• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Should the mentally ill be able to own/carry guns?

Should the mentally ill be able to own guns?

  • Yes

    Votes: 12 23.1%
  • No

    Votes: 34 65.4%
  • Unsure

    Votes: 6 11.5%

  • Total voters
    52
It's all my fault and I take full blame for this - I probably even should have used the term "crazy/dangerously insane people" instead of "mentally ill." But, since I decided to use the broader PC term, this poll/thread is a mess....
And what a wonderful mess it is.

If you had worded the post more accurately, this thread would be dead. People would have answered the poll, maybe posted a comment or two, and left. But now we have people assuming their own meaning and defining to each-other what their terms are. I think you did this correctly. This is a debate forum, and you gave us something to debate.
 
there are loads of people who have mental issues and then there are people who have mental illnesses who pose a threat to themselves and others. People who have a mental illness or people who have a mental issue that could spiral into bad problems if they do not take their medication should be banned from owning or operating guns or other weapons.

People who have mental issues or mental illnesses in which they do not pose a threat to themselves or others but who use medications that have the side effect that they could become violent, then they too should not be allowed to own or operate guns.

At least that is my opinion when it comes to mental issues and guns.
 
Aren't the mentally ill, to be PC mentally challenged one of the liberals protected groups under ADA ?

The hypocrisy of the political left.
 
And what a wonderful mess it is.

If you had worded the post more accurately, this thread would be dead. People would have answered the poll, maybe posted a comment or two, and left. But now we have people assuming their own meaning and defining to each-other what their terms are. I think you did this correctly. This is a debate forum, and you gave us something to debate.

Thanks - means a lot coming from you! :)

Been reading your posts here for quite some time, my friend and I must say I think you are a very strong poster (read: a straight shooter whom treats people right)....

AND I don't know if I've ever told you this, but I will now: Thanks for your service to our nation - you are a true hero in my book, as you fight for those whom perhaps can't fight for themselves....

Oh hell, I love ya, man (and I mean that in a good way, of course).
 
I voted yes. ANYONE should be allowed to exercise their natural INALIENABLE rights until they are brought before the judicial system and determined to be unfit. At that point then and only then should they be deprived of their rights. That is the ONLY and proper way to deal with this type of situation. Goshen in my opinion needs to clarify his reasoning and outline what method he prefers. This type matter is a judicial matter and should be decided in court. Its the reason we have them.

I can live with this.
 
I'm answering the question. Gun violence is not simply about crazy people having access to guns, it's about people with mental health issues who are being improperly treated who have access to guns. Almost all of the recent school shootings have been by young people being treated for mental health. The Sandy Hook incident was by a guy who was withdrawaling from his medication FFS.

The media loves to blame guns but it's cutback in mental health care that has caused this issue to come to a head.


Can't we both improve mental health services and accessibility, and, not allow the mentally ill to have guns? Seems both together would have the most positive results.
 
any one that needs to own a gun is mentally ill on so many levels..
 
Can't we both improve mental health services and accessibility, and, not allow the mentally ill to have guns? Seems both together would have the most positive results.

I agree with everything except eliminating gun rights for the "mentally ill", because in America that constitutes more than 20% of the population. Our medical sector already greatly over-diagnoses and medicates the general public while true mental health - the kind that needs people to be institutionalized, not running around the streets homeless - is not being treated. If we allow mental illness to be the indicator of overriding the 2nd Amendment, then the government will use that as a power grab.

Also, just because someone has a mental illness does not mean they are incompetent or irresponsible. Innocent until proven guilty, right?

If anything, it would make much more sense to limit firearms to people who have been convicted of violent crimes, but in the case of Sandy Hook that would not have made one bit of difference since the attacker had no criminal record.
 
I agree with everything except eliminating gun rights for the "mentally ill", because in America that constitutes more than 20% of the population. Our medical sector already greatly over-diagnoses and medicates the general public while true mental health - the kind that needs people to be institutionalized, not running around the streets homeless - is not being treated. If we allow mental illness to be the indicator of overriding the 2nd Amendment, then the government will use that as a power grab.

Also, just because someone has a mental illness does not mean they are incompetent or irresponsible. Innocent until proven guilty, right?

If anything, it would make much more sense to limit firearms to people who have been convicted of violent crimes, but in the case of Sandy Hook that would not have made one bit of difference since the attacker had no criminal record.


There of course would have to be some reasonable level of incompetency set by mental health experts. I don't buy your argument about the 2nd Amendment here however as nowhere in there does it say the mentally ill shall be part of the well-regulated militia.
 
There of course would have to be some reasonable level of incompetency set by mental health experts. I don't buy your argument about the 2nd Amendment here however as nowhere in there does it say the mentally ill shall be part of the well-regulated militia.

The Constitution is not a document of what the government can do, but what it can't. As the right of the people to bear arms shall not be infringed, you can't really stop mentally ill people from getting guns. That doesn't mean we can't create checks and balances to monitor them more closely.

Again, this would not have prevented the Sandy Hook killing. The gun used was not owned by the individual in question.
 
The Constitution is not a document of what the government can do, but what it can't. As the right of the people to bear arms shall not be infringed, you can't really stop mentally ill people from getting guns. That doesn't mean we can't create checks and balances to monitor them more closely.

Again, this would not have prevented the Sandy Hook killing. The gun used was not owned by the individual in question.


It is already unlawful for the FFL gun dealers to sell guns to the mentally defective, and it has never been challenged in court for being an infringement of 2nd Amendment rights:

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.”

Possession of a Firearm by the Mentally Ill
 
17 yes
Its OK for the mentally sick to own guns
Is our society itself sick ??
Scary...
 
No, but with the caveat that they actually are declared mentally ill, not just seeing a psychiatrist or in therapy or even have a random diagnosis. I think safeguards need to be put in place so that people who aren't likely to be a danger aren't restricted in their rights because of other people's fears and/or what some others similar to them may have done. An official diagnosis that they are a danger to others would be necessary.
 
Back
Top Bottom