But do you disagree that people who battle mental illness are disproportionately more likely to live in high-crime neighborhoods and be associated with individuals who are themselves mentally ill (and thus more “dangerous”)? Does it make sense to allow the upper class guy in a safe neighborhood to buy a gun to protect himself and his family, but to deny that right to someone is who living in a flop house across the street from a crack den, just because she hears voices sometimes and suffers from PTSD? Who really has the most to worry about, in terms of their safety?
Yes, the mentally ill are much more likely to harm themselves with guns than they are to have to defend themselves. But individuals who are scared of being hurt don’t care about statistics. Imagine suffering from a general anxiety disorder on top of the regular anxiety that comes from living with an abusive, violent spouse. Are you willing to deprive a person in this situation the assurance of gun just because of what the statistics say?
There are no indications that the Oregon shooter was delusional or psychotic. All the sources describe him as shy, anxious, quiet, and socially inept. But not “crazy.” Let’s say he did have Asperger’s Syndrome. A lot of Dopers have this diagnosis. No guns for them, I guess? And I wonder…does this include folk who intentionally eschew their diagnosis and refuse to be “treated” for it? Does it even matter that this isn’t a mental illness at all, but rather a developmental disorder? Should IQ and EQ tests be a requirement to own a firearm? What should be the cut-offs?
I’m not against restrictions. They just need to make sense.
How do you envision your proposal working, exactly?
Let’s say you have a history of mental illness. You aren’t compliant with meds. You aren’t in therapy. You aren’t keeping a journal. You’re the Oregon shooter guy.
One day you walk into Walmart and lay a rifle on the counter to buy.
What next? What is it that would happen to keep you from walking right out of there with that rifle?
I know one thing I would do. I’d make it a requirement to flag a gun buyer if they’ve bought more than one gun in a short period of time. Apparently the Oregon shooter had 14 guns, all legally registered. Why does a single, private individual need an arsenal like this? Seems to me once a person has, let’s say, ten firearms, someone with a badge needs to be knocking on the door to see WTF is going on.
I think one thing that needs to be done is for schools to pay more attention to
that quiet kid that sit in back of the classroom b/c the parents sure don’t seem to be dong anything . Most people are shocked when they find out who the shooter was , they were so ’ quiet and shy and kept to their self '.
This should be a warning sign right there, I know all shy kids will not turn into a mass shooter but most mass shooters were a shy kid . Asperger’s is not a
mental illness , the shooter could of had Asperger’s and a mental illness.
It is being said the shooter had Asperger’s and people are going to start thinking kids that have this are violent people . This is not true . I really think society has to take some blame in what is happening , people don’t try to get to know kids that are difference they get bulled around instead or just treated as they’re not there. After all’ It take a village to raise a child '. Society needs to
reform too in how to threat kids that don’t fit in , you can’t treat a person like
shit and expect them to treat other people kindly . We have to invest in every child no matter how difference they act , talk or look.
You are asking some guy on the internet, with no college degree, and no specialized training, what to do. I don’t know. But that does not mean that we should do nothing. Because, quite frankly, when you have a mental disability whose symptoms include an inability to recognize and adapt to normal social customs and/or an inability to recognize and be deterred by consequences, then we, as a society, need to take steps to address this.
This is not an idea that I like, it will not be a popular idea with many people, but it is a practical reality we can not ignore.
We (I mean, me) are about to head into very unpopular waters.
Not all people with aspergers have the inability to recognize social norms. Not all people with aspergers have an inability to recognize and respond to consequences. But unless I am mistaken, that often is a part of that condition. I am — not — saying we need to take any draconian measures against people with aspergers. I am saying you can’t ignore that aspect of the condition completely either.
Officer: Per section XYZ of the state firearm code, citizens in possession of more than 10 firearms are subjected to surprise inspections. Have you not heard of the Home Arsenal Act?
Gun Owner: No, sir.
Officer: Well, I don’t know how that can be, since your signature on the registration paperwork signifies that you were aware of this law.
Gun Owner: Who passed this horrible law?
Officer: The Honorable Governor Monstro.
Gun Owner: Doh!
Officer: I am ready to inspect your arsenal whenever you are.
The officer would check to see that all weapons were accounted for and that they were securely stored. He would also be authorized to confiscate any non-registered weapons or illegally modified weapons. First-time violations would be punished with a fine. A gun owner who racks up a certain number of offense would be unable to purchase new weapons. He would have to relinquish all firearms after a felony conviction.
I can think of a lot of solutions that wouldn’t be popular, that would create negative consequences, but would probably solve the problem better than your proposal.
Like, it seems these guys have way too much aggression in them. I say we treat troubled young men with a drug that tamps down all that testosterone. Got a teenaged boy with poor social skills? Forgot the Concerta and the Zoloft. Try estrogen! A daily estrogen pill might take the edge off of that sexual frustration and beta male loneliness. Maybe colleges should require males meeting a certain psychological profile to be under hormone treatment.
After all, there are plenty of “loser” women out, but they aren’t killing anyone. Maybe the problem isn’t mental illness or guns, but rather too much testosterone in a world that’s becoming increasingly more social and cooperative and androgynous. I personally take birth control pills so that I no longer have to suffer from the psychological ravages of PMS. I don’t feel less “womanly” because of it. Hell, women are frequently told that our hormones are pathological. Maybe men need to start hearing the same message.
If the problem is so urgent that we must do something–anything!!–to fix it, regardless of the downsides, then there’s no reason my plan shouldn’t be taken seriously.
You are calling for one’s medical records to be mixed in with their criminal record, so that a background check will pull up both pieces of information when someone is trying to purchase a gun.
So how does one’s medical records stay private, if Bubba the gun dealer can see you is crazy when he runs your name?
And who is the authority that a potential gun owner has to plead in front of to have their sanity vouched for? A firearms judge? Does everyone have to go in front of the firearms judge, or just the guy who makes the mistake of being honest on his license application when it asks “Have you ever been diagnosed with a mental condition or illness?”
If the job is conditional on the psychological test, the potential employee can be asked to waive confidentiality. If they don’t want to, they are free to leave without a job.
Well, if we want to get into hysterics, I apologize but I know no other way to express it, if we want to get into hysterics, do you want people who are incapable of recognizing and adhearing to social norms and, more importantly, people who are incapable of responding to consequences or being deterred by them, do you want these people to be able to purchase guns without any safeguards in place?
No sarcasm or hyperbole. I’m for real. I sincerely believe that decreasing the testosterone levels in troubled males would be highly effective at reducing their aggression and acts of violence.
Why do you think your proposal is more effective than my plan? Why does my plan seem hyperbolic, while your plan to require mentally ill gun owners to keep a journal seems reasonable to you?