Gun control laws less responsible for mass shootings than mental health care failure: poll

The American public now believes that easy access to guns plays less of a role in mass shootings than it did in the wake of the deadly Tucson shooting in 2011.

The poll, released Friday, measured the country’s sentiments about gun control on Sept. 17 and 18, just days after Monday’s mass shooting at the Washington Navy Yard that left 12 and the shooter, Aaron Alexis, dead. The 2011 poll was conducted Jan. 14 to 16, measuring the response after a mass shooting in Tucson, Ariz., that killed six and wounded several others, including then-Rep. Gabrielle Giffords.

I am glad to see that more of the public sees that it isn't access to guns that are the problem in this country as much as it is untreated mental illness. Hopefully this will create an environment where people can get the help they need and Government attacks on legal gun ownership will die down.


Article

Poll

reply to post by Metallicus


I really am torn about this. Should a mentally unstable person be allowed to buy a weapon? Hell no! But should medical records be accessible by just anyone without a warrant? Once again...hell no!

It's really a fine line. I used to mess with the Shrinks after every deployment. It was all in fun. But what if one of them had no sense of humor and decided to place my name on a no-buy list? Even though I have no criminal record outside of a traffic violation.

I think that this will be the next battleground concerning gun-control. and if it passes.

Had a argument with the spouse or a bad divorce and you just had to talk to someone? = No gun.

Going to AA or anger management because the job is stressful? = No gun.

etc...etc...

Your rights will be taken away by some one who just has a opinion.

All this will do is encourage the hysterics to target anyone they perceive as mentally ill. I pity anyone with a problem. They're now going to become the focus of the haters.

reply to post by Metallicus

I think most people would agree that if everybody obtained a license to carry a concealed firearm, incidents of this sort would be ended well before they could escalate to 'mass' shootings. They may even be prevented from starting in the first place.

reply to post by TDawgRex


It really is a slippery slope.

I am just glad to see that the attitudes of people are changing to put the blame where it belongs and not on gun ownership and access. It really will be a shame if people with mental issues get targeted.

reply to post by TDawgRex


Exactly. When a couple of my kids were having difficulty (2 were adopted and went through some bad stuff)and needed help we found a very discreet doctor whom we paid in cash. We had great medical coverage but there was no way I would trust that kind of psychiatric care information with the insurance company.

They are doing well now without the documented baggage or paper trails that would deny them their rights. Cost a few bucks but it was worth it.

I wonder how many of the people in these mass shootings were on medications that can have mind influencing side effects. I know they can effect a persons mind from first hand experience. I didn't get violent, but if our granddaughter did not come to live with us because of problems with her mother, I would have done myself away. Straightening her out so she could return home to my daughter gave me a purpose to live.

reply to post by rickymouse


I think that many of these shooters in the past have been on medications. It's been documented. And many were avid gamers as well. Of course, that is not the end all and be all. The good chunk of the population also do these things but don't snap.

I believe that having a purpose in life is a key thing. I'm giving up smoking and I find myself often when I get frustrated, sticking my finger to my head and saying, "Pow!".

But would I ever do such a thing for real? Nope. I believe that I have a purpose in life.

I still don't know what it is, but I'm enjoying the ride for the most part.

reply to post by Metallicus


The article has a subliminal message in it.

"Mental Health System"

What is a mental health system? Is that like a happiness system?

Semicollegiate
reply to post by Metallicus

 

The article has a subliminal message in it.

"Mental Health System"

What is a mental health system? Is that like a happiness system?

Too true.

If a shrink is not happy with your thought processes, then the shrink can take away what makes you happy. Even though it's your right. What a double edged sword.

Coming soon to a legislator near you.

Who determines what constitutes "mental illness"? It sounds like allowing them to infringe on a RIGHT to bear arms is trading a RIGHT for a privilege.

It is not a privilege that allows me to bear arms to protect me and my family, it is a GOD given RIGHT.

The Soviets pulled this exact same bullshirt to disarm their populace.

Any true scientist (as a biochemist, I welcome your rebuttal) can tell you that the "science" of psychiatry is a psuedo-science at best and completely arbitrary crap at worst.

It's not who votes, that counts, it's who counts the votes.

It's not who is mentally unstable that counts, it's who determines the criterion for mental instability.

These same "experts" are pumping people full of SSRI drugs knowing that doing so will constitute the bellwether of what is considered "sane".

Priceless.

The LAST people on earth who should be policing are those currently doing so. Let's test the cops for their substance abuse considering the plethora of evidence available online showing them to be mentally deranged!

(www.archives.gov...)

Students/followers of US politics will know it is a pain to make an amendment to the U.S. Constitution but regarding the issue of Gun Control vs. Drug Control should a provision be added to make the right to bear arms only applicable to those who pass regular (say yearly) physical and mental examinations performed by neutral third-party doctors and physicians?

Doctors who like you just because they "know" you.
Lacklustre background checks.

MysteriousHusky

(www.archives.gov...)

Students/followers of US politics will know it is a pain to make an amendment to the U.S. Constitution but regarding the issue of Gun Control vs. Drug Control should a provision be added to make the right to bear arms only applicable to those who pass regular (say yearly) physical and mental examinations performed by neutral third-party doctors and physicians?

Doctors who like you just because they "know" you.

