Should the Mentally Ill, Young Adults, or Males be allowed to own firearms?

[Michael McMahon]

So why is it ok to deny the constitutional rights of people with mental illness, who are far more likely to be victims of violence rather than perpetrators, but not ok to deny those rights to the two demographic groups most likely to actually engage in gun violence?

People weren't born as adults. Why should be people who were once children be trusted with second amendment rights? After all evil people don't mature.

you want to arm the mentally ill?

Mental illness is often temporary or medium-term and so they're not at permanent risk of suicide. Most psychotic patients are non-violent and co-operative. Psychiatric hospitals tend to have security guards and so mentally ill patients in a ward don't need to be armed. Sufferers in the community are all unique individuals. Hence whether they should be deprived of self-defence rights should really depend on a full medical assessment rather than generic bans. Truth be told a sustainable self-defence policy should never have to rely on selective disarmaments of non-criminal groups. Trusting someone with a gun is much like playing God.

 

[CaughtInThe]

wait. so young people/young guys shoot people more than mentally ill people????

 

[Lethargic Aptitude]

One thing that it seems everyone can agree on, including both the NRA and the federal government, is that people with mental illness should not have 2nd amendment rights. This seems to be based on some sort of "common sense" idea that people with mental illness cannot be trusted with firearms, because "what if they go crazy and start randomly shooting people?" What it isn't based on is any kind of concrete data.

The demographics most likely to engage in gun violence are young adults and males. Those are much better predictors of gun violence than mental illness is.

So why is it ok to deny the constitutional rights of people with mental illness, who are far more likely to be victims of violence rather than perpetrators, but not ok to deny those rights to the two demographic groups most likely to actually engage in gun violence?

Mental illness, young adults, and males are way too broad to have any meaning.

 

[AConcernedCitizen]

you want to arm the mentally ill?

Why not? The mentally ill are more likely to be victims of violence. Shouldn't they have a right to defend themselves?

 

[AConcernedCitizen]

wait. so young people/young guys shoot people more than mentally ill people????

That is correct.

 

[Rucker61]

Why not? The mentally ill are more likely to be victims of violence. Shouldn't they have a right to defend themselves?

Less than a fraction of a percent of males commit violent crime. Are you suggesting punishing an entire demographic for the actions of so few? Do you think this would pass muster under the 14th Amendment?

 

[AConcernedCitizen]

Mental illness, young adults, and males are way too broad to have any meaning.

Ok, for the sake of the thought experiment, let's narrow it down to:

1. people who have been committed to a mental institution
2. people under the age of 30
3. biological males as determined by the presence or absence of a Y chromosome,

Why should 40-year-old women who have been committed to a mental institution have their constitutional right to bear arms taken away, when they are less likely to engage in a firearms-related crime than a 22-year-old male who has not been committed to a mental institution?

 

[Rucker61]

Ok, for the sake of the thought experiment, let's narrow it down to:

1. people who have been committed to a mental institution
2. people under the age of 30
3. biological males as determined by the presence or absence of a Y chromosome,

Why should 40-year-old women who have been committed to a mental institution have their constitutional right to bear arms taken away, when they are less likely to engage in a firearms-related crime than a 22-year-old male who has not been committed to a mental institution?

Only a fraction of 1% of males commit violent crimes. Why punish all of them?

 

[Real Korimyr #9]

wait. so young people/young guys shoot people more than mentally ill people????

Massively. People with "obvious" mental illness are much, much more likely to be the victims of violent crime than the perpetrators.

 

[AConcernedCitizen]

Less than a fraction of a percent of males commit violent crime. Are you suggesting punishing an entire demographic for the actions of so few? Do you think this would pass muster under the 14th Amendment?

Are you under the impression that most people with mental illness commit violent crimes? How does punishing that entire demographic for the actions of so few pass muster?

 

[VanceMack]

This. "Mentally ill" isn't synonymous with "a danger to self and others". Maybe... most people newly diagnosed with depressive and bipolar disorders should give the keys to their gun safe to someone else for a couple months while they get their medication straightened out-- because of the medication-- but once they're on something they're gonna stay on, they're fine.

I'm severely mentally ill, on a disability pension because I'm mentally ill-- the wheelchair's a bonus disability-- and I've been hospitalized a couple of times for being a danger to myself. Just bought new guns a couple of years ago, all aboveboard and legal, because my 4473 is clean; no qualified doctor and no judge has ever looked at my medical history and legally said "this guy shouldn't have a gun". I've had a couple of shrinks say they weren't real comfortable with me keeping guns in the house... but they know when I decide to end it my guns are going one place, and I'm going another. They're not worried about what I might do to other people.

I want my baby girl to have the weapons I carried in life. I want the helium tank that carries me to Hel to go back the store I rented it from.

This is one of the biggest problems I see when people defer to the "mentally ill" argument when discussing mass shooters. Not all "mental illness" is the same, yet its used as an umbrella term.

People would/could easily classify Nicholas Cruz as being mentally ill. Yet...he met with and talked to police officers and social workers 36 times before committing the Parkland Shooting and not once were officials concerned adequately to take action. Being depressed, being anxious...hell...theres a lot of that going around. Not every person that is depressed is suicidal.

Its also not founded that people that commit violent acts do so because of a lack of access to mental health treatment. In fact most people that are found to have mental health concerns are either in or have denied treatment.

That also highlights the problem with saying "18 year olds are too young to make good judgements". Some arent...most are...but when you look at the last 20 mass shootings in the US, 3 were 18/19, 3 were 21, and 14 were 23 and older (up to age 70).

 

[Rucker61]

Are you under the impression that most people with mental illness commit violent crimes? How does punishing that entire demographic for the actions of so few pass muster?

I didn't write that law. Please focus on the point I'm addressing.

