An Open Letter to President Donald Trump

originally posted by: DBCowboy

originally posted by: Deaf Alien

originally posted by: DBCowboy

originally posted by: Deaf Alien
a reply to: DBCowboy

Maybe we can start with churches. And maybe organizations like the Red Cross. Or we can start one. I am sure many will be willing to donate like they donate to those organizations.

We do that now.

And it's not working.

The organizations for mentally ill people? I don't see much of that. So of course it isn't working.

We can't force people to be charitable.

No. We can ask as I have originally stated. We can ask churches and people who already have been donating to organizations such as Red Cross. As I have originally stated I am sure they would be more than willing to donate to mental health organizations.

originally posted by: Deaf Alien
a reply to: DBCowboy

How would you know if a person is mentally ill if they have no such record? Usually families either never knew or deny out of love or have "boiling frog syndrome".
And to what point would you consider a person mentally ill enough not to be allowed to own guns? We all suffered depression and various ailments at some points in our lives. And many people suffer depression. And some of them have records of seeing psychiatrists. Should we ban them from owning guns?

From what I'm hearing the Air Force never submitted his criminal history to the FBI as required. If they had he would have been denied at a gun store, if that's where he got it.

a reply to: DBCowboy

Most people with mental health issues aren't born that way or probably never thought they'd end up in that state of mind.
They have gotten the short end of the stick so many times in life they just get into a deep state of depression and can't get out. It's not mental health that's an issue it's a society issue as a whole. You can throw millions at people to try and correct it but it takes more than just sitting them down upfront of a doctor. Most people who are desperate and lash out are the ones who were never given opportunity in life. Or were and came out worse, for example a soldier going to war and coming back broken.

I believe I know where you're coming from, DB, but it gets quickly complex. Some kinds of mental illnesses are easy to find and track. These people cannot function by themselves. We've all seen them, maybe even worked with them. Their illnesses are serious and obvious. The problem comes when we have people who are actually mentally ill, but they don't think they are. They think they are simply angry at society and have nothing positive to say. The government is corrupt. Rich people are evil. Religion is stupid. People in general are sheeple. Everything is a conspiracy. In short, the very ideas you see expressed here on ATS hourly. The last few shooters who have killed so many have expressed these kinds of thoughts. One, in fact, was an ATS member. Most people here would be quick to claim that we are not mentally ill and that all those negative issues are, in fact, true. But the point here is: How can you tell the difference?

This last guy was a complete douchebag. just look at his picture and you can tell something is wrong with him. He was a loner, a malcontent. He got tossed out of the USAF with a Bad Conduct Discharge. He beat his family. He spent a year in jail (The brig, actually.) He was an overt "angry" atheist. He was described as a loner back to Junior High School. He wasn't "doing well" in any sense of the term. He was a misogynist. So the question becomes, when can society step in and say, "You are mentally ill and must be confined and/or treated"? Because he's going to claim we are infringing on his individual rights. There is no law that says you can't be a loner. There is no law against any of the things he did or expressed either individually or in the collective. With guys who are otherwise bright (and many of them are) you are going to be presented with compelling counter-arguments that no court would fail to uphold. Without going into detail, the same can be said for the Las Vegas guy, except he was a self-made millionaire who most people would say had NOT gotten the short end of the stick and had done rather well for himself. So to say society did him in by presenting him with repeated failures does not cut it in his case.

The questions here are 1.) How do you identify these guys in advance? How do you distinguish them from any ATS members, for example, who tend to have the same sorts of overt views? 2.) If you CAN identify them, how do you legally detain them? 3.) If you do detain them for what you think they might do, how does that behavior differ from a completely authoritarian totalitarian government? Not very easy to do.

a reply to: schuyler

I don't think you can diagnose someone over the internet. Those are things you have to take in totality with everything else in their life.

We as members may get frustrated with things we see in society and we may express that situation, but I'm not here at home beating my kid or abusing my cat. Nor do I operate my life as if everyone is out to get me.

Most of us will only see this limited picture of each other, what we present here.

a reply to: schuyler

It is complex, there are no easy solutions and chances are, people will still fall through the cracks and do harm.

But if anything can come from this horrible tragedy, then maybe we can take another look at where we are and where we should be in treating mental health problems in the US.

