It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Gun Control and the Mentally Ill

page: 1

log in


posted on Apr, 22 2007 @ 04:54 PM
Seems that this is going to be a major issue.

There are tens of millions of Americans, perhaps hundreds of millions, who would fit the diagnosis for one or more mental illnesses, or mood disorders, no?

Remember 'mandatory mental health screening for students' - this phrase may become more important soon than it has been up until now. “New Freedom Commission on Mental Health.” Doesn't get much more doublespeak than that.

The commission members:

The horrible thing about these measures is that they could work if we could trust the system. Nobody in their right mind wants dangerously insane people wielding weapons.

But as it stands, these measures combined seem to paint a very grim picture. Do we want the current government in the business of labeling people insane and taking away their constitutional rights in response?

Scary stuff. But nobody seems to care. Maybe it's just scary enough that it's easier for people to look away and make believe nothing's wrong...

[edit on 22-4-2007 by WyrdeOne]

posted on Apr, 22 2007 @ 05:47 PM
I wonder if anyone besides me sees the irony in this Administration instituting a "New Freedom Commission on Mental Health"

"One Flew Over the Cuckoos Nest" come to mind?

Thanks WyrdeOne! This should be a great thread.

posted on Apr, 22 2007 @ 07:20 PM
Deciding what disorders make a person unstable and not suitable to own firearms is most defiantly a delicate topic and I can see where there are a lot of disorders that make people dangerous; schizophrenia and mood disorders come to mind as some of the biggest risks both to self and others when coupled with access to firearms.

posted on Apr, 22 2007 @ 11:46 PM
I would have to say that any disorders that render the person a danger to self or others shouldn't be allowed to wield a weapon. Then again, the question then arises, how are they do defend themselves.

Personally I think guns are redundant when it comes to defense, but I've worn that subject into the ground.

In a true democracy, one shouldnt have to carry a weapon, because the government would never be capable of turning into a dictatorship, and the police would be the only ones with the right to a weapon. However, the US government is not a complete democracy. But the government is absolutely capable of going against the publics will, and hence that is why the public has the right to bear arms.

This definately is a sketchy area. And I can certainly see both sides of the argument.

Essentially, the only way that gun violence is to be lowered is through proper use of education when it comes to guns.
Unfortunately, education isn't exactly on the top priority in the US lately, so hopes of such things are out of the window.

posted on Apr, 26 2007 @ 11:31 PM
At the end of the day, a government is only ever going to be as virtuous as the people that make it up, and in a nation stuffed to bursting with virtuous people, the role of government is greatly reduced.

The government intrusion into the private sphere will end (or be greatly reduced) when it's no longer tolerated by the citizens (when the citizens care enough to pay attention and start taking care of themselves and one another). People put up with this crap, and get what they deserve for such stupid, cowardly behavior.

I don't even really see anything wrong with the situation, in that sense. Yeah, it sucks, because I have to live here too, but all things considered, everything is probably right with the universe, and everyone is getting exactly what they deserve.

: shrug :

new topics

top topics

log in