How do you feel about the proposed new gun law?

[dilligaf0]

A bill is flying through Congress to repeal a law that bans people that are too mentally unstable to handle their own life . (They cannot take care of their own life affairs with out a caregiver make decisions, handle their money, etc.),
The bill will would make it legal for them to own guns.

 

[JickyJuly]

It sounds terrible. Is there a reasoning behind it?

 

[MFCGod]

If what you said is accurate then how are they going to go buy a gun anyway if they don't have access to their own money?

 

[MFCGod]

This article says

http://www.snopes.com/congress-gun-legal-mental/

"The repeal does not change any actual firearm regulations; there have been (and still are) laws on the books that prohibit the sale of guns to some groups of people based on mental illness."

What they're trying to change is this

"Under the Obama rule, information from the Social Security Administration regarding mental disability benefits would be added to the National Instant Criminal Background Check database for use in firearm background checks."

So they aren't trying to change any laws, just how background checks are done

^ This is all as far as I can tell from this article anyway, may be wrong

Maybe they feel adding disability benefits information to the national criminal check database could somehow be misused or is a breach or privacy

 

[justjoinedtopost]

A bill is flying through Congress to repeal a law that bans people that are too mentally unstable to handle their own life . (They cannot take care of their own life affairs with out a caregiver make decisions, handle their money, etc.),
The bill will would make it legal for them to own guns.

I think the original law was garbage. It offered the illusion of safety, in exchange for giving an already overwhelming bureaucracy more rules. A bandaid on a severed limb.

I don't think anyone is one bit safer with this law. And repealing it doesn't represent any great gains in the name of liberty.

 

[JickyJuly]

New If what you said is accurate then how are they going to go buy a gun anyway if they don't have access to their own money?

Usually, if a disabled person needs a payee, it will just be a family member. I am a payee. I make sure the money covers needs, and at the end of the year fill out a document about what percentage is used for housing, food, medical and recreation. The payee is allowed to give the person money for personal use. So, they do have access to money depending on the situation. If they don't have someone in their life to act as a payee, they have to have a prof one. In that case, access to recreational funds is maybe less?

 

[LioraVox]

This article says

http://www.snopes.com/congress-gun-legal-mental/

"The repeal does not change any actual firearm regulations; there have been (and still are) laws on the books that prohibit the sale of guns to some groups of people based on mental illness."

What they're trying to change is this

"Under the Obama rule, information from the Social Security Administration regarding mental disability benefits would be added to the National Instant Criminal Background Check database for use in firearm background checks."

So they aren't trying to change any laws, just how background checks are done

^ This is all as far as I can tell from this article anyway, may be wrong

Maybe they feel adding disability benefits information to the national criminal check database could somehow be misused or is a breach or privacy

Why WOULDNT they want to check mental stability before selling legal firearms to someone? A breach of privacy is bullshit when it comes to owning a gun, imo. There's so many mass murders that just go out and shoot people for whatever reason they feel like-then they play the "mentally ill" card to get a lesser sentence. Why wouldnt the gov't want to nip that in the bud?

 

[JerryBoBerry]

More power to em. Get rid of them while they can. Too many idiotic gun laws on the books as it is. Repeal them while they have the power to do it.

 

[fandango]

This seems like the stupidest thing ever. Why on earth would you want more guns in the hands of people who are already known to be mentally ill? It's just asking for trouble.

 

[justjoinedtopost]

This seems like the stupidest thing ever. Why on earth would you want more guns in the hands of people who are already known to be mentally ill? It's just asking for trouble.

Why would you NOT want a gun in the hands someone known to be mentally ill?

 

[Gen]

I wonder if there is any distinction in the application between what would and wouldn't get you denied. Like how they would classify that, or if it's just anyone receiving these benefits is automatically denied.

I guess I'd support keeping it as part of a background check, but I do think the vague concept of "mental health" is often just a talking point with few actionable ideas behind it. A lot of gun crime seems to be committed by paranoid extremists, but that describes a lot of gun owners and you can't throw someone in the asylum for being kind of extra. I'm always curious, for the people who immediately go to "we need mental health" after a shooting, what their ideas are. You can't force someone into therapy, you can't force someone who IS in therapy to actually benefit from it, you can't diagnose or pathologize everything and even if you could, doesn't mean you can access the people who need help or treat it. I also believe generally in working within the system you have and I wonder what large-scale mental health initiatives America would actually get on board with.

