• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

CC mental health form question

Status
Not open for further replies.

davidmcbeth

Banned
Joined
Jan 14, 2012
Messages
16,167
Location
earth's crust
That is the level you should continue to expect.

When mental health issues are discussed almost all gun owners will say that crazy people should not have access to guns.


I don't subscribe to this. Only crazy people who are separated from society due to their health issues (or any other issues for that matter, not just mental health) should have their RKBA trimmed in any manner.


A crazy person could kill me just as easily with a hammer as with a gun.

I don't worry about these risks. I am more likely to get run over by a VW Bug filled with clowns.

There are no "reasonable" gun control laws.

And when the issue is being discussed people go crazy.

Maximum lizzurds will want people to get an OK from a physiologist before one can buy a gun.

And other lizzurds will use the examples of crazy killers as evidence that non-crazy people are not likely to kill and that the laws on the books now would have prevented killings if only enforced and new laws will do nothing.
 
Last edited:

WalkingWolf

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 31, 2011
Messages
11,930
Location
North Carolina
When mental health issues are discussed almost all gun owners will say that crazy people should not have access to guns.


I don't subscribe to this. Only crazy people who are separated from society due to their health issues (or any other issues for that matter, not just mental health) should have their RKBA trimmed in any manner.


A crazy person could kill me just as easily with a hammer as with a gun.

I don't worry about these risks. I am more likely to get run over by a VW Bug filled with clowns.

There are no "reasonable" gun control laws.

And when the issue is being discussed people go crazy.

Maximum lizzurds will want people to get an OK from a physiologist before one can buy a gun.

And other lizzurds will use the examples of crazy killers as evidence that non-crazy people are not likely to kill and that the laws on the books now would have prevented killings if only enforced and new laws will do nothing.

Yes, and those people are sometimes otherwise sane gun owners. It is the same for felons, if they want to commit violence laws will not stop them, if they want a gun they will get it, by committing more crime.

There are only two ways to stop them, lock them up, or stop them in the act.

OTOH some felons can turn good, some crazy people can lead non violent lives. And sometimes some good people can turn bad, and some smart bad people do not get caught.

The question in this thread was a legal one that had to do with NC statutes. I did not answer because while all know my feelings toward useless feel good laws I will not intentionally violate site rules. Add to that I have no history on the OP, and this is a volatile time for the next two months.
 
Last edited:

JoeSparky

Centurion
Joined
Jun 20, 2008
Messages
3,621
Location
Pleasant Grove, Utah, USA
That is the level you should continue to expect.
While saddened he didn't recieve the welcome he deserved and should have received the known behaviors of some unrepentant souls on this forum didn't surprise me at all. I say unrepentant for when those have been challenge to be better the response in one of pride and continuation. 'Tis certainly getting old to see it happen over and over.

You don't need to know what kind of device or tool was used to send this
 

solus

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 22, 2013
Messages
9,315
Location
here nc
While saddened he didn't recieve the welcome he deserved and should have received the known behaviors of some unrepentant souls on this forum didn't surprise me at all. I say unrepentant for when those have been challenge to be better the response in one of pride and continuation. 'Tis certainly getting old to see it happen over and over.

You don't need to know what kind of device or tool was used to send this

so joe, besides jumping in to engage in an emotionally charged chastisement of another member with slightly veiled insults over the response provided.

so do you have any objective contribution countering those response(s) or any type of valid information which assists the OP?

don't believe you do joe, not one bloody iota, yet you just jump to jab a personal insult apparently to heighten your own ego for unknown reasons known only to yourself.

consider joe, which of us lack the appropriate maturity towards members...

ipse
 

solus

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 22, 2013
Messages
9,315
Location
here nc
When mental health issues are discussed almost all gun owners will say that crazy people should not have access to guns.
snipp...
A crazy person could kill me just as easily with a hammer as with a gun.
snipp.
There are no "reasonable" gun control laws.
And when the issue is being discussed people go crazy.
snipp..

guess what, agree w/these points, especially w/lack of viable gun control laws...

but...please outline a viable societal overview to deal with those individual(s) who lack coping skills to deal with their emotionally charged activities they experience during marital, employment, ad nausem, difficulties?