As someone pointed out to me in a PM, some drug companies fast-track and bypass the standard 7 year pipeline set up by the FDA.

a reply to: DBCowboy

The Soviets sent dissidents to mental hospitals because anyone who opposed the Soviet system must be crazy. I have no problem with a government that picks up medical bills, but I cannot trust a government that decides who is mentally ill and who is not.

originally posted by: DBCowboy
As someone pointed out to me in a PM, some drug companies fast-track and bypass the standard 7 year pipeline set up by the FDA.

Usually when that happens, it's done with the FDA's approval though.

a reply to: DBCowboy



Pare that down to the maximum of 144 characters and He just might read it. Does Twitter™ allow cut & paste? You might lead in with a few zingers like "Trump $u¢k$" and get Him going in a Twitter™ battle.

Best of Luck

Bad Idea . Whats to stop them from then declaring anyone who speaks out against the state mentally incompetent / insane and locking them away ?

a reply to: Grambler

I have a recently discovered BRAIN GAP in my lower left cerebellum last year ,I keep waiting for the feds to come after me.
But my Psycher Dr says I'm sane.

If someone has to take a pill every single day of their lives or they will go off the deep end, they need to be monitored every single day of their lives. It's not rocket science. Someone has to take responsibility to monitor them, be it a relative, paid caregiver, or state institution. These people are loaded guns that will pull their own triggers if left unmonitored not because they are bad but because of mathematical certainties.

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: schuyler

I don't think you can diagnose someone over the internet. Those are things you have to take in totality with everything else in their life.

Neither do I, nor was I suggesting it. I don't think that is the question here. The question is how do we, as a society, find these people and stop them before they commit heinous acts? On what basis do we interfere with their lives? The kinds of things these malcontents tend to say are the same kinds of things we here on ATS tend to say, whether it is in person or on social media. Obviously none of us, afaik, beat our kids or abuse our cats, and that's kind of the point: How do you tell? Take the Internet out of the equation. How do you tell? If your neighbor is a loner and won't talk to you do you call the cops and suggest he is a potential shooter? Every time something like this happens people wail and gnash their teeth and say, "We've got to DO SOMETHING!" And that very statement shows their ineptitude: Something? What do you mean, "something?" Please explain what "something" is? If you think these folks "need mental health treatment," then explain how you would provide that. Don't worry about the money. That isn't the issue. Explain how you would find these people in the first place, and then explain how you would force these people into "treatment." And make sure you follow due process.

Look, this is obviously an uncomfortable discussion.

But ignoring the need for substantial mental health care will not make the problem go away.

originally posted by: DBCowboy
Look, this is obviously an uncomfortable discussion.

But ignoring the need for substantial mental health care will not make the problem go away.

I don't think anyone is uncomfortable with it. It's the government involvement we have issue with.

Well, I tell ya, it's not going to be solved by writing a letter to Trump or, indeed, engaging any self-serving politician. Our "leaders" are not the solution. They don't have a clue. I just read the latest article on this and there were danger signs all over the place.

1. He beat up his girlfriend. The police were called, but the residents of the house claimed there was nothing wrong. The girlfriend did nothing.
2. He sent a threatening text to his ex mother in law. She did nothing.
3. There were several instances of domestic violence. No one would press charges.
4. He had a protective order issued against him in 2015. (I have no details)
5. He had animal cruelty charges in 2014 with minimal consequences.
6. And the big one. He spent a year in the rig and got a BCD from the USAF.
Source

So who could have done something here? How about wifey pressing charges? How about Grandma alerting authorities? How about local authorities pressing charges themselves? it appears to me that the people who were actually in a position to know did nothing. They let it go. My contention here is that there is nothing at all here nationally that can be done. The solution is a mindset one locally. Trump can't solve this. But we individual citizens can.

a reply to: schuyler

Yep, cause I am definitely a loner. I just prefer not to interact with most people. They tend to make things messy and complicated. It's simpler to confine my interactions to the few people I know very well and truly care about for the most part.

But none of that means I'm about to go out and massacre everyone else, either.

a reply to: schuyler

Look, I don't think Trump will read this, but I had a thought, formatted a discussion base for it, and am busy trying to learn here.

I'm not being a dick about it, not trying to start anything, just wanted to discuss.

Obviously it's a far larger issue than could be tackled on an internet forum, but hey! Gotta start somewhere.