I'm a Canadian so I share the common national view of "why the fuck does everyone need a gun", but I wonder if there's evidence of this helping prevent gun violence? Does it make a huge difference if I can't get a gun but I live at home with my family who all has guns? Is there evidence that people on mental disability are more violent or otherwise more likely to misuse a gun? Looking at people who commit gun crimes, is there evidence that people on mental disability are over represented? I have a lot more questions than answers, I guess.

 

[JoleneBrody]

I'm not sure exactly how to answer the poll. are you asking yes or no do i agree with the original law or yes or no do I agree with the bill to repeal it?

 

[MFCGod]

Why WOULDNT they want to check mental stability before selling legal firearms to someone? A breach of privacy is bullshit when it comes to owning a gun, imo. There's so many mass murders that just go out and shoot people for whatever reason they feel like-then they play the "mentally ill" card to get a lesser sentence. Why wouldnt the gov't want to nip that in the bud?

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/feb/16/nra-republicans-gun-control-science

This article says

Advocacy groups, including the American Civil Liberties Union, the National Association for Mental Health, the American Association of People with Disabilities, and the federal government’s own advisory group, the National Council on Disability, opposed the measure, arguing that it deprived Americans of a constitutional right without due process.

“There is no data to support a connection between the need for a representative payee to manage one’s social security disability benefits and a propensity toward gun violence,” the ACLU argued in a letter supporting the rollback of the rule.

The Bazelon Center for Mental Health Law said the rule “creates a false sense that meaningful action has been taken to address gun violence, and detracts from potential prevention efforts targeting actual risks”.

 

[AmberCutie]

More power to em. Get rid of them while they can. Too many idiotic gun laws on the books as it is. Repeal them while they have the power to do it.

Is a background check procedure really an actual gun law, though? Thus the disagree. I may not have a firm stance on one side or the other on gun laws in general, but Obama's rule doesn't seem like something smart to get rid of.

I feel like every time there's a shooting, there's a "guns don't kill people, people kill people" argument from gun supporters. They shout about how banning guns is bad and wrong, and there's a lot of yelling about focusing on mental illness yadda yadda.

So a pro-gun dude saying that this should be repealed seems, I dunno, counterintuitive?

 

[JickyJuly]

Did the gun law only affect disabled people who have a payee? I think to have an SSDI payee you either have to be a danger to your own money (addiction) or mentally incapable of handling money. Those seem like okay groups to take guns away from. And, they're allowed to appeal the decision to require a payee. So, if you lumped gun ownership in with that they would still be getting due process.

 

[dilligaf0]

I'm not sure exactly how to answer the poll. are you asking yes or no do i agree with the original law or yes or no do I agree with the bill to repeal it?

Bill to repeal.

 

[Bocefish]

Without due process?

Ha!

Government's "Due process" is laughable, at best.

Remind us all again who vetted the mentally ill gentleman that stood next to Obama as his sign language interpreter?

The No-Fly list...

Not to mention the travel ban.

 

[justjoinedtopost]

The Bazelon Center for Mental Health Law said the rule “creates a false sense that meaningful action has been taken to address gun violence, and detracts from potential prevention efforts targeting actual risks”.

A complete charade.

I cleaned up shit and piss from several mentally ill people who cared more about getting an Egg McMuffin than getting a gun. One of whom alarmed the hell out of me when I found myself trapped between a wall, and him waving a butcher knife as he screamed at someone talking to him from the ceiling.

I have met 2 people who were disarmed by SWAT teams, undiagnosed until their run-ins with law enforcement.

I knew a man who was clearly mentally ill. Had guns until the day he died, was prone to waving them during bouts of road rage. Somehow managed to avoid shooting someone, or trouble with LEO. Had no business with a gun, didn't have a payee.

I knew a man who was a member of Mensa, severely mentally ill, disabled but capable. No reason to believe he was a threat...but if he was, would this law protect society in any way? (think Ted Kaczynski)

I have known several veterans, some disabled/some not, diagnosed and in treatment for mental illness (PTSD). Are the ones disabled and with a payee more of a threat than the ones who aren't?

If the mentally ill are dangerous, should they be allowed to drive? Should they be allowed to walk freely among us?

If guns in the hands of the mentally ill is a threat, shouldn't the focus be on confirming mental stability before allowing someone to get a gun? Is a token gesture on the back-end of any practical use?

Considering the easy availability of guns, is the notion of "allowing" someone to get a gun even realistic? Shall we ban teenagers, toddlers, and reckless idiots from having guns? Will this government that is "protecting" us refrain from gun-walking?