then let's chat about implementation of overview across this country.

ipse
 

Skeletor06

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 12, 2016
Messages
12
Location
NC
guess what, agree w/these points, especially w/lack of viable gun control laws...

but...please outline a viable societal overview to deal with those individual(s) who lack coping skills to deal with their emotionally charged activities they experience during marital, employment, ad nausem, difficulties?

then let's chat about implementation of overview across this country.

ipse

Solus, I never thought I'd say it, but I think I agree with you. What would you consider to be "viable" gun control laws? I'm honestly asking for your opinion. I'd say that being adjudicated mentally incompetent without restoration of rights, found not guilty by reason of insanity, current felony charges /convictions (to include serious misdemeanors such as driving impaired, domestic violence, etc.), under a restraining order, etc. are good reasons to deny a firearm.

The reason I listed are based on 1) what someone chose to do, i.e. commit a crime or 2) the person has an illness to such a degree that they are unwilling or unable to care for themselves and the court had to appoint someone to make decisions for them.

Barring that, we just can't know what others will do. But I would submit we shouldn't infringe on anyone's rights if they haven't done anything to have them taken away.

The reason I got so heated in response to your comments towards me is that I felt it was a rush to judgement without provocation. "Preemptive" laws take away the rights of people who haven't done anything wrong. All people should have the right to responsibly carry a firearm, up to and until the point that they have shown by their own actions that they can't safely do so.

Edit: "a lack of coping skills" is surely not solely the realm of people with mental illness, especially those who actively care for their well-being with medication and other modalities. I would argue that their coping skills are likely more developed than many people without mental illness who go through such situations, if only because the former group had to learn to be vigilant about their mental health. This does not include, of course, people who refuse necessary treatment and support.
 
Last edited:

davidmcbeth

Banned
Joined
Jan 14, 2012
Messages
16,167
Location
earth's crust
guess what, agree w/these points, especially w/lack of viable gun control laws...

but...please outline a viable societal overview to deal with those individual(s) who lack coping skills to deal with their emotionally charged activities they experience during marital, employment, ad nausem, difficulties?

then let's chat about implementation of overview across this country.

ipse

tsk tsk tsk ... error: always thinking that there IS a solution when, in reality, there is none. What? Yes, its called life ... equally unfair to all.

50yrs ago it would be family of course but with abortions, easy divorce etc...its a thing of the past.
 

solus

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 22, 2013
Messages
9,315
Location
here nc
might i be afforded the opportunity to start at the end of your query as it provides segue into the discussion.

first premise: DV is, for the most part, a familial learned tactic for both men and women. not withstanding within certain ethnic populations where it is viable mainstay of their culture. that stated, if it can be learned, then society can assist to un-learn (read providing coping skills) the tactic to mitigate DV incidents.

second premise: substance use/abuse, society has yet to discern why it's population needs substances, let alone come up w/viable modalities to treat those who are affected.

third premise: our society stigmatize its citizens who are suffering from mental health issues ~ long term, e.g., personality disorders or short term, death in family, divorce, etc. instead...all citizens are lumped together and chastised and shunned. these citizens are not provided appropriate care, similar to having a cold (short term issues) to having, say MS, Lou G, etc (long term issues); or seeing a GP instead of a MH professional who is trained to provide CBT coping skills, talk therapy, and so forth instead of the GP saying take this pill and you will feel better in the morning ~ no where does the citizen learn to come to grips with the issue they are facing or dealing with. please see premise two.

fourth premise: citizens refuse treatment due to financial constrats, stigmatization by family/friends/employment/etc., treatment causes AND they want help instead of being given a pill.

fifth premise: get meda (all media, social, mainstream, internet drudge) under control to cease with the shock and awe journalism so the news reporting enties cease making $$$ off of society's tragedies.

now real life situation...NM, pop 1.8m, 2014- 311, 2015 - 398, 2016 to date - 341 NM citizens have died on the state's highways..'studies' reveal upward to 75% of th deaths are due to someone driving while impaired. state officials have no earthly clue how to abate these deaths. except to pass meaningless legislation meant to apease their society. premise two, three, four, and five are in play.

