Mental Health And Firearms

[ninjatoth]

What is your thoughts on the issue of mental health,and the ownership of firearms?Most states will stop you from owning a handgun if you were ever judged insane or sent to a mental institution,but there are not as many restrictions on long guns.But is this enough?I speak as a person living with mental illnesses myself,a person that will admit that during a time in my life,I should not have been allowed to own firearms.See,I have OCD(obsessive compulsive disorder)which leads to depression.Untreated,the depression can grow,and the depression is what is dangerous.Never to anyone else,but to myself.I love the sport of shooting and hunting,and I own firearms now,in a much healthier state of mind of course,and I am being treated for my illnesses with medication every day.I feel like I am coming through and out of a hard place in life,but I am making it through.I just want to encourage anyone who has ever had depression to not give up,don't give up a sport you love.If you love to shoot,keep doing it,just make sure to keep yourself mentally fit.Seek treatment if necessary,and be safe.

[shepherddogs]

I think if a condition predisposes a person towards harming others intentionally or through lack of judgement for the safety of others then he should be prohibited from owning firearms. Other than that I see no reason for restrictions. If a person wants to kill himself, he is unlikely to be stopped by a gun law. And if you added up all the people who have been depressed, anxious, drank too much, etc. etc. at some time in their lives that would probably be a sizable portion of the US population. I read somewhere that most people have depression at some time in their lives. Look at all the elderly people who have limited or no family contact.

[Tom Servo]

I read somewhere that most people have depression at some time in their lives.

I went through a terrible bout of it a few years back after losing several loved ones in a year. I saw a shrink a couple of times, so I'd have a neutral party to talk to.

Should that keep me from owning firearms? At no point was my judgment affected, but there are those who would love to make such a thing a barrier to owning firearms.

They don't care about "mental health." They care about banning guns. "Mental health" makes it easier for the general populace to swallow.

I know recovering alcoholics and addicts who shoot. Those folks have walked through a fire I hope to never face. They have an incredible amount of wisdom, willpower and self-awareness, and I'd trust them at my back more than I would many "normal" people.

Now, if someone has a clear history of dangerous behavior, that's a different matter. However, we need VERY clear and fair guidelines for determining such behaviors before we start abrogating their rights.

[Lawyer Daggit]

I agree with you Tom. I am a lawyer in Australia who has a firearms practice.

Many people here, especially farmers who are for example depressed as a result of drought, are reluctant to see a psychiatrist because once you see one the licensing people seem to take that as proof that you are incapable of having guns- even when your doctor is supportive.

By and large it is not the people who seek help who are the risk but rather the people who go undiagnosed and treated.

[brmfan]

Tom hit it right on the head. It has very little to do with depression per se. I do think that people that have been legitimately diagnosed with some specific disorders should be restricted. Otherwise, you have to remember that in a free society, our rights are guaranteed to all, from idiots to responsible folks alike. It's those on the outer fringes that need to be kept in check.

The ironic (and sad) thing is that those that want to yank your RKBA simply because you had a bout of depression actually DO prevent people from seeking the help that they might need by making them choose the help they need over possibly loosing their right. Great bunch of humanitarians, aren't they...

[Lawyer Daggit]

If someone is depressed to the point of being suicidal firearms possession can be a problem.

Then again, since Australia adopted its tough firearms laws the number of single blokes having fatal car accidents on long straight stretches of road seems to have gone up....

The reality is if anyone wants to top themselves, where there is a will there is a way and society needs to treat the problem, and treating the problem should not involve discriminating against the mentally ill unless there is a legitimate reason to deprive them of a capacity to own a firearm.

[44 AMP]

If you have been adjudicated by a court (not a doctor, or mental health "professional") you are prohibited from owning firearms. ALL firearms.

It does not matter at all, what any particular doctor thinks about your "condition". Their word carries no weight in law. They may provide their opinion to the court, but until/unless a court rules, your rights are not revoked.

Claiming someone has "mental health issues" and should be denied firearms is a very slippery slope. Yes, we all agree that mentally incompetant individuals should not have guns. Nor should they have knives, matches, or drive a car.

But mental health "doctors" are not, and should not be the sole judges. And that is because it is not a hard science. Remember that only a few decades ago, the standard textbook on mental illness still listed homosexuality as a mental illness.

Also remember that in the Soviet Union, quite often, individuals who disagreed with state policy were judged mentally ill, and sent off to camps for "treatment", instead of being charged with crimes for which there were definate sentances. A certain crime might have a sentance of 10 years, but if you are "mentally ill", you could be in custody the rest of your life!

Existing law does not need any so called "improvement". Any calls for such as simply thinly disguised attempts by those with an agenda which does not include protection of your rights.

[grey sky]

the Indiana pernit application asks if one has ever been treated for psyciatric, mental or emotional. what year and requires a recomendation from the "mental health profesional". No adjudication necessary. Its not clear how much weight is given the recomendation. I find it interesting that there is no expration for how long ago. So if one saw a "mental health profesional" 40 years ago it still counts. The Indiana application is available online.
My point is once you have seen a "mental health profesional" YOU are forever a "menal paitient" just sayin.

