Big Gun Protest in Chicago!

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Joined
Jun 5, 2018
Messages
3,062
Reaction score
3,169
Location
Broken Arrow
I'll agree with him, though I'll take a different tack: I believe people who are institutionalized--whether criminally or civilly--ought to be denied arms. I believe violent felons and people whose mental issues are bad enough that they're a danger to others ought to be institutionalized until they're no longer dangerous.

Free people should be, well, free.

To a degree I agree with you. The problem is funding, especially on the mental health side.
 

druryj

In Remembrance / Dec 27 2021
Supporting Member
Special Hen Supporter
Joined
Jan 16, 2010
Messages
21,469
Reaction score
17,728
Location
Yukon, OK
To a degree I agree with you. The problem is funding, especially on the mental health side.

How would more funding help? Pay for more shrinks to decide if some nutty guy gets to have his guns back or something maybe? Mental health evaluations are mostly subjective, are they not? I dunno, I sort of agree with you and Dave both but I have little faith in many mental health professionals making such determinations.

Recently Released Nut: Can I have my guns back now?
Shrink: Did your momma spank you as a young boy? Tell me more...
Nut: Naw, I'm all better now. Really.
Shrink: I'll say okay if you'll tell me about your momma.
Nut: Okay. I saw the mailman spanking...

Scary, and I ain't telling some shrink nothing about my momma!
 
Joined
Jun 5, 2018
Messages
3,062
Reaction score
3,169
Location
Broken Arrow
How would more funding help? Pay for more shrinks to decide if some nutty guy gets to have his guns back or something maybe? Mental health evaluations are mostly subjective, are they not? I dunno, I sort of agree with you and Dave both but I have little faith in many mental health professionals making such determinations.

Recently Released Nut: Can I have my guns back now?
Shrink: Did your momma spank you as a young boy? Tell me more...
Nut: Naw, I'm all better now. Really.
Shrink: I'll say okay if you'll tell me about your momma.
Nut: Okay. I saw the mailman spanking...

Scary, and I ain't telling some shrink nothing about my momma!

I hear ya, especially since a majority of shrinks seem to be left leaning. What I was referring to on funding was institutionalizing those who would be a danger to themselves or society. Right now they put them on meds to make them walking zombies, the patient stops taking the meds, gets arrested and starts the cycle all over again. True mental health is way underfunded as it is. To get to the point where we could put people that pose a threat to themselves and society in a group home to make sure they take their meds is way beyond where we are right now. But it is that type of person that I feel doesn't need access to firearms. The ones that go through a stage of their life where they are deep in depression, I can see a case of removing their access to firearms. Once they get past that stage, their rights should be restored. But you are right, its hard for even an honest head shrink to make that determination. Its a fine grey area that has a lot of questions there are no answers for.
 
Joined
Jan 28, 2008
Messages
21,952
Reaction score
10,297
Location
Tornado Alley
I hear ya, especially since a majority of shrinks seem to be left leaning. What I was referring to on funding was institutionalizing those who would be a danger to themselves or society. Right now they put them on meds to make them walking zombies, the patient stops taking the meds, gets arrested and starts the cycle all over again. True mental health is way underfunded as it is. To get to the point where we could put people that pose a threat to themselves and society in a group home to make sure they take their meds is way beyond where we are right now. But it is that type of person that I feel doesn't need access to firearms. The ones that go through a stage of their life where they are deep in depression, I can see a case of removing their access to firearms. Once they get past that stage, their rights should be restored. But you are right, its hard for even an honest head shrink to make that determination. Its a fine grey area that has a lot of questions there are no answers for.
It really isn't difficult. If we deem someone too risky to trust firearms with, they shouldn't walk among us. Period.

Making me jump through hoops, imposing "reasonable controls", etc. because the dope dealer down the street has a sketchy past and future is just wrong. You can't spin that any other way.

Bottom line is there is no guarantee of safety for anyone. It's just a fact of nature.
 

Latest posts

Top Bottom