Just some random musings about this whole farce from a mentally ill, pro gun/pro gun regulation individual who, at the age of 10, used to wait for his dad to leave the house so he could play with his .38...

 

[ExcellaExe]

I'm kind of in a weird middle ground, because mental illness does not predispose one to be inherently violent (almost all of my family has some kind of issue, from bipolar, to OCD, to panic disorders, and my great aunt has a psychotic disorder I can't remember and she's more a danger to herself than to anyone else) and none of us have any tendencies towards outbursts--but, at the same time, I think that those who do have that proclivity, who aren't capable of knowing right from wrong, shouldn't be able to have access to guns. But, how do you get to that small difference of information without invading medical privacy? I have OCD, an anxiety disorder, and lingering ptsd. The only thing I'm a danger to is my sleep schedule.

So, on one hand, you can't treat all mental illnesses the same. We aren't all violent, we don't all abuse people, and the vast majority of us are actually pretty normal minus our brains are wired a bit wrong. But, on the other, I think that some kind of a closer look would be prudent, such as a case by case basis. But, that would require disclosure of medical history and psych evals, which opens up individuals to discrimination and worse.

I'm all for smart gun regulation. Don't get me wrong, I want better regulation and laws. But, this is a really nuanced issue that I don't think the law goes into with enough... savvy for lack of a better word.

 

[dilligaf0]

Are there any lines that should be drawn?
Should we allow guns for convicted criminals?
Certified mentally ill patients?
Now that he's free, should John Hinkley be allowed to have a gun?
Charles Manson if he ever gets out?
Are there any limits at all?

 

[ExcellaExe]

Are there any lines that should be drawn?
Should we allow guns for convicted criminals?
Certified mentally ill patients?
Now that he's free, should John Hinkley be allowed to have a gun?
Charles Manson if he ever gets out?
Are there any limits at all?

There definitely should be lines. I am in agreement with that.

 

[AudriTwo]

I grew up with guns. My dad and brothers all hunt. I own a rifle and I just sold my pistol because I want a new one. Shooting is fun, and I am a member of a gun club. I also shoot recurve bow.

There is a lot of responsibility when comes to owning a gun. Average gun owners understand that. First thing you do when anyone shows any mental problems, is remove the guns. When you are in that situation you don't know if they are going to harm themselves or someone else. I didn't have a problem with this check to be in place because I have met a lot of unstable people who should not own a gun.

I know bocefish is bringing up an incident that happened four years ago when some fucking how a schizophrenic stood in a sign language interpreter for Obama. It's fucking insane that it happened. I don't know what this has to do with this conversation, but whatever kellyanne. lol

My dad taught it to me perfectly. A gun is the most powerful thing you can carry. It should be a privilege and a responsibility, like driving a car. That being said. I would love for some required gun safety school classes.

 

[dilligaf0]

I don't know who was responsible for vetting the sign language interpreter since the service / incident was in South Africa

A related note: the Indiana legislature has an ultimate goal of eliminating all gun permits.
Any other states proposing this too?.

Note: This is NOT to eliminate guns, just the requirement for permits to carry them.

 

[Gen]

I looked up some info because it seems relevant:

"According to Appelbaum, less than 3% to 5% of US crimes involve people with mental illness, and the percentages of crimes that involve guns are lower than the national average for persons not diagnosed with mental illness. Databases that track gun homicides, such as the National Center for Health Statistics, similarly show that fewer than 5% of the 120 000 gun-related killings in the United States between 2001 and 2010 were perpetrated by people diagnosed with mental illness." (From American Journal of Public Health)

And then this article which is an interview with the authors of the study above, lists the most common broad predictive factors of gun violence:

• Drug and alcohol use
• History of violence
• Access to firearms
• Personal relationship stress

I appreciate their perspective that these kind of policies are based on societal fear of lone gunmen and mass shootings, and are misattributing the problem to people with mental illness rather than looking at factors for the more common types of gun violence.

 

[Johndoe91]

I don't know who was responsible for vetting the sign language interpreter since the service / incident was in South Africa

A related note: the Indiana legislature has an ultimate goal of eliminating all gun permits.
Any other states proposing this too?.

Note: This is NOT to eliminate guns, just the requirement for permits to carry them.

This is coming to be a much more common practice. I don't have a current list, but searching the term "constitutional Carry" and you will probably find one, along with the reasoning behind it

 

[CharlieCharma]

I do think background checks need to be changed. I think that if you're a non-violent felon, you should be able to own a gun. I don't think that people who are so mentally ill they can't even be responsible for their own money should have a gun though. Gun control is a complicated matter.