Spin-Off on Gun Control - What Constitutes Mentally ill ?

[chbare]

chbare, let's move on. You have again failed to answer the 2 questions I asked that are far more important. My challenge to you is to answer them.

1) Clearly, a differentiation probably exists; however, I am not qualified or informed enough to say who is dangerous and who is not dangerous.

2) Saying something has no use is a rather subjective and dare I say emotional judgment. For example, I absolutely despise ethanol, "alcohol." I see no use for the substance and believe the world would probably be better off if people did not drink at all. Yet, many people would probably argue that it is important in a social context. The same is probably true with these kinds of guns. What one person says is a useless danger, another probably derives great pleasure and social satisfaction from going to the range and shooting zombie targets, 30 rounds at a time, with their friends. At the end of the day, I cannot say that what I think regarding my world view is better than another person's view. I believe most people are basically good, so their views hold fairly equal weight IMHO. The best I can do is appreciate the views of others and attempt to minimise the hyperbole that is thrown out.

[ClutzyEMT]

we do not have a legal right to search through their belongings.

I have to disagree on the search issue island EMT~~if their "belongings" are getting into my ambulance with them, then I either I am searching their belongings, or their belongings are getting a ride with someone else or being left behind. This comes from having a suicidal 14 yr old pull a switchblade out of her backpack whilst we were traveling down the highway many years ago. Since that day, anything my patient deems necessary to go along with them (unless it's old grandma mae down the street who's going in for CP) and even then, if I don't know her well enough, her bag may be subject to my search as well.

When it comes to "recognized" mental health disorders, the site that aussiephil linked to has eating disorders linked and paragraphed under "Psychiatric Disorders" so if we disallow "everyone" with a psychiatric disorder from legally owning a firearm this is going to include eating disorders as well as sleep disorders, sexual disorders, etc.....

I have to agree that we need to stop laying "all" the blame on mental health disorders and look at the issue on a broader scope.

We can include such things as they did in the olden days

~Demand that the parents accept some responsibility for the actions of their children.

• Although I realize that there truly are situations where a parent is overloaded or overcome by one thing or another and no longer has the knowledge or the means to deal with an unruly or hostile child I still feel it is then that parents responsibility to contact the appropriate person/facility that can either give them tools to deal with the child, or refer them and the child to the proper authority to deal with it. I don't understand a parent or parents who can, or will, turn a blind eye to their little Johnny who is constantly in trouble at school or is a bully or a thief. Why do we make it so easy for them to just throw their hands up in the the air and say "It's not my problem"? Why don't we drag little Johnny to them every time he hits another student or steals something and ask them "What are YOU going to do about it? He is YOUR child, your responsibility and if you don't deal with it and discipline him then YOU can go to prison for it, or pay the fine for it, or whatever the consequences there may be and from now on, we will discipline little Johnny in Juvenile Detention, or wherever may be appropriate."

~Allow Teachers and Principles some form of punishment for misbehavior rather than a "time out against the wall or name on the bulletin board".

• Teachers have 90% of the nations children 85% of their waking hours and by taking the ability away from the teacher to rap a child's knuckles with a ruler that is being disruptive in class or directly stopping their disruptive behavior immediately we are just allowing the concept some children have of "I can do anything I want because "It's my right." I clearly remember being smacked upside the head with an eraser and being made to feel ashamed of myself for teasing another student in the second grade. I also clearly remember being made to apologize to that student in front of the class~~

And possibly my biggest Pet Peeve in regards to the whole human condition is......wait for it......

Why in the hell do we watch or support some of the stupidest programming on the television on the face of this earth like "Honey Boo Boo" or "Jersey Shore, Mobster Wives, Toddlers and Tiara's, etc. " or supposedly "real life" reality shows who's only purpose is to highlight stupidity, selfishness, or the need to be number one regardless of the cost, etc???? Why??

I think it just speaks to the generalized decline of the American Spirit and the ability to be proud of working hard for what we have and valuing good morals and strong working values and relationships.

Once we begin to allow "life" to be degraded in such a way, we begin to accept that as the "Norm" and all values and discipline becomes lost.........

whew....that was quite a ramble and possibly off track. I may have been able to condense it in a nutshell by saying "we've allowed this to happen by cheapening our values one by one."

And P.S. I honestly don't see the need for anyone outside of police or military to have a clip for any firearm that holds more than 10 bullets. Honestly.

[island emt]

don't hold back Clutzy: It's been a while since we had your wit !

I'm not saying if it's coming on the ambulance we can't take a look see. I'm talking about in their home or in their car.

[aussiephil]

1) Clearly, a differentiation probably exists; however, I am not qualified or informed enough to say who is dangerous and who is not dangerous.

2) Saying something has no use is a rather subjective and dare I say emotional judgment. For example, I absolutely despise ethanol, "alcohol." I see no use for the substance and believe the world would probably be better off if people did not drink at all. Yet, many people would probably argue that it is important in a social context. The same is probably true with these kinds of guns. What one person says is a useless danger, another probably derives great pleasure and social satisfaction from going to the range and shooting zombie targets, 30 rounds at a time, with their friends. At the end of the day, I cannot say that what I think regarding my world view is better than another person's view. I believe most people are basically good, so their views hold fairly equal weight IMHO. The best I can do is appreciate the views of others and attempt to minimise the hyperbole that is thrown out.

chbare,

well said.

while I dont agree with you, you are the only one who has enough intestinal fortitude to actually reply.

Bravo

[DFIB]

http://allpsych.com/disorders/index.html

This is where you will discover what constitutes a mental illness.

This is an abstract from the publication by the American Psychiatric Association & is used to diagnose recognoised mental illnesses.

My question is should someone who is diagnosed with a mental illness of Narcilepsy be categorised in the same way that someone with schizophrenia, paranoid type is? or should we look at each case individually, without tarring each person with mental illness with the same brush?

If you want to be considered professional, take the emotion out of the gun debate. stop laying the blame on people with mental illness. Look at reality.

I do not want to impinge on your constitutional right to bear arms, god forbid, but please answer me one question. Considering the types of weapons used in most gun crime, many are fully automatic weapons, like the bushmaster .223 capable of holding a 30 cartridge magazine, what need is there for them, outside a military use? Hunting does not need this capability, a true hunter is about the skill & aim for 1 shot, not 30. Why should these weapons not be restricted & manufacturers be accountrable for every one produced?

Edited January 31, 2013 by DFIB

[DwayneEMTP]

First, this thread should be focused on the intent of the OP. Did they have the right to search, and at what point are you too mentally ill to own/possess a firearm? (to my reading.)

I don't see the issue with searching his things. The police have those limits as they are looking to gain evidence that can be used to alter your life and remove your civil and constitutional rights. We are, or should be, doing it for the protection of ourselves and those around us only. We have no right, nor obligation, to be collecting evidence in the situation described.

I don't have time to investigate the line in the sand for psych issues/gun possession, but I love the question!

Aussie, this is America, not Australia. We don't need to prove that we need something in order to have the right to own it. It instead needs to be proved that there is an exceptionally valid, unquestionable reason not to have it in order to remove that right. That just simply hasn't been done in this case, in my opinion. America is a land of guns. There is no even remotely probably plan, that I've ever heard, to unring that bell..