Quote:
Originally Posted by GenuineRisk
Another of the challenges is, what gets defined as a mental illness severe enough to warrant a handgun restriction? More people die from suicide via gunshot each year than homicide. So does anyone who's ever been diagnosed with depression get a no-gun rule due to fear they'll kill themselves with it? Or just men, because they're more likely to use guns. I'm exaggerating for effect, of course, but that's the challenge- trying to find a mental health rule of thumb for what is a very individualized condition.
I do think greater resources for treating mental ill health. Which would be good, not just for dealing with gun violence, but all kinds of situations.
|
Present law seems to indicate a person has to have already demonstrated that they are dangerous to themselves and others. What if a person indicates in therapy sessions that they fantasize about harming others? Do they actually have to harm someone to be put on the database? Therapist for the Movie theater shooter in Colorado indicated that she was afraid he might do what he eventually did. Must have been something that gave her this impression. Maybe the definition should be expanded to include even threats to other persons from persons that have mental illness, but illness that has not yet presented itself as psychosis.