[Old Grump]

I think most of the people you see being treated for mental problems is for depression. Most are not a danger to others and only some a danger to themselves. The line for me is psychotic episodes. ie bi-polar, schizophrenics, paranoia in almost any form or delusional people who talk to God and he tells them to do things. That being said I know some delusional people who I would trust the keys to my house to and my gun cabinet because that isn't part of their delusion and it doesn't stop them from being productive members of society.

[grey sky]

A Big problem is with the mental health profesional's recomendation, maybe the provider makes a decision based on well thought out facts or from a liability angle that I Won't vouch for any one and put myself out on a limb. Who knows what attitude a councelor or psychiatrst, socialworker will have.

[Bud Helms]

Here's how it reads in Georgia:

§ 16-11-129. License to carry pistol or revolver; temporary renewal permit; mandamus

...

(b) Licensing exceptions. No license or renewal license shall be granted to:

...

(4) Any individual who has been hospitalized as an inpatient in any mental hospital or alcohol or drug treatment center within five years of the date of his or her application. The probate judge may require any applicant to sign a waiver authorizing any mental hospital or treatment center to inform the judge whether or not the applicant has been an inpatient in any such facility in the last five years and authorizing the superintendent of such facility to make to the judge a recommendation regarding whether a license to carry a pistol or revolver should be issued. When such a waiver is required by the probate judge, the applicant shall pay to the probate judge a fee of $3.00 for reimbursement of the cost of making such a report by the mental health hospital, alcohol or drug treatment center, or the Department of Behavioral Health and Developmental Disabilities, which the probate judge shall remit to the hospital, center, or department. The judge shall keep any such hospitalization or treatment information confidential. It shall be at the discretion of the probate judge, considering the circumstances surrounding the hospitalization and the recommendation of the superintendent of the hospital or treatment center where the individual was a patient, to issue the license or renewal license;

Given these restrictions, it seems there are some reasonable, included protections. That said, I am personally acquainted with an individual that will engage in a fist fight at the drop of a hat. A real scrapper. He gained a reputation with the local cops in his home town here in GA. After one particularly public melee` the police had a psychologist rule him "mentally defective", due to his propensity to defend himself against all comers (my version). Now he may not own or possess a weapon in the state of Georgia due to that ruling.

So, there you go.

[chris in va]

The line for me is psychotic episodes. ie bi-polar

You're grouping bipolar people in with psychotics? Interesting. Better do more reading up on the illness.

In my experience, mental health 'doctors' are just experimenters throwing medication at you in hopes of one actually working for it's intended purpose. I've seen what a bad medication can do to a person, it's ugly.

If you're good on meds and live a stable life, why shouldn't you be able to defend yourself?

[ninjatoth]

Bud,Georigia is is easy going compared to Michigan

7. Have you ever been subject to an order of involuntary commitment in an inpatient or outpatient setting due to a mental illness?
Yes
No
8. Do you have a diagnosed mental illness, regardless of whether you are receiving treatment for that illness?

no.7 on the app here is right along the lines of most states,but no.8 is unique to Michigan,so under the laws here I CANNOT obtain a CCW permit,since I have OCD.

[ninjatoth]

You're grouping bipolar people in with psychotics? Interesting. Better do more reading up on the illness.

In my experience, mental health 'doctors' are just experimenters throwing medication at you in hopes of one actually working for it's intended purpose. I've seen what a bad medication can do to a person, it's ugly.

If you're good on meds and live a stable life, why shouldn't you be able to defend yourself?

I agree that the general public has no Idea what mental illness is.I think the general public has the idea that a mental illness is ALWAYS expressed through dementia.I think that the only illnesses that should deny someone from owning firearms are those that have uncontrollable dementia.Schizophreia in it's advanced stages might be one of those circumstances.But 99% of those with mental illnesses should be allowed to own firearms,get CCW permits no matter what.

[DaveBeal]

There are certainly people with serious mental illness who should not be allowed to possess firearms. However, because of the unfortunate taboo about discussing mental illness, its prevalence is greater than many people know. The great majority of people with well-managed mild or moderate illness will never be a danger to themselves or others and should be allowed the same rights as other Americans.

mental health 'doctors' are just experimenters throwing medication at you

While it's true that the effectiveness of many psychiatric medications on a particular person can't be predicted, this shouldn't be taken as an indictment of psychiatry in general. I have been successfully treated for anxiety and insomnia and am very grateful for the help of these professionals.

[ninjatoth]

Me and my sister both have OCD pretty bad.The only difference is that she can get a CCW permit,and I cannot because she has never seen a doctor or been diagnosed,but I have been.

[DaveBeal]

Me and my sister both have OCD pretty bad.The only difference is that she can get a CCW permit,and I cannot because she has never seen a doctor or been diagnosed,but I have been.