 

[AConcernedCitizen]

I didn't write that law. Please focus on the point I'm addressing.

If you have some other point you would like addressed, make your own thread.

This thread is about reconciling the logic behind prohibiting people with mental illness from owning guns with the logic of allowing 18-year-old men to do so, when being young and male is an objectively better predictor of gun violence than mental illness is.

 

[Real Korimyr #9]

That also highlights the problem with saying "18 year olds are too young to make good judgements". Some arent...most are...but when you look at the last 20 mass shootings in the US, 3 were 18/19, 3 were 21, and 14 were 23 and older (up to age 70).

People make a big deal out of numbers. It's hard for them to grasp that most 20-year-olds are still children in their parents' houses, while some 20-year-olds are professional soldiers, responsible for other soldiers' lives. Others are single parents. If it doesn't fall within neat categories, the human mind refuses to process it.

 

[Rawley]

Why not? The mentally ill are more likely to be victims of violence.

Who is telling you this?

Shouldn't they have a right to defend themselves?

Absolutely. The question is why are you advocating that the mentally ill require guns to defend themselves.

 

[Rucker61]

If you have some other point you would like addressed, make your own thread.

This thread is about reconciling the logic behind prohibiting people with mental illness from owning guns with the logic of allowing 18-year-old men to do so, when being young and male is an objectively better predictor of gun violence than mental illness is.

You redefined the goals in #32. I'm addressing one of the points in your proposal.

 

[j brown's body]

One thing that it seems everyone can agree on, including both the NRA and the federal government, is that people with mental illness should not have 2nd amendment rights. This seems to be based on some sort of "common sense" idea that people with mental illness cannot be trusted with firearms, because "what if they go crazy and start randomly shooting people?" What it isn't based on is any kind of concrete data.

The demographics most likely to engage in gun violence are young adults and males. Those are much better predictors of gun violence than mental illness is.

So why is it ok to deny the constitutional rights of people with mental illness, who are far more likely to be victims of violence rather than perpetrators, but not ok to deny those rights to the two demographic groups most likely to actually engage in gun violence?

The mentally ill are less likely to be violent than so-called normal people.

 

[AConcernedCitizen]

You redefined the goals in #32. I'm addressing one of the points in your proposal.

My only proposal was to reconcile the reasoning.

If we want to say that the many should not be punished for the actions of a few, then people with mental illness should not be prohibited from owning guns, as the vast majority of them do not use guns to commit crimes.

If we want to say that the actions of a few justify restrictions on the many, then prohibiting firearms for males under 30 is more rational than prohibiting firearms for people with mental illness.

 

[DebateChallenge]

And you do realize this is just a thought experiment, right?

Well its a very poor thought experiment and if you ask me, anybody who would post such stuff even as a thought experiment is very uneducated. As most of us probably know the vast majority, as a matter of fact the vast vast vast majority of men ages 18-35 do not commit mass shootings. That should be obvious enough but it can be surprising how many people don't know the obvious and that's why Im stating it.

 

[DebateChallenge]

Ok, for the sake of the thought experiment, let's narrow it down to:

1. people who have been committed to a mental institution
2. people under the age of 30
3. biological males as determined by the presence or absence of a Y chromosome,

Why should 40-year-old women who have been committed to a mental institution have their constitutional right to bear arms taken away, when they are less likely to engage in a firearms-related crime than a 22-year-old male who has not been committed to a mental institution?

Get yourself an education, then we can have a serious discussion.

 

[Felis Leo]

Your premise is flawed.

Truly mentally ill people are for either psychological or medical reasons presumed incapable of making sound decisions. Young males and makes in general are far more well known for making very good, decent, and honorable decisions than many people in other categories. You are trying to assign the behaviors of those extreme outliers to the group.

If you look at wwho is committing the majority of violent crime in the US it is young minority men that often live in overall desperate and impoverished communities. If you care, you CAN find commonalities and look to those committing violent crimes and then target them...if you have the stomach for it.

Agreed. And even then, I would not bar a young adult male Mexican or African-American from seeking to legally purchase a firearm just because their ethnic groups have higher statistical degrees of gang violence.

Any restriction on a person's rights must be geared to the individual and any wrongdoing they have committed or disability they suffer on an individual level.

 

[VanceMack]

Agreed. And even then, I would not bar a young adult male Mexican or African-American from seeking to legally purchase a firearm just because their ethnic groups have higher statistical degrees of gang violence.

Any restriction on a person's rights must be geared to the individual and any wrongdoing they have committed or disability they suffer on an individual level.

Facts show pretty lcearly that outside of the poverty stricken rat infested shitholes in the major cities, black Americans thrive at roughly the same rate as white Americans. We are literally talking about a very small minority of black Americans that are responsible for so much of the crime and violence that affects black Americans.

 

[Rucker61]

Facts show pretty lcearly that outside of the poverty stricken rat infested shitholes in the major cities, black Americans thrive at roughly the same rate as white Americans. We are literally talking about a very small minority of black Americans that are responsible for so much of the crime and violence that affects black Americans.

Somewhere south of a tenth of a percentage point.

 

[AConcernedCitizen]

Well its a very poor thought experiment and if you ask me, anybody who would post such stuff even as a thought experiment is very uneducated. As most of us probably know the vast majority, as a matter of fact the vast vast vast majority of men ages 18-35 do not commit mass shootings. That should be obvious enough but it can be surprising how many people don't know the obvious and that's why Im stating it.

The vast, vast majority of people with mental illness also do not commit mass shootings.

 

[Rucker61]

The vast, vast majority of people with mental illness also do not commit mass shootings.

Likely when 18 USC 922g was enacted, mass shootings weren't the concern. Suicide was the concern. Where do the mentally ill rank in regards to suicides?