Most Mentally Ill Are Not Violent.

How can you back new guns laws with the NRA? So you are saying this group would be OK had Clinton or Obama said you need a goverment licenses to own a gun for example? Or that even private gun sales need a waiting period and background check? these are are common suggestions for gun reform that still allow gun ownership. No, the NRA owns politics and does not allow it. No con can suggest this and no dem is too serious since they want to get votes too.They fear the NRA too.

Mental health is funded through taxes which again is not a popular right wing idea. You will pay for someone else's care. Someone you don't know. Same funds that pay for cancer treatment, it's all medical health in general. Gun owners could choose to donate to this. That's a right wing idea right? Don't tax me just let the free market and kind people decide to help. If gun owners were serious about good PR they could do this. It helps the whole responsible owner bullshit they go on about,. Also, since the natrue of a gun means risk to the public they should pay for this risk. You have to insure a car sine it's a risk if you hurt someone. Don't like it? Don't own a car. Don't want to accept the risk of a gun? Don't own one. Even the most careful owner has accidents or mistakes just like anyone can crash a car. Every year Americans die in hunting accidental and accidental discharges from guns.

If they want to accept higher taxes that's fine but they will say it's socialism. People like Sander's health plans include mental health. Either way you will pay for it.

I find the NRA does not agree with someone taking guns. You said before you don't agree with them. But there are many examples of a shooter who they still back on principal. They call it thought crime and say it's impossible to know who will kill others. So we can't risk freedom we must accept gun crime and own our own gun to stop it.

You are really reaching you if want to suggest one patent means people kill other people. Lots of people are in one parent homes they don't shoot people. It's a certain sort of person who sees the gun as giving them power and control. These people buy into the NRA idea that they have a "right" to make the call on what is right and wrong and use the gun. So things they don't like or feel out of control are solved with the gun. It's why maybe several of these shooters have said they think it's their duty to start a race war. The 2nd amendment says defend the country and yourself. They protect themselves from Muslims and black people. It's all interpretation.

There's also at this point just as many shooters with rich 2 parent childhoods.

 

I agree with you on that one.
For some reason, when a person does not conform to our nanny state and ends up being treated, doctors seem to feet the need to prescribe pills. Many of these are highly addictive and without their supply the withdrawal can easily turn an otherwise harmless person violent.
The vast majority of people diagnosed with mental illness today are just a bit odd and 50 years ago would have lived happily in society. Hopefully lack of funding will return us to this far more acceptable situation.

 

VG

In many cases it was the result of neoliberalism you’d know that if you had done the studying I’d suggested.

And it wasn’t aimed at helping people but about cutting public spending.

Thing was many wanted to reform the old system to improve things yes they thought the old institutions needed closing down but only so money could be redirected at new treatments.

Thing was that was picked up by right wing propagandists - that pushed to close down the old institutions, because they cost a shitload of money and didn’t achieve results, BUT then right wing governments didn’t do what the social reformers had suggested - to spend the money saved on other treatment - but instead it just came about taking money away from public services.

Maybe if you had read up on neoliberalism….

 

Wil

That is not what the NHS - our public ‘nanny state’ health system - tries to do things these days it doesn’t want to treat mental illness with drugs, that is more of a free market system thing where doctors and pharmaceutical companies make money out of prescriptions.

It is usually right wingers that say there is too much of a ‘nanny state’ and that people should look after themselves and so they bring in policies to cut public funding of such things as healthcare and other publically funded social care.

This means that the safety net and ‘early warning system’ that used to be in place has either gone or is over worked and under pressure so that the police are now increasingly complaining that they are dealing with things that used to be handled by social workers.

50 years ago was 1969 when the institutions that are been derided were still operating and been a ‘bit odd’ could land you in one. This was when a lot of mental health problems went unnoticed or were mistreated (look up the Rolling Stones song Mother’s Little Helper 1966)

 

Nope, I never suggested that.

The NRA is just another lobby, they don't care who is in the top seat, they bow to their members and the people in Washington they can bribe. But you bring up an interesting distinction. Guns are complicated because they have been designated as a right. Automobiles came much later and have no such protection. So clogging the auto industry with regulations and then piling more onto anyone wants to own one and drive it is too easy.

Which is why the country went from a hundred or so car makers to only a handful. And why owners are buried under insurance requirements that vary wildly from state to state. Oddly the permitting part is enforced rather thinly. I have a relative who is legally blind by can see well enough to drive apparently. I personally think people should have to re-qualify for a driving permit regularly. It would reduce accidents (like the ones caused by people breaking simple rules like crossing solid lines or changing lanes in an intersection). And it would generate revenue and reduce the need for ticketing quotas for cops (that aren't supposed to be true, but are).