That ain't right.

I used to be a private pilot. Pilots have the same problem. If you keep your illness hidden, you can continue to fly. But if you do the responsible thing, see a doctor and have antidepressants prescribed, the FAA takes away your medical certificate and you're grounded. It's stupid. I've been on several medications in the past and none of them would ever have jeopardized my ability to fly safely. In fact they would have enhanced it, because I slept better when I was taking them. But it's non-negotiable - the FAA has a blanket prohibition against all antidepressants.

[Old Grump]

You're grouping bipolar people in with psychotics? Interesting. Better do more reading up on the illness.

This is why it should be on a case by case basis, there are many degrees and bi-polar can be mild or only occasionally disrupting but a person who rapid cycles and hits deep manic cycles can be classified as psychotic. I probably have way more experience in this field than you can reasonably know about.

I was a group counselor for child abuse groups for years and a crisis center hot line volunteer. I dealt with a man who got messages from God through pictures of rocks he saw in the newspaper, except for that little idiosyncrasy he was the nicest man you could meet.

I also dealt with the God people and that isn't easy. Depressives mostly and a lot of alcohol/drug abusers with underlying problems beyond that. No one answer fits all. Most were just depressed from external sources beyond their control and just needed an ear to listen and a nudge towards the proper agencies that could help their particular situation till they got a handle on it.

A few and fortunately very few were on a different world than the one most of us walk in. They were quickly referred to people who could help them and some ended up confined in a hospital till they were stabilized. Some were just harmless like the old gal who would get drunk once a week then call the hotline at dark thirty in the morning to sing and play the piano for us, she was just lonely and we were her contact. Explaining that we weren't there to visit with her and we didn't need her music didn't do any good and hanging up didn't do any good because we were on speed dial.

It was interesting but after x number of child abductions and molestations and x number of suicide calls, I had to throw in the towel. At that particular time and place most of those people probably shouldn't have had guns but most shouldn't have been permanently disqualified either, not for a temporary episode in their life.

[Glenn E. Meyer]

Ninjatoth - If I recall correctly, you have discussed this before. At that time, we advised you to seek legal advice from an attorney with knowledge of your local laws and advised to seek out the local firearms rights organization that posters said had info on specifics.

Did you do that?

If not, perhaps - you would be better served doing that, than posting here again.

PS - folks shouldn't throw around technical terms and diagnoses if you are not fully aware of what they are.

[NWPilgrim]

Agree with the "case by case" approach rather than across the board prohibition. The right to bear arms should be the foundation. No law should prevent an entire class of citizens from exercising that right. It would be too easy for the government to start classifying gun owners as mentally unstable for any number of cooked up reasons. Oppressive governments often use "mental illness" to describe anyone who disagrees with them.

If a person is thought ot be a danger to others, then it should be taken to court and determined if that was a one time circumstance or a permanent condition and of such severity he can no longer exercise a fundamental right as a citizen.

Now, if a person is on psychotropic drugs, then I could see a case for disallowing firearms, but only during the period of prescription.

The whole mental illness arena is a delicate matter when it comes to civil rights because it can be so easily abused by the State.

[ninjatoth]

Ninjatoth - If I recall correctly, you have discussed this before. At that time, we advised you to seek legal advice from an attorney with knowledge of your local laws and advised to seek out the local firearms rights organization that posters said had info on specifics.

Did you do that?

If not, perhaps - you would be better served doing that, then posting here again.

Well,yes I did post something before asking directly about CCW permits,and me not being elibible,but this is a totally different post dealing with actual reasons why someone should not be allowed firearms ownership,or those who should think twice about owning firearms.I have no issue with legally obtaining any firearms,handguns or long guns,and i'm not seeking more information about getting a CCW permit,I just want to encourage others who may have mental issues.

[Glenn E. Meyer]

Sorry, if I misinterpreted.

There is no viable solution for mandatory proactive screening for people wanting to buy guns if they have NOT been already been adjucated or diagnosed as a risk (as mentioned above).

Getting exams before, banning folks who have certain drugs proscribed, etc. will just preclude many, many people who are NO risk from getting firearms. The false positive rate will be astronomical.

It will also deter folks from getting help.

This has been said above also - by me and other.

Certainly, if one feels that they should not own a gun, they shouldn't.

[zombieslayer]

My thought: Firearms are great for mental health!!

[Lawyer Daggit]

The point needs stressing that the mentally ill are by and large the most harmless people in the community, and it is really only if someone is psychotic that one would need to deprive them of their right to bear arms.

[Mr. Davis]

I think this falls under the realm of family and personal responsibility.

If a person struggles with mental illness, depression, or other challenging emotional conditions, perhaps their guns should be willfully placed under the watchful care of a loved one. I realize this has serious repercussions on the ability of one to engage in armed self-defense, but in most cases the chances of a mentally ill person harming themselves or someone else with a firearm outweighs the chances they'll have to use it for self-defense.

This is just my opinion on the matter, and is worth what you paid for it.