Should an individual who wants to purchase a gun be required to obtain a "clean bill of mental health" from a psychiatrist?
Why or why not?
Should a person have to obtain a clean bill of mental health to exercise their First Amendment Right?
The answer to both is no.
It should be on the Government to show beyond a reasonable doubt that you are unable to exercise your Right properly, or that you would improperly exercise your Right for it to be taken.
Can't these veterans sue if they believe they were diagnosed unfairly? If not, they definitely should be able to.If I trusted Government and the Shrinkologist Association to be fair, impartial, nonpolitical and reasonable about the whole thing, and to only ban those who were clearly dangerous, I'd probably think it was a great idea.
Unfortunately, the Government has pissed in that pool far too often, and trust is in short supply. I am too concerned such power would be abused... indeed it already has been, depriving many vets with PTSD of their rights even without any evidence they are actually dangerous.
Should people be required to obtain a clean bill of mental health to purchase dangerous chemicals? Gasoline? Automobiles?
Wrong.Non-sequitur: purchasing firearms can be and is already restricted without any constitutional violations.
Do you need a mental health exam to purchase it? And you dont think you can do some wicked **** with standard chemicals found in any hardware store?Depending on the chemicals, they might have to be bonded. Not easy to achieve if you're unbalanced. And of course, you still need a license to take an automobile out on public streets.
Wrong.
As a Right it does follow, and therefore is not a non-sequitur. Maybe you just do not know what a Right is? :shrug:
What is a non-sequitur is using an argument that they are already restricted.
It doesn't follow that it is alright to add more restrictions just become some restrictions are already in place.
Shall not be infringed means any infringements are Unconstitutional regardless of what any Court has decided.
That is what we should be forcing our Gov and Courts to acknowledge and get back to.
Do you need a mental health exam to purchase it? And you dont think you can do some wicked **** with standard chemicals found in any hardware store?
The premise is silly. So silly in fact that one might wonder if there shouldnt be a mental health exam conducted before anyone starts a thread on this site.
You realize that most of the mass shootings in recent US history are pulled off by people who were obviously unhinged at the time, no?
:doh Figures. You want to make this personal.If you say so, Mr/Ms. Nuh-uh-I'm-right-cuz-I-know-everything.
Non-sequitur: purchasing firearms can be and is already restricted without any constitutional violations.
I realize that most of the mass shootings were conducted by adolescents that got their weapons from someone else. I also realize crazy people do crazy things, and that doesnt require a firearm. But...I was willing to play your silly game. You think people should be required to get a mental health check before they purchase a firearm...soNATURALLY that extends to ALL dangerous objects. Like say...hammers...right?You realize that most of the mass shootings in recent US history are pulled off by people who were obviously unhinged at the time, no?
I realize that most of the mass shootings were conducted by adolescents that got their weapons from someone else. I also realize crazy people do crazy things, and that doesnt [sic] require a firearm. But...I was willing to play your silly game. You think people should be required to get a mental health check before they purchase a firearm...soNATURALLY [sic] that extends to ALL dangerous objects. Like say...hammers...right?
If a person has a history of mental illness, it should be put on their background check proffering a denial to buy a gun. (ie., Black List) If the individual would want to pursue the purchase they would then have to get clearance by a psychiatrist but I can tell you right now, no psychiatrist would touch that with a ten foot pole out of fear of being sued and their insurance going through the roof.
It's so tragically stupid that people think somehow it is justified to attack constitutional rights of 350 million because of 2-3 people a year. It's also very telling that they ONLY want to attack the rights of gun owners in their zeal to keep people 'safe'. I think anyone that feels that way is mentally unhinged and believe their mental health records should be a matter of public record. I would hate to sell a used car to someone like that and have him do something stupid with it.And also, logically, to all other Constitutionally-affirmed rights.
It's so tragically stupid that people think somehow it is justified to attack constitutional rights of 350 million because of 2-3 people a year. It's also very telling that they ONLY want to attack the rights of gun owners in their zeal to keep people 'safe'. .
Mental illness is not in itself a sign that one is a danger to self or others. For instance, depression is a mental illness.
You realize that most of the mass shootings in recent US history are pulled off by people who were obviously unhinged at the time, no?
Well, my cousin was depressed and catatonic on his medication until he decided he wasn't going to take it any longer..... at 38 he refused his meds, wandered off and drowned himself in a lake. He disappeared last year in November and was found in the spring after the thaw. He apparently was a danger to himself and I'm not sure I'd want to sell a gun to someone I knew to be depressed in fear they'd use the gun on themselves.
Well, my cousin was depressed and catatonic on his medication until he decided he wasn't going to take it any longer..... at 38 he refused his meds, wandered off and drowned himself in a lake. He disappeared last year in November and was found in the spring after the thaw. He apparently was a danger to himself and I'm not sure I'd want to sell a gun to someone I knew to be depressed in fear they'd use the gun on themselves.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?