oh, premise one is also in play in NM as the hispanic/latino ethnicity is where familial abuse is a normal part of their culture.

now, to mitigate firearm restrictions...our society needs to provide to our children the appropriate guidance on how to deal with life's stressor in an appropriate manner, if a citizen has a difficulty, our society has to openly treat the individual, etc. btw to provide the children's parents need the same interdiction.

once society sees these modalities work, the knee jerk legislative constraints will cease and individuals should be once again held accountable instead of a class of citizens.

apologize for the length

ipse
 

OC for ME

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 6, 2010
Messages
12,452
Location
White Oak Plantation
...

now, to mitigate firearm restrictions...our society needs to provide to our children the appropriate guidance on how to deal with life's stressor in an appropriate manner, if a citizen has a difficulty, our society has to openly treat the individual, etc. btw to provide the children's parents need the same interdiction. ...
A hint of "it takes a village."

Interdiction is a "government" term http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/interdict
 

marshaul

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Aug 13, 2007
Messages
11,188
Location
Fairfax County, Virginia
but...please outline a viable societal overview to deal with those individual(s) who lack coping skills to deal with their emotionally charged activities they experience during marital, employment, ad nausem, difficulties?

There's nothing special about any case. And there isn't a "viable societal overview".

The reality of the situation is this: if an individual demonstrates unacceptable behavior (aggression), action may be taken. If an individual requests help, it may be provided. If an individual has done nothing and asked for no help, there is no law on earth that can protect us through prior restraint, while we maintain a free society.

Imposing "interdiction" elsewhere in the process is bound to A: trample rights, B: fail spectacularly, and C: give the antis a "camel's nose in the tent", which they will use to further (A) once (B) occurs.

I'm really not sure what there is to say beyond that.
 
Last edited:

utbagpiper

Banned
Joined
Jul 5, 2006
Messages
4,061
Location
Utah
That is the level you should continue to expect.

While saddened he didn't recieve the welcome he deserved and should have received the known behaviors of some unrepentant souls on this forum didn't surprise me at all. I say unrepentant for when those have been challenge to be better the response in one of pride and continuation. 'Tis certainly getting old to see it happen over and over.

Yup. Looks like the good ol' boy welcome committee is at it again. It is amazing we ever manage to keep new folks with the "welcome" they receive should any of the good ol' boys decide they might be suspicious, or, heaven forbid, the new guy commits some minor faux paus regarding someone's view of forum etiquette.

Methinks that real trolls are likely to enjoy the attention and stick around ever after being formally banned. (cough mcbeth, cough)

Oh well. It isn't like there is much useful actually going on here these days anyway. Just a little recreational value.

Charles
 

utbagpiper

Banned
Joined
Jul 5, 2006
Messages
4,061
Location
Utah
There's nothing special about any case. And there isn't a "viable societal overview".

The reality of the situation is this: if an individual demonstrates unacceptable behavior (aggression), action may be taken. If an individual requests help, it may be provided. If an individual has done nothing and asked for no help, there is no law on earth that can protect us through prior restraint, while we maintain a free society.

Imposing "interdiction" elsewhere in the process is bound to A: trample rights, B: fail spectacularly, and C: give the antis a "camel's nose" in the tent, to further (A) once (B) occurs.

+1

Anyone trusted or allowed to walk the streets unsupervised must have his rights respected....all of his rights.

If he can't be trusted to exercise all of his rights, then he ought not be walking the streets freely, unsupervised.

No man can rightly be stripped of his liberty or other rights except through full, due process for crimes committed, or through due process to determine he requires commitment for mental health problems that pose a real risk to his own others' safety.

I note that the same liberals who (correctly) point out that most person with mental health problems are not violent and do not pose any risk of criminal conduct, then turn around and want to impose lifetime bans on RKBA for anyone with any mental illness, no matter how well managed or how transient in nature.

Charles
 

Grapeshot

Legendary Warrior
Joined
May 21, 2006
Messages
35,317
Location
Valhalla
I think that the information desired by the OP has been provided. That done, what I see is a lot of personal reference that benefits no one.

Locking it.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top