Some With Histories of Mental Illness Petition to Get Their Gun Rights Back

[popsjumper 2]

Quote

The linked story is very similar to Johns solutions IMO

http://news.blogs.cnn.com/2011/06/16/portland-draining-reservoir-after-man-urinates-in-it/

All humor aside. It's opinions like his that have gotten us where we are today with respect to constitutional rights and the degeneration of the knowledge and understanding of just how important they are to us as a nation.

It's nothing new though. Since the day they were written fearful people have misinterpreted, modified, and blatantly ignored them. Nearly every president this country has had has done something to erode them.

Here, it's fear hoping for a false sense of safety.
Other times have been fear of losing status, of losing money, of losing votes, of losing control of the masses. History is just chocked full of constitutional rights being trampled by the fearful.

Ask the poor, the minority groups, the native Americans...they have a story to tell.

My reality and yours are quite different.
I think we're all Bozos on this bus.
Falcon5232, SCS8170, SCSA353, POPS9398, DS239

[popsjumper 2]

It appears that you really don't understand that when your name is in the subject that someone must be talking to you.

OK....not everybody knows that. Glad of the opportunity to edumacate you.

My reality and yours are quite different.
I think we're all Bozos on this bus.
Falcon5232, SCS8170, SCSA353, POPS9398, DS239

[rushmc 23]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Please explain how you would "close the cracks".

What in the world is a question like that? It's especially off-the-mark coming from a book-educated person.
Has common sense gone completely to pot these days?

Just for your benefit, John, I'll state the obvious...

There IS no closing all the cracks no matter what you can come up with. You want a pie-in-the-sky world and it just ain't a-gonna happen. You want utopia and it ain't a-gonna happen. You want a world without weapons and it ain't a-gonna happen.

STRAWMAN. No-one called for a world without weapons or even a ban on handguns. Just closing the cracks YOU identified that Cho and Loughner crawled through on the way to their massacres of innocent people.

So here we are again

How would you have stopped them without stepping on their rights?

Answer is, you would not and can not.

Now demonstrated is your desire to ban guns and, avoid the debate at all costs

Please provide a link to ANY post of mine where I expressed a desire to ban all guns. You can't, and you know it. It's the same strawman you use over and over again.

According to the SCOTUS, rights are NOT unlimited and prohibitions on the mentally ill ARE constitutional.

You are not fooling anyone John
Your solutions (that you were brave enough to post once) would result in virtual gun ban and you know it
You just lack the honesty to say it plainly

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[popsjumper 2]

Quote

All you ever do is criticize the suggestions of others.

Ummmmm.....maybe your suggestions got lost in all the sarcastic drivel you post??

My reality and yours are quite different.
I think we're all Bozos on this bus.
Falcon5232, SCS8170, SCSA353, POPS9398, DS239

[kallend 2,028]

Quote

It appears that you really don't understand that when your name is in the subject that someone must be talking to you.

OK....not everybody knows that. Glad of the opportunity to edumacate you.

Lame excuse for your confusion over which button to press.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[popsjumper 2]

OK...so you don't edumacate well. Have fun with it.

I pointed out a couple of things I said to highlight them to you and you don't understand it so you make up stupid BS to cover. So be it.

My reality and yours are quite different.
I think we're all Bozos on this bus.
Falcon5232, SCS8170, SCSA353, POPS9398, DS239

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Please explain how you would "close the cracks".

What in the world is a question like that? It's especially off-the-mark coming from a book-educated person.
Has common sense gone completely to pot these days?

Just for your benefit, John, I'll state the obvious...

There IS no closing all the cracks no matter what you can come up with. You want a pie-in-the-sky world and it just ain't a-gonna happen. You want utopia and it ain't a-gonna happen. You want a world without weapons and it ain't a-gonna happen.

STRAWMAN. No-one called for a world without weapons or even a ban on handguns. Just closing the cracks YOU identified that Cho and Loughner crawled through on the way to their massacres of innocent people.

Where was Loughner's psych eval (beside your summation of his Youtube vids, that is)? If Cho was a danger, why was he released?

IF? IF? The guy killed dozens of innocent people.

Yes, john...we KNOW that you're a BRILLIANT Monday morning quarterback.

Quote

despite your LIP SERVICE about caring about the victims, you have never made one useful suggestion about how people like Cho and Loughner can be prevented from going on killing sprees. All you ever do is criticize the suggestions of others.

Gee, another "gun owners don't care about innocents" whinge from kallend, just as expected and just as devoid of truth as ever.

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[kallend 2,028]

Quote

Gee, another "gun owners don't care about innocents" whinge from kallend, just as expected and just as devoid of truth as ever.

So you can't find a SINGLE post where you've made a positive suggestion to prevent kooks from going on shooting sprees. Just lip service and crocodile tears for the victims.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

Quote

Gee, another "gun owners don't care about innocents" whinge from kallend, just as expected and just as devoid of truth as ever.

So you can't find a SINGLE post where you've made a positive suggestion to prevent kooks from going on shooting sprees. Just lip service and crocodile tears for the victims.

Certainly - I keep urging you to finish that future crime telepathy machine, do I not?

Since, you know, even the psych PROFESSIONALS (as opposed to physics professors monday morning quarterbacking Youtube videos) admit that there is no way to tell if someone is going to 'snap'.

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[Amazon 7]

Quote

Quote

The linked story is very similar to Johns solutions IMO

http://news.blogs.cnn.com/2011/06/16/portland-draining-reservoir-after-man-urinates-in-it/

All humor aside. It's opinions like his that have gotten us where we are today with respect to constitutional rights and the degeneration of the knowledge and understanding of just how important they are to us as a nation.

