Should mental defectives be identified?

[Mumwaldee]

Zoloft is one of the entry level drugs thrown at several "mental illnesses"

Zoloft is approved to treat depression, social anxiety disorder, posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD), panic disorder, obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD), and premenstrual dysphoric disorder (PMDD) in adults over age 18. It is also approved for OCD in children and adolescents age 6-17 years.

Straight from the Pfizer website.

One theory regarding the cause of these disorders is that they may be due to the reduced function of one or more neurotransmitter chemicals in the brain, such as serotonin. The action of SSRIs is not thoroughly understood, although it is thought to be due to the ability of SSRIs to block the uptake of serotonin, thereby providing higher levels of serotonin at the brain receptor site.

Maybe you should explain it to the people that make the pills. This is just one common type of medicine used. You can easily find that most of them are not fully understood and that most of them are thrown at a variety of problems.

There is no fear here. I'm not the one begging the government to protect me from the dangerous and unclean masses. Just rightful indignation, in my opinion, at persons suggesting we turn America into a fascist state.

 

[MrDig]

Geister, the fact that the Courts are involved and Adjudicating a persons mental state means that the Police,and or External factors got them to that Court system. People aren't dragged into court for no reason and ordered to take a mental health assesment. They don't walk into a courthouse and ask a judge to have them evaluated either. Some External factor forced the court to order the assesment. This then idicates that a person is due to the courts involvment a danger to themselves or others.

 

[Mumwaldee]

They get sued by THE INDIVIDUAL for "erring on the side of safety" when there was no compelling and demonstrable evidentiary basis to do so.

No, they get sued when they release someone who is obviously dangerous because they could pump no more money from the family, their insurance or the state to provide care and then that individual commits a crime.

This isn't about firearms so I don't know why we're discussing it here. Hopefully a mod will lock it soon.

 

[Geister]

Geister, the fact that the Courts are involved and Adjudicating a persons mental state means that the Police,and or External factors got them to that Court system

Once again, what does this have to do with someone purchasing a firearm with the intent to kill? Just because someone goes to court doesn't mean they are violent and will kill.

I knew a high school girl admitted for inpatient treatment, by a court, because her older sister was stalked by some guy and she got depressed over the incident.

And you are telling me that we should take away her ability to purchase a firearm?

Mumwaldee, we are still discussing firearms.

 

[MrDig]

directly related to....

DOJ and it's NICS system. An Individuals ability/access to purchase a firearm.
The Real Questions at hand Seem to be,

How do we Define "Mentally Incompetent" and where do we draw the line as far as the DOJ and NICS is concerned.

Who or Whom should the courts report to the DOJ and the NICS for Firearms Purchases.

 

[MrDig]

"I knew a high school girl admitted for inpatient treatment, by a court, because her older sister was stalked by some guy and she got depressed over the incident."

How did the court get involved? What was her diagnosis? Was she a danger to Self or Others?
How do we Scale the Severity of the Mental Illness to appropriately define "Danger To Self o Others"

 

[Geister]

How do we Define "Mentally Incompetent" and where do we draw the line as far as the DOJ and NICS is concerned.

And that, my friend, is the problem. We really can't.

The ONLY thing we can do is allow people to pack in more places. I'd feel a thousand times safer being allowed to pack on campus than to deny the occassional nutjob a firearm purchase when he could just as easily steal a firearm. And what about the nutjobs never considered to be nutjobs in a court of law? Are we going to start demanding psych analysis for all firearm purchases?

We need to focus our efforts on something that is not only constitutional, but is more effective: allowing people the ability to carry on campus.

 

[JohnBT]

CFriesen, MDig, and others. You purport to know all about both the mental health system and the legal system. May I request that you list your qualifications so we can evaluate your comments?
__________

Gun owner for 50 years.

32+ years of experience working with folks with mental health problems, both before, during and after their involvement with the local mental health centers and the state mental health system.

The majority of my knowledge comes from reading confidential reports - medical, legal, etc. and talking to patients and the professionals in numerous agencies in an effort to put a comprehensive plan together to get and keep people functioning in the community. I know quite a bit about welfare, Social Security DI and SSI, unemployment, food stamps, private disability insurance, medicaid waivers, blah, blah, blah and blah.

