Yesterday I wrote about the shooting at Aberdeen, Maryland. This morning the news is reporting the shooter had been diagnosed with a mental illness a few years ago. She was allowed to purchase a firearm despite that. And so the debate is opened up once again about gun control. This time it centers around a background check and your health records. Mental health is the same as having a heart attack or back spasm isn't it? Or we are going to treat mental health in a totally different fashion? What I mean is, that mental health records are public information, not protected by privacy laws? More importantly is a diagnosis of mental illness a permanent diagnosis? Can you be treated, released, and all your rights restored? In short are we going to give a doctor the power to control your freedom? As it stands presently you can only be detained for mental health evaluation for 72hours. Following that a hearing must be conducted and testimony from mental heath professionals heard. If there findings are that you require mental health treatment you can ordered into a facility. It does requires an affidavit signed by at least two qualified individuals. Your rights are protected by a number of checks. It depends a lot upon the state you are in and whether or not you have committed a crime.
Now I would agree it is never a good idea to arm the mentally ill. My issue lies with the determination of mental illness. Just what is the criteria? And just what " illness " disqualifies you from purchasing a gun? I'm no expert on any of this stuff but I assume paranoia is a mental illness. Would that disqualify me? What about any number of phobias? Social anxiety? Low self esteem or egomania. Which ones warrant the removal of my constitutional rights? These are the question I ask, along with, can I be cured? If I am cured does that restore my rights? If I can't be cured just what am I going to the doctor for? If I go to a rehabilitation center for drug or alcohol abuse they never cure anybody, just ask them. No, they say if you have a relapse it isn't because of a failure of treatment, that's your fault. Why? Because they are not going to accept responsibilty for that, plain and simple.
Now if I am a mental health professional and I treat you am I then going to accept the responsibilty if you have a relapse? I highly doubt that! If you have had your right to own a gun removed for mental health issues and I am the one that declares you cured, you get your gun back and shoot someone, whose fault is that? Sounds like a lawsuit to me! Or would it take at least two " professionals " to declare me cured. Another point is, at what threshold am I declared insane? Is everyone with a mental health issue insane? The answer is no. Why is that? Or are there degrees of insane, as in, I'm only a little crazy. How crazy do I have to be to get my rights taken away? See the issue here? Are all insane people violent? Well of course not, but they all have the potential. Truth is we all do, so how do you measure that? One slip of the old cog and your rights are gone, forever!
What is the answer to this dilemma. Do we just remove the rights of everyone? Just say, only competent people, as determined by the government, are allowed to own firearms? But isn't that exactly what the founding fathers were concerned with when writing the constitution and bill of rights, an oppressive government? That oppression is maintained and controlled by what, superior firepower is the answer there. Yes, by force! Do we place the responsibilty for determining who gets a gun and who doesn't in the hands of mental health professionals? My question there is do they all agree on diagnosis and treatment? What I'm saying is are there any differences of opinion among these professionals regarding diagnosis? If there are, and I'm certain there must be, which ones are right and wrong? How do we determine that? Will it be the ones that fall in line with the government powers? Are they the ones that gain favor? A bit of an issue isn't it? It is my belief no matter how much education and training you may have, in the end, it is a matter of opinion. There are no set in stone standards! What we have are social standards of conduct and behaviors. Those standards and conduct are subject to change. As an example consider those folks from the LGBTQ community. They hold parades were some of them are dressed in leather costumes and are being lead on leashes while being struck with a whip. I'd say you have a mental illness but they say, I like it! See the problem there. That scenario can apply to any number of behaviors that are different from my own. Should those folks have their rights removed? Ask me and I'd say no, although I do think they have a mental illness. So just what is the answer?
Now I would agree it is never a good idea to arm the mentally ill. My issue lies with the determination of mental illness. Just what is the criteria? And just what " illness " disqualifies you from purchasing a gun? I'm no expert on any of this stuff but I assume paranoia is a mental illness. Would that disqualify me? What about any number of phobias? Social anxiety? Low self esteem or egomania. Which ones warrant the removal of my constitutional rights? These are the question I ask, along with, can I be cured? If I am cured does that restore my rights? If I can't be cured just what am I going to the doctor for? If I go to a rehabilitation center for drug or alcohol abuse they never cure anybody, just ask them. No, they say if you have a relapse it isn't because of a failure of treatment, that's your fault. Why? Because they are not going to accept responsibilty for that, plain and simple.
Now if I am a mental health professional and I treat you am I then going to accept the responsibilty if you have a relapse? I highly doubt that! If you have had your right to own a gun removed for mental health issues and I am the one that declares you cured, you get your gun back and shoot someone, whose fault is that? Sounds like a lawsuit to me! Or would it take at least two " professionals " to declare me cured. Another point is, at what threshold am I declared insane? Is everyone with a mental health issue insane? The answer is no. Why is that? Or are there degrees of insane, as in, I'm only a little crazy. How crazy do I have to be to get my rights taken away? See the issue here? Are all insane people violent? Well of course not, but they all have the potential. Truth is we all do, so how do you measure that? One slip of the old cog and your rights are gone, forever!
What is the answer to this dilemma. Do we just remove the rights of everyone? Just say, only competent people, as determined by the government, are allowed to own firearms? But isn't that exactly what the founding fathers were concerned with when writing the constitution and bill of rights, an oppressive government? That oppression is maintained and controlled by what, superior firepower is the answer there. Yes, by force! Do we place the responsibilty for determining who gets a gun and who doesn't in the hands of mental health professionals? My question there is do they all agree on diagnosis and treatment? What I'm saying is are there any differences of opinion among these professionals regarding diagnosis? If there are, and I'm certain there must be, which ones are right and wrong? How do we determine that? Will it be the ones that fall in line with the government powers? Are they the ones that gain favor? A bit of an issue isn't it? It is my belief no matter how much education and training you may have, in the end, it is a matter of opinion. There are no set in stone standards! What we have are social standards of conduct and behaviors. Those standards and conduct are subject to change. As an example consider those folks from the LGBTQ community. They hold parades were some of them are dressed in leather costumes and are being lead on leashes while being struck with a whip. I'd say you have a mental illness but they say, I like it! See the problem there. That scenario can apply to any number of behaviors that are different from my own. Should those folks have their rights removed? Ask me and I'd say no, although I do think they have a mental illness. So just what is the answer?
No comments:
Post a Comment