I've been listening to the case against that kid that shot and killed those people at the video game tournament. He didn't use one of those " assault " rifles and so the narrative has to be changed. He did use a semi-automatic pistol that he purchased legally. For that reason we now have to question his ability to purchase the gun. Yes, his right to keep and bear arms is being examined. It has been uncovered that he has had mental health issues in the past. And so the cry goes up, mental patients should never be allowed to own or purchase firearms! Which, I admit sounds reasonable enough to me but has to be examined from all angles.
Now many of the people so outraged, and justifiably so, over this tragic event are the same people talking about mental health in America. Free mental health services should be available to everyone. They say how mental health is a disease and should be treated like any other disease. It does require treatment. But now, unlike other treatable illnesses, you should have your constitutional rights withheld because you have had this disease. Do you see what I'm saying here? If that isn't attaching a stigma to mental health I don't know what else you would call it. And so, how can we say in one breath mental illness is a treatable disease, and in the next say, you will be forever penalized for having that disease.
It is a bit of a problem isn't it? There are many that would just ignore that portion of the conversation altogether. Or there are those that will talk about it but never admit to the truth of it. And the truth is, we will deny your constitutional right to keep and bear arms if it is determined you are mentally unstable. We also agree that once mentally unstable you are suspect the rest of your life. Yes, we will assign a stigma to that disease and to you for having it! Ah, but there it is in a nutshell. The liberal progressives want to withhold your rights without having to admit they are withholding your rights. They are desperately attempting to justify that action without having to admit to anything. And that, in my way of thinking is the whole issue. We all agree that mental patients shouldn't be able to legally purchase firearms. Of course, that doesn't prevent then from buying firearms illegally. It's a bit of a quandary.
Most of you reading this are aware of my political and social leanings. Yes, I'm a conservative person by nature and a bit of a stoic to boot. I accept things for what they are, whether I happen to like that thing or not. There are crazy people in the world, always have been, always will be. I don't believe you can medicate that away. You can medicate the person into some semblance of conformity, a lobotomy took care of troublemakers in the past, although I believe that to be a bit extreme. But my point is I believe in certain things and am not easily swayed from those beliefs. I get called names for that occasionally, and that is just fine, I don't mind. I've been known to do a bit of name calling myself, although I call it telling the truth. I don't believe in conditional morality or conditional ethics. Really it is the same old thing, you can't have your cake and eat it too. The bottom line in all of this is simple enough. If a person has been treated for a mental illness should they forever be barred from owning a firearm? If so, define those parameters. Is it alright to be a little crazy? Is it alright to be crazy as long as I am not institutionalized? Thirty days seems to be the cutoff at the moment.
Me, I say if you are diagnosed by competent authority as having mental illness you should be banned from purchasing firearms. Yes, I would attach that stigma to you! No different than preventing a blind man from getting a drivers license in my view. It's just a common sense measure. No, it isn't foolproof. If you want a firearm you will get a firearm. An automobile is a deadly weapon along with a few hundred other things I could think of. But, I wouldn't make it easy for you, so you are barred. And that's how I feel about that and I make no apologies for saying that. I will attach a stigma to you! I will not attempt to rename it or make some excuse for it. Nope, I will just display my prejudice against the mentally ill by not allowing the legal purchase of a firearm. Stark isn't it? Reality often is.
Now many of the people so outraged, and justifiably so, over this tragic event are the same people talking about mental health in America. Free mental health services should be available to everyone. They say how mental health is a disease and should be treated like any other disease. It does require treatment. But now, unlike other treatable illnesses, you should have your constitutional rights withheld because you have had this disease. Do you see what I'm saying here? If that isn't attaching a stigma to mental health I don't know what else you would call it. And so, how can we say in one breath mental illness is a treatable disease, and in the next say, you will be forever penalized for having that disease.
It is a bit of a problem isn't it? There are many that would just ignore that portion of the conversation altogether. Or there are those that will talk about it but never admit to the truth of it. And the truth is, we will deny your constitutional right to keep and bear arms if it is determined you are mentally unstable. We also agree that once mentally unstable you are suspect the rest of your life. Yes, we will assign a stigma to that disease and to you for having it! Ah, but there it is in a nutshell. The liberal progressives want to withhold your rights without having to admit they are withholding your rights. They are desperately attempting to justify that action without having to admit to anything. And that, in my way of thinking is the whole issue. We all agree that mental patients shouldn't be able to legally purchase firearms. Of course, that doesn't prevent then from buying firearms illegally. It's a bit of a quandary.
Most of you reading this are aware of my political and social leanings. Yes, I'm a conservative person by nature and a bit of a stoic to boot. I accept things for what they are, whether I happen to like that thing or not. There are crazy people in the world, always have been, always will be. I don't believe you can medicate that away. You can medicate the person into some semblance of conformity, a lobotomy took care of troublemakers in the past, although I believe that to be a bit extreme. But my point is I believe in certain things and am not easily swayed from those beliefs. I get called names for that occasionally, and that is just fine, I don't mind. I've been known to do a bit of name calling myself, although I call it telling the truth. I don't believe in conditional morality or conditional ethics. Really it is the same old thing, you can't have your cake and eat it too. The bottom line in all of this is simple enough. If a person has been treated for a mental illness should they forever be barred from owning a firearm? If so, define those parameters. Is it alright to be a little crazy? Is it alright to be crazy as long as I am not institutionalized? Thirty days seems to be the cutoff at the moment.
Me, I say if you are diagnosed by competent authority as having mental illness you should be banned from purchasing firearms. Yes, I would attach that stigma to you! No different than preventing a blind man from getting a drivers license in my view. It's just a common sense measure. No, it isn't foolproof. If you want a firearm you will get a firearm. An automobile is a deadly weapon along with a few hundred other things I could think of. But, I wouldn't make it easy for you, so you are barred. And that's how I feel about that and I make no apologies for saying that. I will attach a stigma to you! I will not attempt to rename it or make some excuse for it. Nope, I will just display my prejudice against the mentally ill by not allowing the legal purchase of a firearm. Stark isn't it? Reality often is.
No comments:
Post a Comment