Quantcast
  1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

No Guns for Folks On Anti-Depressants?

Discussion in 'General Gun Discussions' started by 30 cal slob, Apr 17, 2007.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. 30 cal slob

    30 cal slob Member

    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2004
    Messages:
    2,092
    Location:
    Location, Location!
    Been browsing a few non-shooting/non-gun communities and instead of the usual knee-jerk ban everything responses, I'm (anecdotally) coming across a lot of "well, sometimes this happens" to "no guns for folks on anti-depressants."

    Would you support this restriction?

    How would you verify that somebody is taking anti-depressant meds, given that there really is no federal mental illness database?

    Is ATF Form 4473 going to be amended to include a question about psychiatric meds?

    Curious to hear what you think.

    -slob
     
  2. junyo

    junyo Member

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2004
    Messages:
    719
    The only problem is doctors prescribe meds like candy these days.
     
  3. PotatoJudge

    PotatoJudge Member

    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2005
    Messages:
    1,332
    Location:
    Texas
    Psych meds are given for all kinds of legitimate reasons, and it's not the ones getting treatment we need to worry about. Also, it'd be another reason for a person to avoid treatment. It's just a bad idea all around.
     
  4. ArmedBear

    ArmedBear Member

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2005
    Messages:
    23,171
    The problem with psych meds is that, in some cases, maybe in many cases, we don't really understand what the med do to people.

    So I have mixed feelings.

    Some of these meds are no "safer" than "street drugs." The fact that they came from a legitimate professional in a white coat doesn't necessarily make them better than if they'd come from a black market seller in a trenchcoat.
     
  5. IdahoFarmer

    IdahoFarmer Member

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2003
    Messages:
    161
    Location:
    Eagle, Idaho
    My wife is currently on anti-depressants for post-partum depression. Apparantly this is somewhat common for females in the months following childbirth. I formally disregarded "depression" as an excuse for the weak minded (no offence meant). However, I can now tell you from first hand experience that depression is legitimate, due at least in part to a physical chemical imbalance.

    I would be SERIOUSLY ANGRY if anyone attempted to take away my wife's rights to purchase and carry firearms due to this issue.

    Farmer
     
  6. MrDig

    MrDig Member

    Joined:
    Nov 1, 2005
    Messages:
    1,662
    Location:
    Where all the women are strong, the men are good l
    Certainly not.

    Knowing what little I know about medications I know this, Sometimes they are prescribed off label. That means that they are prescribed for the "side effects" as much as for the intended use. ie the Anti-Depressent Elavil/Amytriptaline is prescribed for its "sedative" effect in some cases to help the patient sleep. Not as an Anti-Depressent.
    Wellbutrin, also and anti-depressent is prescribed to help people quit smoking, ie Zyban is just Wellbutrin with a new name.
    For Crying out loud as an extreme measure Thorazine (an old school anti-psychotic) is prescribed as a cure for hiccoughs. I know this since I had the hiccoughs for about four days once, and the Doc gave me a low dose of Thorazine for about a week. Something about it made the hiccoughs go away. I was not at the time Psychotic and have never been adjudicated incompetent.
    The point of all of this is that just taking a medication dosen't make you mentally ill and or a danger to self or others. This is one of the reasons you have to be Commited or Judged Mentally Ill or Incompetant to be denied a firearm.
     
  7. El Tejon

    El Tejon Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2002
    Messages:
    18,085
    Location:
    Lafayette, Indiana-the Ned Flanders neighbor to Il
    No, there is already a process to commit those deemed mentally unstable.

    Anti-depressants are passed out like candy. Tens of millions would be impacted.
     
  8. Big Calhoun

    Big Calhoun Member

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2006
    Messages:
    554
    Absolutely not!!

    Two years ago, my wife and I were expecting our first child. The entire pregnancy was difficult and culminated in her being in the hospital for 2 weeks, giving live birth prematurely, and our child passing away. I was 29...my head was MESSED UP. I never had to deal with anything on that magnitude in my personal life. Subsequently, I had to make all the arrangements and the decision to have him cremated.

    During the middle of all of this, I had trouble sleeping, short tempered, would go into fits of depression. I attended a counseling session at the hospital and they scripted me something for anxiety. Never have been a big fan of medicines and I never did get that script filled. It was an emotional time and I needed help. Things passed, life moved on, and I'm two months away from the birth of our second child with what has been an easy-peasy and noneventful pregnancy.

    We all need help at times. Help does not equate to defect.
     
  9. mnrivrat

    mnrivrat Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2002
    Messages:
    4,672
    Location:
    MN
    That would be barking up the wrong tree !
     
  10. pax

    pax Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2002
    Messages:
    9,762
    Location:
    Washington state
    My mom has fibromyalgia. She takes low doses of anti-depressants to help with that.

    My dad has chronic back pain. He, too, takes low doses of anti-depressants. Apparently they help him sleep better.

    A friend has high blood pressure. Guess what? The doc handed him an Rx for an anti-depressant along with his blood pressure medication.

    Buddy of mine was recently diagnosed with a long-term, degenerative disease that will cripple him and eventually kill him. He is on anti-depressants, understandably so, I think.

    Another friend of mine is watching her partner of 20 years die slowly from cancer. As the full-time caregiver to her partner, and the mom to their kids, she is dealing with a lot of stress. Yup, anti-depressants for her, too.

    So which of these people is a threat to society so severe that you would take away their human right to self-defense?

    And why would you want any of them to avoid the doctor's office in the first place, because the legal threat was severe enough to keep them from seeking help for minor problems before the minor problems became major ones?

    pax
     
  11. jeff-10

    jeff-10 Member

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2004
    Messages:
    1,356
    Location:
    South Florida
    The problem with singling out someone for seeking treatment is that once everyone finds out you can lose your rights for seeking treatment no one will anymore. Letting a crazy man not on drugs buy a weapon and a crazy man on drugs not buy one, in itself is crazy.

