General Discussion

HereSince1628

(36,063 posts)

19. The issue isn't really the presence of a 'serious mental condition'

Sat Jan 4, 2014, 12:12 AM

Jan 2014

the issue is a decision on whether a person is a 'danger to self, others or property'.

Although popular belief suggests that serious mental illness always or even usually makes the afflicted person either violent or incompetent, that's just popular belief.

A serious problem that laws don't actually address is, according to the APA, that even for person with 'serious' mental illnesses the psychiatric industry really cannot predict with any accuracy who will be a danger to self, others or property.

Some states like Texas, have attempted to address the issue with lists of mental illnesses that preclude gun purchases. But in the state with the worst numbers for getting people diagnoses the list really can't even address the intent of the legislature that created it.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

76 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

White House announces two new 'executive actions' on guns [View all] aikoaiko Jan 2014 OP

k&r... spanone Jan 2014 #1

If gunners really cared, they would not transfer a gun without FFL involved. Hoyt Jan 2014 #2

You have quite the imagination there. Ranchemp. Jan 2014 #18

I never do. Deep13 Jan 2014 #51

Thanks. I agree. I've seen some charge $35, but even paying that is responsible thing to do. Hoyt Jan 2014 #53

And if the state governments really cared they wouldn't require you to go just to an FFL Glassunion Jan 2014 #67

I like that Duckhunter935 Jan 2014 #69

That's good too. But, if the state doesn't, what do you think a so-called responsible gun owner Hoyt Jan 2014 #73

I have a feeling that soon Chuuku Davis Jan 2014 #3

Yeah, exactly what I took from this.... dhill926 Jan 2014 #4

Gun fanciers have been a bit out there too. I think if one has a DUI, they should not be able Hoyt Jan 2014 #5

Good thought. They should be charged with madinmaryland Jan 2014 #36

And I suppose shoplifters should never be allowed to shop again seveneyes Jan 2014 #65

How many innocent folks get killed, wounded, intimidated by a shoplifter or jaywalker? Hoyt Jan 2014 #72

I think being determined to be PARANOID might be a better reason. JoePhilly Jan 2014 #10

Oh sure, tip of the iceburg. Skip Intro Jan 2014 #17

bull & shit. spanone Jan 2014 #21

Apparently you are living in Wayne's World. It has gone exactly 180 degrees madinmaryland Jan 2014 #41

And gun owners have been a little whiny in the last 25 years. MyNameGoesHere Jan 2014 #50

little whiny Duckhunter935 Jan 2014 #58

Exactly! Just like you showed and example of. MyNameGoesHere Jan 2014 #66

In California, a bill passed the Legislature that would have given a 10 year petronius Jan 2014 #62

"militant anti-gunners" nuff said. You guys are all out tonight. madinmaryland Jan 2014 #6

Yup 1000words Jan 2014 #32

I'd like more detail X_Digger Jan 2014 #7

Not an executive order, but "statements", it's posted at the WH website here are HereSince1628 Jan 2014 #8

Ahh, thanks for the text! X_Digger Jan 2014 #9

Below is a link to the full White House fact sheet regarding the 'executive actions' Tx4obama Jan 2014 #13

Well, that's only mildly more explanatory.. X_Digger Jan 2014 #20

Found more info, links below Tx4obama Jan 2014 #27

Ahh, so a change to USC 922. That clarifies a lot. X_Digger Jan 2014 #29

Grade A post! TroglodyteScholar Jan 2014 #33

This message was self-deleted by its author Skip Intro Jan 2014 #42

Would you sell one of your guns to someone with a serious mental condition? Hoyt Jan 2014 #14

The issue isn't really the presence of a 'serious mental condition' HereSince1628 Jan 2014 #19

I don't think I've ever met a gun fancier capable of making that determination. Hoyt Jan 2014 #34

I would never knowingly sell to a prohibited person. X_Digger Jan 2014 #24

I know, you guys will find a way to rationalise taking the cash. Never had any doubt. Hoyt Jan 2014 #35

Details matter, Hoyt. Bloviating and hand-wringing don't actually *do* anything. X_Digger Jan 2014 #37

The only aspect of the problem that concerns you is how to protect your access to gunz and Hoyt Jan 2014 #39

^ Perfect example. Thanks for making my point for me. n/t X_Digger Jan 2014 #40

^^^^ Ranchemp. Jan 2014 #74

I don't know that there is a national standard for outpatient commitment. HereSince1628 Jan 2014 #16

Well, as long as there's an actual judicial hearing, with proper representation.. X_Digger Jan 2014 #26

Some who value individual rights and libeties don't like it either. Skip Intro Jan 2014 #11

See the link in Comment #13 Tx4obama Jan 2014 #15

Worse than I thought. Skip Intro Jan 2014 #30

Also see links in Comment #27 Tx4obama Jan 2014 #31

And even worse. n/t Skip Intro Jan 2014 #44

Skip, I think you may be reading more into it than is intended.. X_Digger Jan 2014 #43

I think you may be reading less into it as intended Skip Intro Jan 2014 #49

I'll await the final language for the proposed rule change, to be sure. n/t X_Digger Jan 2014 #56

Here's the proposed text.. X_Digger Jan 2014 #64

Great news. Get ready, gunners! FEMA camps by 2015! Pretzel_Warrior Jan 2014 #12

This message was self-deleted by its author freshwest Jan 2014 #46

" culture war against gun owners" bowens43 Jan 2014 #22

Ah, so now you've sunk to equating gun owners with cancer. Lizzie Poppet Jan 2014 #25

Hey gun fanciers use autos, flashlights, fire extinguishers, hammers, etc., to rationalize their Hoyt Jan 2014 #38

Oh, I get his "point" all right. Lizzie Poppet Jan 2014 #45

At least he's not trying to defend something that should be taboo in a civilized society - more Hoyt Jan 2014 #47

I didn't really expect anything better than a "tu quoque" fallacy. Lizzie Poppet Jan 2014 #48

Keep it up Hoyt, Ranchemp. Jan 2014 #54

Nah, best spokespersons are militia types, preepies, bigots, white wing, Hoyt Jan 2014 #59

You're a riot. Ranchemp. Jan 2014 #61

These are sensible steps. Lizzie Poppet Jan 2014 #23

Well, I don't see this as a wider range of records, but more of the records that the law intended.. X_Digger Jan 2014 #28

Honestly, I'm not so keen on mental health providers turning over confidential... Deep13 Jan 2014 #52

Most murders are not committed by crazy people. gwheezie Jan 2014 #55

lot of word salad Duckhunter935 Jan 2014 #57

Oh NOES! 99Forever Jan 2014 #60

'Obama's comin' to git arr gunzzz!!!' onehandle Jan 2014 #63

Actually, a good discussion, here. Something you can't abide. nt Eleanors38 Jan 2014 #68

You notice that Duckhunter935 Jan 2014 #70

I've long contended gun-control is an elitist outlook. DU proves it... Eleanors38 Jan 2014 #75

Won't this require a change to the HIPPA law? Calista241 Jan 2014 #71

There's a "culture war" against gun owners? Blue_Tires Jan 2014 #76