Crazy Talk

[Roadkill Coyote]

The NRA's approach is to rebuild the utterly broken mental health system, not punish law abiding citizens. It's only the crazy, knee-jerk liberals who disagree with that premise.

I'd certainly like to see that implemented, But there are actually two obstacles, rather than one. The knee-jerk liberals on one hand, and the we don't want to pay for it crowd on the other. After all, the drive to de-institutionalize the mentally ill came about in the 80's, and it was just as much about money as patients rights. Go ask anyone who had a loved one at NORCE how easy it will be to fund more inpatient treatment for anyone these days.

I have no desire whatsoever to negotiate with crazy people.

You saw the thread title, and came in to argue with me anyway

 

[gerhard1]

The ability to control prescription drugs has been a federal power for a long time. Reporting medical records concerning people who are a threat to themselves and others is something most states are doing, or are about to start doing. What I am saying is that the yardstick used to determine who is a danger to themselves and others is broken. We need to come up with another way to measure that, and if we do not, someone else will. As for the media, I have not suggested control of all media, or most, or any significant part of the media. I have suggested we stop large, national, commercial media infotainment corporations from rewarding mass murderers, by the least intrusive means possible.

The problem with your proposal is that it paints with too broad of a brush. It looks good on paper, but in real life I could see it being abused, especially by an anti-gun government. This will prohibit anyone on these medications from purchasing firearms when the effect of suicidal ideation occurs sporadically. Not everyone who takes a particular drug experiences these negative side-effects. But anyone who is prescribed these drugs loses their firearms rights.


The problem with this idea is that any such restriction on the media would never pass constitutional muster. The media have the right to publish and prior restraint, which is what you are suggesting, would never be upheld. I distrust and despise the media as much as anyone, but I am also a realist. Courts would not go along with such an idea.

 

[turkeyrun]

You have left out that nearly every soldier returning from Afghanistan and Iraq has been diagnosed with PTSD. So, ALL vets are prohibited from gun ownership?


Why not make it simple, not a convicted felon, allowed to own / carry. Commit crime while in possession, put them down like a rabid dog.

 

[rhart]

OK, so 6-years ago I was on anti-masturbation medication (which cured me six years ago) and then yesterday the government agency (staffed by the current ruling party's appointees) decided that this med (name brand NOJO) causes "suicidal ideation" and that that effect can recur even long after one stops taking it. So today my 2nd amendment rights got permanently revoked. Forever! I no longer have a gun to caress and stroke lovingly... But! I do have a recipe for making a rather loud surprise that I got off the internet (site called "cooking with Al somebody") and it can be made with household products (main ingredient is Jurkins Lotion). So these adverse tendencies of the anti-masturbation drug can be fulfilled along with a sudden need to be famous and punish all who are what I cannot be (a shooter) after all!

Trying a little humor here, but see where this type of stuff can lead to? I predict that within 20 years only certain privileged people will be allowed to own firearms (rich or powerful).