Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Gun Control & RKBA
In reply to the discussion: Mental Illness and Gun Ownership [View all]spin
(17,493 posts)49. You reminded me of Catch 22...
Catch-22
Catch-22 is a satirical, historical novel by the American author Joseph Heller. He began writing it in 1953, and the novel was first published in 1961. It is set during World War II in 1943[2] and is frequently cited as one of the great literary works of the twentieth century.[3] It has a distinctive non-chronological style where events are described from different characters' points of view and out of sequence so that the time line develops along with the plot.
The novel follows Captain John Yossarian, a U.S. Army Air Forces B-25 bombardier, and a number of other characters. Most events occur while the Airmen of the fictional 256th squadron are based on the island of Pianosa, in the Mediterranean Sea west of Italy.
Among other things, Catch-22 is a general critique of bureaucratic operation and reasoning. Resulting from its specific use in the book, the phrase "Catch-22" is common idiomatic usage meaning "a no-win situation" or "a double bind" of any type. Within the book, "Catch-22" is a military rule, the self-contradictory circular logic that, for example, prevents anyone from avoiding combat missions. In Heller's own words:
There was only one catch and that was Catch-22, which specified that a concern for one's safety in the face of dangers that were real and immediate was the process of a rational mind. Orr was crazy and could be grounded. All he had to do was ask; and as soon as he did, he would no longer be crazy and would have to fly more missions. Orr would be crazy to fly more missions and sane if he didn't, but if he were sane he had to fly them. If he flew them he was crazy and didn't have to; but if he didn't want to he was sane and had to. Yossarian was moved very deeply by the absolute simplicity of this clause of Catch-22 and let out a respectful whistle. (p. 46, ch. 5)...emphasis added
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catch-22
edited to add link
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:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
I agree that a lot of these "illnesses" should not disqualify someone from gun ownership.
enough
Dec 2011
#4
In Indiana, if you've sought treatment from a Mental Health Professional, you have to state such
BiggJawn
Dec 2011
#30
Federal Law prohibits anyone who has been adjudicated mentally ill from possessing a firearm
aikoaiko
Dec 2011
#8
I thought that part of that process waas determining if one presented a danger to others...
PavePusher
Dec 2011
#10
Adjudicated mentally incompetent or involuntarily committed to a mental institution.
Atypical Liberal
Dec 2011
#18
I'm happy to say that I totally agree with you, and I think we both agree with the law.
TPaine7
Dec 2011
#19
I agree anorexia, grief counseling, etc., should not be grounds. But, how about being a gun "nut?"
Hoyt
Dec 2011
#20
And where is that found in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders?
friendly_iconoclast
Dec 2011
#21
Right next to "gun fetish." If you think guns are equivalent to the issues you mention,
Hoyt
Dec 2011
#22
Hey, we've been looking at guns same old way for hundreds of years. Time to update the diagnosis.
Hoyt
Dec 2011
#24
Is there some reason you can't post in a thread without bringing up open or concealed carry?
AtheistCrusader
Dec 2011
#25
Hey, I'm against guns in public. All your posts promote guns. Finally, try Ignore.
Hoyt
Dec 2011
#26
You sure make a lot of accusations for someone with no medical qualifications.
PavePusher
Dec 2011
#37
Qwners not necessarily. Need to rule it out for those who strap one/two on before walking out door.
Hoyt
Dec 2011
#44
"Is one who walks into a public park, restaurant, church, etc., with a gun"
AtheistCrusader
Dec 2011
#34
Leave your guns at home is what I am saying. As for the rest of your question, quit being stupid.
Hoyt
Dec 2011
#41
Individual vs. societal rights need balancing. A good place to start is restricting guns in public.
Hoyt
Dec 2011
#58
"GTFO" -- sounds right wing to me. Used to hear it often in 50/60s from fuckers with guns.
Hoyt
Dec 2011
#60
Society has not said that. Right wing gun lobbies have paid right wing legislators for votes.
Hoyt
Dec 2011
#42
If you are actually "unarmed and safe" why do you care if I have a gun?
AtheistCrusader
Dec 2011
#69
Simple-- you are polluting society with your guns in public. And you promote carrying by others.
Hoyt
Dec 2011
#72
A post worthy of Pat Robertson, Harry J. Anslinger, or Fredric Wertham
friendly_iconoclast
Dec 2011
#73
It was a hell of a shame that Dr. Hupp did not have her weapon with her in the restaurant. (n/t)
spin
Dec 2011
#53
Doesn't take any guts to tuck a gun or two down your pants and walk into Chuck E Cheeze.
Hoyt
Dec 2011
#61
Wow, you can remote view as well as practice telespsychology. I am impressed!
friendly_iconoclast
Dec 2011
#74