas as well. Actual diagnosis needs to be in the opinion of more than one doctor before you try to strip someone of the right to own a firearm.

You can't just go around slapping labels on people who are getting treatment. If that's the case, you're going to see an increase in law-abiding citizens refusing to go to the doctor because they're afraid of the consequences concerning gun ownership. That's not a feasible solution.

There also needs to be a way for people to gain their rights back. You can't just take it away forever because of something like a death in the family causing so much grief that a person gets on an anti-depressant. You also cannot tell a person they can't own a gun because of a certain medication they take. Just because it treats schizophrenia doesn't mean you're schizo. It may treat a lot of other conditions.