I hate to be political but if your gun rights are sacred to you then ....

quote:

---

Chris Rock dropped out of high school in the 10th grade and you are going to educate me on the 2nd amendment. Bitch you can't spell the word amendment.

---

Ok,,,,

There is a background check and that may soon delve into mental issues on medical records and that's fine but to relieve our 2nd admin rights because the politicians want to try a witch hunt is BS. We are beyond that and let's move on.

I can tell you as someone with a lot of years in psychology plus a degree in it that you should definitely NOT trust the idea that somehow we're going to be able to define some kind of psychological condition as being the thing that indicates someone is homicidal. DSM 5 is about to come out and if the past few have been any indication, it's going to have politically correct bullshite built into it so that aberrant behavior is defined by liberal political correctness.

I don't have a problem with them designating homosexuality, gender confusion, etc as no longer being considered psychological conditions worthy of a designation in the DSM. What I do have a problem with is the fact that this is happening every time they revise the DSM based on whatever the popular liberal opinion is. I'm sorry, but not all gender confusion is ok and not an indication of mental illness. Which tells me that the people in charge of changing the DSM are politically driven. I had too many patients that gender confusion was DEFINITELY aberrant and contributed to other psychological problems that apparently now are no longer illness in spite of the fact that these people are most definitely having real psychological base level problems.

And the DSM is the be all, end all tome of what is considered mental illness. And it's completely made up by people with an agenda who KNOW that a lot of what they are blowing off is not in their patients best interests.

It's a complicated subject all tied up in insurance payments and whatnot but believe me when I tell you that you do not want these people deciding what constitutes behaviors that allow you to maintain your civil rights. Psychology is an individual sport so to speak. To make broad sweeping judgments based on the the decisions of people who've never met the patient involved are dangerous and easily manipulated.

Do not trust the APA to determine if you are worthy of holding the same rights they have. And Obamacare has made this concern much more important.

quote:

---

I know of a few people I can personally name that are on some sort of low-dose medication.

---

I personally am one of those people. I suffer from a light anxiety disorder. Am I homicidal? Absolutely not. Its embarrassing, butI'm just a guy who had a lot of shite go on in my life the past few years. In no way am I incapable of doing any task. I'm a responsible gun owner. Always have been, always will be.

That's the thing though. One guy goes on a shooting spree that's on a prescribed drug and you can bet your arse that with the Alex Jones nutjobs screaming that it's all the drugs fault, they're gonna throw them a bone and blame it on the drugs and include that as a reason why you can't have a gun.

Are there legitimate reasons to look into the connections between psychotropic meds and these extreme violent behaviors? frick yes there are. But for 999 out of 1000 people on them, that's not an issue. It's got to be up to the Dr. He's the only one in this equation that has a fricking clue what's going on with that patient. And this Obamacare shite is practically a 180 degree teflon surface for slippery slope. It's a back door way to take your rights.