It's nothing new though. Since the day they were written fearful people have misinterpreted, modified, and blatantly ignored them. Nearly every president this country has had has done something to erode them.

Here, it's fear hoping for a false sense of safety.
Other times have been fear of losing status, of losing money, of losing votes, of losing control of the masses. History is just chocked full of constitutional rights being trampled by the fearful.

Ask the poor, the minority groups, the native Americans...they have a story to tell.

Hey but as long as corporations are more equal here in the Farmyard.. its all good.

[lawrocket 3]

A neat case is Foucha v. Louisiana, which the SCOTUS held that even a person acquitted on the basis of insanity cannot be held when the person is no longer mentally ill. Once the person is deemed to be no present danger to himself or others he must be released.

It's quite interesting that the state cannot even keep a person acquitted of a crime on the basis of insanity. That person has to be released. And - rights restored! Of note is the dissent in that case - and the similarity that the viewpoint of Clarence Thomas in his dissent. (As I have long stated, Thomas is not always right).

The SCOTUS has repeateadly reaffirmed the rights of the mentally ill.

Addington v. Texas? To commit someone involuntarily requires "clear and convincing evidence" (a standard between "preponderance" and "beyond a reasonable doubt). Evidence based on psychiatric opinions (which, of course, can differ).

Of course, Heller v. Doe provided a relaxation of the standards required to commit mentally ill in that they were not a suspect class (again, an opinion with Rehnquist, Scalia and Thomas in the majority).

So we're seeing strange things where there's a big agreement with the Thomas/Scalia line of thinking form those who would ordinarily be opposed.

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[DFWAJG 4]

I just came across this article. It discusses violence with the mentally ill:

http://psychcentral.com/news/2009/02/03/mental-illness-does-not-predict-violence/3869.html

[virgin-burner 1]

Quote

Quote

Quade,
People with Anti-Social Personality Disorder, considered a characterological disorder, are more likely to commit violent crimes, including those with guns, than someone who has a severe mental disorder. Not all that are mentally ill are violent. And most do not commit crimes. And, you are more likely to commit a violent crime if you are depressed, than if you are schizophrenic.

The mentally ill have rights protected by our constitution. I have no problem supporting their rights.

Dr. DFWAJG, psychiatrist

So, Dr., you have no problem with a person that is unable to tell the difference between reality and fantasy owning a gun?

Seriously?

apparently, even psychiatrists need counseling; funny, there's this saying that everyone that studies psychology usually has a tons of problems they cannot sort out otherwise!

“Some may never live, but the crazy never die.”
-Hunter S. Thompson
"No. Try not. Do... or do not. There is no try."
-Yoda

[Amazon 7]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quade,
People with Anti-Social Personality Disorder, considered a characterological disorder, are more likely to commit violent crimes, including those with guns, than someone who has a severe mental disorder. Not all that are mentally ill are violent. And most do not commit crimes. And, you are more likely to commit a violent crime if you are depressed, than if you are schizophrenic.

The mentally ill have rights protected by our constitution. I have no problem supporting their rights.

Dr. DFWAJG, psychiatrist

So, Dr., you have no problem with a person that is unable to tell the difference between reality and fantasy owning a gun?

Seriously?

apparently, even psychiatrists need counseling; funny, there's this saying that everyone that studies psychology usually has a tons of problems they cannot sort out otherwise!

Most of the ones I have run across... are nuttier than friggin loons.

That.. and so many of them persue the "profession" to have other people help them overcome their own poverty issues.

[popsjumper 2]

Quote

That.. and so many of them persue the "profession" to have other people help them overcome their own poverty issues.

O M G...

My reality and yours are quite different.
I think we're all Bozos on this bus.
Falcon5232, SCS8170, SCSA353, POPS9398, DS239

[popsjumper 2]

Your OP says more about the process than anything else.

"After a brief hearing, in which Mr. French’s lengthy history of relapses never came up,"

Mr. French exercised his rights to a hearing. He got it.

My reality and yours are quite different.
I think we're all Bozos on this bus.
Falcon5232, SCS8170, SCSA353, POPS9398, DS239

[lawrocket 3]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quade,
People with Anti-Social Personality Disorder, considered a characterological disorder, are more likely to commit violent crimes, including those with guns, than someone who has a severe mental disorder. Not all that are mentally ill are violent. And most do not commit crimes. And, you are more likely to commit a violent crime if you are depressed, than if you are schizophrenic.

The mentally ill have rights protected by our constitution. I have no problem supporting their rights.

Dr. DFWAJG, psychiatrist

So, Dr., you have no problem with a person that is unable to tell the difference between reality and fantasy owning a gun?

Seriously?

apparently, even psychiatrists need counseling; funny, there's this saying that everyone that studies psychology usually has a tons of problems they cannot sort out otherwise!

Doesn't it seem odd to you that a person who deals with them every day is less afraid of them then of others in the general population?

It's often said that education will help people. But this thread shows the problem of education - so many people have their own ideas of things and won't listen.

It's amazing how many people on here have the same thought processes of bible-thumpers who believe the earth is a few thousand years old and scientific evidence be damned. Schizophrenics are dangerous and they don't know right from wrong, dammit. Meanwhile, that's not describing the far and away vast majority of schizophrenics out there.

Walk on your flat earth, folks...

My wife is hotter than your wife.