    I believe it was Bill Clinton who signed an executive order allowing ppl who have been treated for mental illness still receive top secret clearances. It doesn't really make sense to block the ppl already in treatment from doing something when you have nutjobs doing the same thing who aren't being treated for there craziness.

    BTW this is coming from someone who has never seen a psychologist and never will.
     
  12. MrDig

    MrDig Member

    Joined:
    Nov 1, 2005
    Messages:
    1,662
    Location:
    Where all the women are strong, the men are good l
    Well said Pax. Who am I to judge anothers mental state simply based on the medicines they take.
     
  13. 30 cal slob

    30 cal slob Member

    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2004
    Messages:
    2,092
    Location:
    Location, Location!
    interesting responses. i am not advocating anything - i just want to hear what you think.

    the VT shooter was reportedly on anti-depressants and had a history of mental illness (unspecified).

    let's take another hypothetical cut at this question:

    No guns for folks who are

    1) under 25 and
    2) being treated for a mental illness and
    3) are on anti-depressants?
     
  14. bowfin

    bowfin Member

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2006
    Messages:
    553
    Location:
    Nebraska
    I'm not a big fan of antidepressants, and neither are the Armed Forces. I had a nephew who scored high enough to go to nuke school for the Navy turned down for enlistment because he was once prescribed antidepressants.

    As for postpartum depression it is almost universal, it was handled for centuries without antidepressants. I don't know how or why these meds became so necessary now. Of course, they used to keep women and the babies in the hospitals for six days after birth, and most women had a better support net of friends, neighbors, and relatives to check up on them and lend a hand.
     
  15. PILMAN

    PILMAN Member

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2005
    Messages:
    1,054
    Location:
    Florida Panhandle
    What the hell is wrong with people? First we have them saying "no guns for legal aliens" and now "no guns for the mentally ill", some of the folks here are starting to sound like a bunch of Nazis.

    I wouldn't be surprised if some of you were willing to trade your first child so you yourself could keep your arms.
     
  16. Smokey Joe

    Smokey Joe Member

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2003
    Messages:
    2,617
    I don't know what the answer for everybody is...

    I do know that there are a number of prescription meds, and OTC drugs, too, that make me too loopy to safely handle a firearm.

    I react rather more strongly than many people to certain drugs.

    And when that condition occurs, I scrupulously avoid handling any of my guns. Or driving. Or using a power saw. Or climbing ladders. Etc, etc, etc.

    But then, I don't do any reloading when I'm tired, or upset, either.

    I think it's called common sense.
     
  17. TimboKhan

    TimboKhan Moderator

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2005
    Messages:
    8,144
    Location:
    Greeley, CO
    For a very short period of time, I took an anti-depressant. It really didn't work for me, and my depression wasn't severe enough to really warrant it anyway. I think for some people, anti-depressants are a godsend, and in no way do I think that they should be a disqualifying factor for a gun purchase.
     
  18. 220_Swift

    220_Swift Member

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2006
    Messages:
    416
    I was on an anti-drepessant for anxiety for quite a while. No actual depression, just had issues with anxiety and sleeping. Worked very well.

    And my father was taking anti-depressants while he was quitting smoking. They gave hime the patch, and the anti-depressants. Worked wonders for him as well.


    Not every person who is given anti-depressants has depression. They have multiple other uses than just that. Their is no reason to put everyone in the same boat, when circumstances vary. JMHO
     
  19. obxned

    obxned Member

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2007
    Messages:
    1,490
    Location:
    OBX, NC
    These days, not being depressed just means you haven't a clue.
     
  20. bowfin

    bowfin Member

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2006
    Messages:
    553
    Location:
    Nebraska
    Somehow, that sounds more damning to our cause than bolstering it.
     
  21. nibb

    nibb member

    Joined:
    Aug 25, 2006
    Messages:
    134
    I agree. Im not sure if it applies to all people. Bu if you take anti depressants it means you can and will become unstable without the pills. But hey, if people can drive why not use guns too.
     
  22. PotatoJudge

    PotatoJudge Member

    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2005
    Messages:
    1,332
    Location:
    Texas
    Nope.
     
  23. RavenVT100

    RavenVT100 Member

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2004
    Messages:
    1,107
    Placing someone who has been prescribed meds at the same level a a convicted criminal for purposes of owning a firearm does not strike me as the most productive solution available to us. There is also the issue of medical privacy, as that would have to be done away with in order to make the data available. Unless your proposal is on the honor system.

    It would also increase stigma and very likely cause individuals who need help to avoid getting it, for fear of being punished for having sought it. Then we're back to square one.

    When the prohibitionists are in knee-jerk mode, they begin looking for ways to disenfranchise people in order to make themselves feel better. Please try to avoid falling into the same trap.
     
  24. 30 cal slob

    30 cal slob Member

    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2004
    Messages:
    2,092
    Location:
    Location, Location!
    not necessarily. if you take anti-depressants, it means ... you've taken anti-depressants.
     
  25. ojibweindian

    ojibweindian Member

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2002
    Messages:
    2,300
    Location:
    Union Grove, Alabama
    The shooter wasn't suffering from major depression; he was anti-social. Someone with a strong sense of entitlement, narcissistic, and very little, if any, empathy for the suffering of others.

    Thing is, insurance companies don't pay Drs. to treat anti-socials, so they often will diagnose them as something else, i.e. major depression, and stuff anti-depressants down the miscreant's throat.

    Anti-depressants aren't the problem. Misleading diagnosis of a patient to get paid, though, is.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page