http://www.nytimes.com/2012/12/18/opinion/dont-blame-autism-for-newtown.html?_r=0
For one thing, Asperger’s and autism are not forms of mental illness; they are neurodevelopmental disorders or disabilities.
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/12/18/opinion/dont-blame-autism-for-newtown.html?_r=0
For one thing, Asperger’s and autism are not forms of mental illness; they are neurodevelopmental disorders or disabilities.
Still waiting for a yes or no.
If the answer is anything but “yes, we need to keep firearms out of the hands of the mentally ill” then we need to stop pushing that particular talking point. Answer the question, then we can determine how to do it.
That is an extreme position taken by advocates. Calling it a neurodevelopmental disorder doesn’t meaningfully distinguish it from any other mental disorder.
How is ADHD not a neurodevelopmental disorder, for instance?
Hey dummy, your point is nonsense.
But I’ll play… My position is that anyone whose judgment, perception, behavioral control, affective control, intelligence or executive function might fluctuate such that they are unsafe with a gun should be prevented from owning one.
The answer is yes, out of the hands of some of them. There are hundreds of thousands (if not millions) of “mentally ill”-diagnosed individuals who, under treatment, are as “normal” as you and I. I don’t care if such people own guns.
Your method will keep the guns out of the hands of such people. And leave them in the hands of untreated mentally ill people, whose numbers the method will increase.
ADHD is, and it isn’t a “mental illness” either.
Uh, how so? What then are all those things in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders?
I guess it’s an “I know it when I see it” kind of thing. See The distinction between personality disorder and mental illness | The British Journal of Psychiatry | Cambridge Core
So, objectively, hard to say. I tend to the side of - if there is a biological/neurochemical cause (like, for example, for depression or MD, or schizophrenia), it is a “mental illness”. If it’s a developmental thing - that is, there is no chemical imbalance, but a different brain arrangement - then it isn’t.
The first kind is easier to diagnose and treat. The second kind is nebulous in diagnosis and untreatable.
Well, we could either go with the DSM, or we could pull shit out of our ass until we know it when we see it.
Let’s go the former, seeing as how it has more scientific credibility.
ETA: Everything you said was total nonsense, by the way.
You do realize that DSM is basically the same as “pulling shit out of your ass” on a lot of subjects. Like diagnosing autism.
I don’t realize that, in fact, and it’s clear you have no idea what you’re talking about.
Read it. Diagnosing autism is notoriously subjective.
It is no more subjective than diagnosing ADHD, depression, post traumatic stress disorder, bipolar disorder, obsessive compulsive disorder, borderline personality disorder, oppositional defiant disorder, alcohol dependence, or pretty much any other mental disorder.
Which of these disorders, by the way, has no evidence of a biological contribution?
Which should be the basis of an exclusion from gun ownership?
Because with (what I assume people are considering) a hunting rifle (bolt-action) you have to load the low capacity magazine by pushing rounds through the breech, and you have to cycle each shot manually with the bolt. The likelihood of carving a path of death and destruction by loosing dozens of rounds in a few seconds (and thus being a weapon of choice among criminals who value this property) is practically nil.
A pump shotgun will throw out just as much carnage as an “assault weapon” with a 30 round mag. That’s why more people are killed annually with shotguns as opposed to assault weapons.
The reason hunting weapons are “excluded” is to split the gun owners into factions.
Just got a text from a relative: “My AR-15 and Mini14 have doubled in price. Thanks Obama!”
Being a practical sort, I’m sure he has them posted on gunbroker.com already.
Could it not be ismply that more people have shotguns than have such weapons?
Or it could be a recognition that such weapons as hunting rifles are simply more legitimate as sports equipment. Though many of us spend our nights fitfully dreaming of grabbing everything in sight…hunting rifles, staple guns, Nerf guns…we still accept that the first step down the road to tyranny and helplessness ought to be sensible and reasonable regulation. Bwah ha ha ha ha! Soon. Soon!
Under Federal law:
Under 18 U.S.C. § 922(d), it is unlawful for any person to sell or otherwise dispose of any firearm or ammunition to any person knowing or having reasonable cause to believe that such person “has been adjudicated as a mental defective or has been committed to any mental institution.”
No need to name all disorders now and in the future. That definition covers it right there. Now to get the list so they can be prohibited through the NICS check. Seems like a solvable problem.
Using that definition, would an alcoholic who self-committed to a treatment facility in a mental institution be disqualified?
Generally, no. Here is what the BATFE says (open letter so full repost):