Lacklustre background checks.

I appreciate that you are openly stating that you do not believe that our existing right to bear arms should be allowed to continue and that the constitution should be amended to reflect that belief. That is the only correct way to modify the rights of the American people, not through subversive legislation.

Here is a great conversation on this topic that you may want to watch:

After Words: Emily Miller, "Emily Gets Her Gun...But Obama Wants to Take Yours," hosted by Craig Whitney, author of "Living with Guns: A Liberal's Case for the Second Amendment"

Restricted
All this will do is encourage the hysterics to target anyone they perceive as mentally ill. I pity anyone with a problem. They're now going to become the focus of the haters.

It may result in a mandatory mental health checkup for would be gun buyers. Na, that wont fly.

greencmp
reply to post by Metallicus

 

I think most people would agree that if everybody obtained a license to carry a concealed firearm, incidents of this sort would be ended well before they could escalate to 'mass' shootings. They may even be prevented from starting in the first place.

edit on 22-9-2013 by greencmp because: (no reason given)

That is Sound Logic IMO . The First Shot Fired by some Mentally Deranged Individual would more that likely be his Last . No more Multiple Deaths , no More Court Cases of Pleading Temporary Insanity and Not going to Prison but to some Lax Mental Institution where Parole is a better possibillity than being kept away from the Public at large for an Indefinite period of time......

Speaking as someone who has dealt with mental health issues for well over twenty years, complete with monthy therapy and a wealth of ill-effects from "trial" pharmacuticals with horrible side effects - I'd like to weigh in on this issue...

First off, I am completely and consciously against personal firearm ownership. I refuse to own one or have one in the house. There are other methods of self-defense if it comes down to it.

The reason I refuse to own a firearm is because I have been through dissociative fugues where I enter into a very dangerous state of mind, and....to be honest....the last thing that should have been in my environment was a firearm.

(Just for the reord - I'm not anti-gun in any way, shape or form - excepting my own personal ownership.)

Secondly, I have to agree that there are a LOT of cracks for people to fall through in the Mental Health System if the patient and therapist don't have an open and working relationship. More often than not, there is very little a therapist or psychiatrist can do if certain dangerous signs begin presenting themselves in a patients life. They can't just lock someone up for mentioning violent thoughts.


Even if they ramp up psychological profiling before allowing one to purchase a firearm, it's not a guaranteed solution. I've crossed paths with persons in inpatient observation over the years who are very good at presenting a "proper social front" in front of authority figures in order to get what they want. Not to mention a lot of these folks come from situations where black market and illegal activities abound, so if they wanted to get their hands on a gun through "unofficial" channels, they could easily do so.

What angers me is when a therapist ignores obvious warning signs, or isn't properly trained to ask the right questions in order to provide alternatives in order to diffuse a psychotic individual until it's too late.

A lot of it has to do with the mentality of the patient in question - 90% of the theraputic process lies squarely on the shoulders of the individual being treated, and if that person isn't serious about finding a non-violent and healthy way of managing their paranoia, fears and/or aggressive impulses - there's not much hope for a positive outcome - regardless of how much therapy they get.

It's a complicated situation all the way around.

I find it very unfair that people with mental illnesses are being labeled as crazy murderers. There are so many different mental illnesses, they can't all be clumped together labeling them all maniacs. The people that take their medications and go to counceling regularly simply can't be put in the same category as those that refuse medicines and counceling. It needs to be easier for a court to order them to take medications.
I am having troubles with my own mental health, but I can't see a doc because I cannot afford insurance but my husband earns more than the $550 income limit for me to be able to get medicaid. I cannot afford my medications or counceling all because I am stuck in the donut hole. Mental health treatment needs to be easier to get, something needs to be done to make it so.
This whole thing is just firing up the stigma and it will make those that are ill afraid to seek treatment because they don't want to be thought of as a potential murderer.

The "health" issue has been overlooked and/or buried in all these instances. What was the shooter on? Why is the pharmaceutical companies so ardent in hiding what they are on? Why the focus on the weapon and not the state of mind of the shooter?

What happens when we realize that these shooters are all hopped up on some company's drugs? Do we care? Or do we care about blaming party X over party Y? The later seems to be more true...

reply to post by ownbestenemy


I have often wondered if certain Pharmaceutical Drugs have the ability to alter a persons perception of their Conscious Self to such a degree that a person could become open to suggestions that in a Normal frame of mind would go against their inner Moral Beliefs . Is the Myth of the " Manchurian Candidate " just that , a Myth , or has it some basis in Fact nowadays ?

reply to post by sk8erchick

I am having troubles with my own mental health, but I can't see a doc because I cannot afford insurance but my husband earns more than the $550 income limit for me to be able to get medicaid.

Call your local Community Mental Health Center. They are EVERYWHERE, and will provide skilled care to people REGARDLESS of their ability to pay.

Please, don't be 'proud'....the Community Mental Health centers are worthwhile. At the same time, INTERVIEW your potential 'counselor'...to make sure it's a good fit. You have to trust your counselor; find one who believes that YOU are the expert on yourself and your goals (usually a Clinical Social Worker) - avoid "medical model" psychologists ("I'm the expert and you are sick" types)....

Don't give up!!
u2u for more information, if you like.
~wild