It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by Logarock
So blind people cant drive. Whats that have to do with the other 300mill + americans that still can and do? Nothing.
If your not mental then your right to keep and bear isnt effected. Real simple.
Originally posted by Krazysh0t
To start with here is a link to the 23 EO's that Obama recently signed without congressional approval:
23 EO's
these laws would only limit the extremist... that are known to disrupt the neighbourhood, got into altercations many times involving law or police, abuse, many drunken driving problems... very highly unstable people can be easily noticed... very highly unstable person would have trouble performing simple things, it sometimes would be hard for them to be in one place for a while, not very patience
In 2004 the Director of Military Personnel Policy for the US Army acknowledged in a letter to Human Rights Watch that nearly 60 17-year old US soldiers had been deployed to Iraq and Afghanistan in 2003 and 2004.[67] The Department of Defense subsequently stated that “the situations were immediately rectified and action taken to prevent recurrence”.[68] Human Rights Watch sent written requests in April and August 2007 for updated information regarding possible deployment of 17-year-old US troops to Iraq or Afghanistan, but as of October 2007 had not received a response.[
why not make it 21 to join the armed forces?
1. Issue a Presidential Memorandum to require federal agencies to make relevant data available to the federal background check system.
4. Direct the Attorney General to review categories of individuals prohibited from having a gun to make sure dangerous people are not slipping through the cracks.
16. Clarify that the Affordable Care Act does not prohibit doctors asking their patients about guns in their homes.
21. Finalize regulations clarifying essential health benefits and parity requirements within ACA exchanges.
22. Commit to finalizing mental health parity regulations.
So what are they? Certainly says Executive Orders at the top of the link when you click on it.
Originally posted by luciddream
Damn, i didn't know it was so simple to be a doctor, have you even tried to get into a med school? easy isn't it?
.....
You can always get a 2nd, 3rd, 4th doctor's verification. Cost should not matter, i mean look how easy is it to become a doctor according to you.
Rosenhan's study was done in two parts. The first part involved the use of healthy associates or "pseudopatients" (three women and five men) who briefly simulated auditory hallucinations in an attempt to gain admission to 12 different psychiatric hospitals in five different States in various locations in the United States. All were admitted and diagnosed with psychiatric disorders. After admission, the pseudopatients acted normally and told staff that they felt fine and had not experienced any more hallucinations. All were forced to admit to having a mental illness and agree to take antipsychotic drugs as a condition of their release. The average time that the patients spent in the hospital was 19 days. All but one were diagnosed with schizophrenia "in remission" before their release. The second part of his study involved an offended hospital challenging Rosenhan to send pseudopatients to its facility, whom its staff would then detect. Rosenhan agreed and in the following weeks out of 193 new patients the staff identified 41 as potential pseudopatients, with 19 of these receiving suspicion from at least 1 psychiatrist and 1 other staff member. In fact Rosenhan had sent no one to the hospital.
The study concluded "it is clear that we cannot distinguish the sane from the insane in psychiatric hospitals" and also illustrated the dangers of dehumanization and labeling in psychiatric institutions.
Originally posted by Krazysh0t
reply to post by Logarock
There is a big difference from being blind and being mentally ill. A blind person is physically incapable of actually driving because the act of driving primarily requires your eyesight. Meanwhile the act of owning a gun requires so much more than being able to think normally. A mentally ill person may have trouble doing normal things or go about it differently than the rest of us, but can still process that killing people is wrong and demonstrate proper gun use.
Originally posted by WaterBottle
reply to post by Krazysh0t
It's been going on since the first president so...
Originally posted by Krazysh0t
reply to post by Logarock
the Constitution doesn't guarantee the right to drive a vehicle by the way. It DOES guarantee the right to own a firearm. Another big difference between your two comparisons. As to your second point, that is EXACTLY what I am getting at. Where does the government draw the line? Two people with the same mental illness can act completely different and there is no way to tell if they will snap with a gun or not. This is why this is a dangerous route that the government is taking. Mental illness shouldn't be a reason to have your rights taken away.