My first intensive experience goes back to the time of the original deinstitutionalization. That was my caseload, almost straight out of grad school - patients emptied out of the state mental hospitals without a month's worth of meds or the paperwork necessary to get more. I was supposed to help them find a job.

 

[RIDE]

Copy/pasted from another post of mine, but I find it to be fitting here:

Is the 1st amendment directed to different people than the 2nd??? How about the 4th????

When do we get to see the mental "test" that gives an individual the license to exercise their Freedom of Speech right??? I mean we wouldn't want "crazies" out there running their mouths with their silly opinions right?

What will the mental test be in order to maintain the RIGHT against unlawful searches??? Why shouldn't we be able the search the "crazies" whenever the hell we'd like?... I mean they ARE "crazy" right???

It sure is a SLIPPERY SLOPE.

 

[JohnBT]

I completely forgot the legal system stuff. More of the same. Lots of people with mental health problems have had drug and alcohol problems and legal problems, etc.

I finished grad school in 1973 so I've been around the block a few times.

John

 

[Geister]

I agree with Ride. Are we also going to start denying the First Amendment rights to the mentally ill as well?

 

[JohnBT]

"When do we get to see the mental "test""

There is no mental test. It's a restriction based on behavior, not some test results.

John

 

[MrDig]

Again I'm no expert, and want to only ask appropriate questions. My experience in the field is limited as I stated earlier. My opinions are based on that limited experience.
I will be intimate with Cindy Crawford before most of my clients are not people who should be on the NICS flagged list. Way Too Severly and Persistently Mentally Ill to be considered safe with a firearm. Mostly Delusional and or Paranoid.
What are the levels of severity and or Classifications that define "Danger to Self or Others"

 

[JCF]

CFriesen, MDig, and others. You purport to know all about both the mental health system and the legal system. May I request that you list your qualifications so we can evaluate your comments?

LOL... no, not specifically.

In generalities; 15 years, thus far, working with high risk sex offenders, law enforcement, investigations, mental health, child abuse, etc.

Suffice it so say enough.

And you, in generalities... what is your claim to fame?

 

[RIDE]

I agree with Ride. Are we also going to start denying the First Amendment rights to the mentally ill as well?

Exactly my point... It is truly scary to think the government is still in the business of stripping the rights from those individuals who have not committed any crimes... "because they might"...

One of the many reasons that I am (and I assume many others here) a PRO 2A individual is because the Police can do NOTHING to stop a criminal who is going to come after me and my family until AFTER the crime has been committed. If I call the police and tell them "hey... I KNOW this guy is going to break down my door steal/rape/murder/etc... please help".. The police can NOT go arrest that guy, and lock him up... not until he HAS committed a crime. And the truth is I would have it no other way... THAT is what the 2A is in place for.. so I can protect myself at the very moment trouble appears.

To take away the rights of others (mentally "defective") or otherwise PRIOR to any crimes is INSANE in and of itself....

Where does it end.

Do you know that most Pedafiles/rapists/etc. were abused themselves as children??? Should we take that fact and pass a law that says ANYONE who is abused or raped as a child must be locked-up because they are now FAR more LIKELY to commit these same terrible crimes on others in the FUTURE???

NO!!! Nor should we do the VERY SAME THING to the mentally ill.


EDIT:

"When do we get to see the mental "test""

There is no mental test. It's a restriction based on behavior, not some test results.

John

And THAT is the slippery slope I referred to... What behavior are we talking about John??? Criminal Behavoir? Or just "crazy" behavior?

How about the behavior of a child after he/she has been victimized? Do we take their rights away because of their behavior that "tells" us he/she MAY one-day be an abuser as well???

 

[MrDig]

So what is being advocated by some is the complete and utter disregard that a Naked, Body painted 23 year old taken into custody by Police for standing in a Park Screaming about the Aliens trying to probe him, should be able to buy a firearm since he has commited no crime to indicate he is a danger to self or others.

 

[Mumwaldee]

So what is being advocated by some is the complete and utter disregard that a Naked Body painted 23 year old taken into custody by Police for standing in a Park Screaming about the Aliens trying to probe him, should be able to buy a firearm since he has commited no crime to indicate he is a danger to self or others.