But none of that will come to pass because driving and car ownership are not rights.

I still think ammunition should be serialized and tracked. In the case of a mass shooter, it wouldn't accomplish much since many of those assholes are dispatched by cops. But events where lead flies and nobody knows who did it might be aided by knowing where the bullets were first purchased and by whom. Gun advocates seem to hate this idea. Their main gripe for years was that it would add to the cost of the rounds. But technology only gets cheaper with age, so they now run and hide behind gun grabbing rumors.

As for the NRA, without the assholes in their pocket, they'd be a tiny, gnat-like voice in Washington. They're a useless focal point. Concentrate instead on the people they bought and progress will be made. Picketing with signs that read "Congressman XXXXXXX is an NRA Whore" might be a good start.

 

So your position in this too is just going to be the Tories are cunts, they are solely to blame for this, and you are not going to budge, not even consider any other possibilities.

What.....a....surprise

Even though in this case its an international thread, both liberal and conservative governments across the world did the same thing because these institutions never really worked and there arent really any alternatives other than playing guesswork with medications and CBT - which is really just a framework to try get patients to give a shit about how their behaviour affects those around them

 

VG

So you didn’t look into neoliberalism them, because that reply seems to indicate you are still clueless.

I said - In many cases it was the result of neoliberalism you’d know that if you had done the studying I’d suggested.

Again you really need to read posts.

 

Car deaths went down in the 70's when there was more regulation and harsh DUI laws. Gun owners like to use cars as an example but ignore this. Regulation does work and they use it as an example of not working since SOME death is possible.

I am not surprised you said guns are a right and cars are not. If we want to get technical the constitution does gurentee the right to travel freely which is what cars do. It's the Sovereign thing. You can find it on Youtube. Those people interpret an old document to mean they don't need to pay tax or have a license for a car since it's the same idea as a horse in 1780. Even though technology changes the right does not. This is what people say of guns. Modern guns are the same thing. The courts have said an old document no longer matters. Modern technology needs modern laws. Right does not mean no limits.

 

I would just add in conclusion that the hope for future of mentally ill lies in medicine research. The old medicines had terrible side effects. And they didn't work on 'negative' symptoms. Newer drugs are much better. If President Trump and his supporters really want to put their money where their mouth is, they'd support medical research.

 

Research means tax and goverment oversight. They hate both.

 

Big Pharma says all their money goes into research... Which is a blatant lie, but whatever.

 

News departments are driven by economics. They report what will cause the most reaction.

With that being said; reporting the few violent mentally ill, all across the nation, brings more reaction than reporting on the hundreds that live in your neighborhood that live normal productive lives.

It's just like their reporting gun deaths all across the nation, especially mass shootings and ignoring the millions of gun owners across our nation that have not shot anyone and more than likely will not shoot anyone.

Obviously, something needs to be done about mental illness and mass shooters, some would say that all mass shooters are mentally ill but what should be done?

More gun control does nothing to address mental illness and stricter commitment laws could end up punishing the mentally ill that have done nothing to deserve it.

 

I disagree with the notion that all mass shooters are mentally ill. Many of them probably fit in very well in our dog-eat-dog world. They're just stupid, ordinary, assholes.

 

Recent shooters have been young de-socialized men.

Young ,isolated and friendless is a prescription for disaster .

 

Just because you're de-socialized doesn't mean you don't fit in. With so many people acting like self-centered assholes these days.

 

Just cunts is what they are

Self entitled cunts is another way of saying :"de-socialized"

 

In a insane world, you have to be insane to be considered normal and then being normal is considered to be insane.

 

I have schizophrenia and can attest to bouts with psychosis. It's simply difficult to say whether or not a person is violent. When psychosis is at play/a factor, it's very difficult to discern the assumptions from the reality.

With that said, I do think there is potential for someone to violently lash out in anger because they have misinterpreted the words or behaviors of those around them; or worse yet they are not misinterpreting but overreacting.

Psychosis is a bitch. When I've had psychotic episodes, I've completely misunderstood things. But there was always a question mark in the back of my mind: was that really what was going on? Did x really mean y? I don't experience frequent bouts of this irrational thinking but it has affected me at times. With all that in mind, I believe that the mentally ill have their hands full, but those who aren't suffering too badly have the capacity to make judgments. It can be, as I said, a bitch though.

For example what if you have someone who hasn't accepted that they have a mental illness? That person will likely have a much more difficult time making sound judgments about reality in my estimation.