I'm saying he shouldn't be taken in. He'll get cold or hungry and home sooner or later.

 

[JCF]

To take away the rights of others (mentally "defective") or otherwise PRIOR to any crimes is INSANE in and of itself....

Do you advocate the right of the mentally retarded to purchase firearms?

The reality of the situation is that adjudication for mental defect encompasses profound mental illness with accompanying expression or demonstration of intent to commit grievous harm to self or others, and within the context of an adversarial process. It isn’t done, or supported, because you asked your doctor for Ambien.

Do you know that most Pedafiles/rapists/etc. were abused themselves as children??? Should we take that fact and pass a law that says ANYONE who is abused or raped as a child must be locked-up because they are now FAR more LIKELY to commit these same terrible crimes on others in the FUTURE???

More unqualified rhetoric, more proliferation of ignorance.

The absolute VAST majority of children who are sexually abused do not sexually offend anyone.

Of individuals who do sexually offend, a high proportion have been victims of sexual abuse.

Enormous difference.

 

[JCF]

I'm saying he shouldn't be taken in. He'll get cold or hungry and home sooner or later.

You have a very exceptionally poor grasp of the reality of mental illness.

 

[pcosmar]

MDig said,

So what is being advocated by some is the complete and utter disregard that a Naked, Body painted 23 year old taken into custody by Police for standing in a Park Screaming about the Aliens trying to probe him, should be able to buy a firearm since he has commited no crime to indicate he is a danger to self or others.

Well I wouldn't hand him one at that moment.
However, in 5 years when he is a free citizen with a home and a family, would you deny him the right to defend himself.
Or will you hold that moment over him forever.

 

[Mumwaldee]

Yeah, I'm sorry I don't have your qualifications. That was a little tongue in cheek...obviously you don't have a very good grasp on humor.

*I'm sorry for being facetious. I'll try to take your opinions and insights more earnestly. Internet forum chats are serious business.

 

[RIDE]

Do you know that most Pedafiles/rapists/etc. were abused themselves as children??? Should we take that fact and pass a law that says ANYONE who is abused or raped as a child must be locked-up because they are now FAR more LIKELY to commit these same terrible crimes on others in the FUTURE???

More unqualified rhetoric, more proliferation of ignorance.

The absolute VAST majority of children who are sexually abused do not sexually offend anyone.

Of individuals who do sexually offend, a high proportion have been victims of sexual abuse.

You aren't reading my post CFriesen... I said they are now FAR more LIKELY to commit these crimes... Which means more LIKELY than someone who has not been abused... which you yourself agreed with when you stated

"Of individuals who do sexually offend, a high proportion have been victims of sexual abuse.

:banghead: PLEASE read before using such phrases as:

More unqualified rhetoric, more proliferation of ignorance.

 

[pcosmar]

So what is being advocated by some is the complete and utter disregard that a Naked, Body painted 23 year old taken into custody by Police for standing in a Park Screaming about the Aliens trying to probe him, should be able to buy a firearm since he has commited no crime to indicate he is a danger to self or others.

You have never been to Key West for Fantasy Fest have you.

 

[MrDig]

Deleted t prevent degradation into a less than highroad conversation.

Just as Felons can petition to have their rights restored so to could those adjuducated mentally ill.

 

[SamTuckerMTNMAN]

CFriesen, MDig, and others. You purport to know all about both the mental health system and the legal system. May I request that you list your qualifications so we can evaluate your comments?

May I request that you list your qualifications so we can evaluate your evaluation of someone's evaluation?



this thread just shows the complexity of the issue. I am seeing a lot of false logic and rhetoric here and exaggerations and attacks. Psychiatry has some dark hallways in its house, ever read The Giver? That's a great book. Mental defection is a great ruse for a lot of control and manipulation. Imagine what leaders of the past would have done to, well, basically every historically important person as a child if unusual creativity, trouble making, and hyperactive behavior was met with mind altering drugs.

Yet, I've known many people who were not locked up that perhaps should have been, and definitely didn't need hands on a weapon. There should be boundaries.

I personally would err on the side of avoiding arbitrary judgment and carrying my Smith & Wesson and maintaining situational awareness.

Artificial Intelegence is no match for Natural Stupidity.

And neither one is a match for the SPELL CHECKER