U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Hobbies and Recreation > Guns and Hunting
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 07-21-2015, 09:28 AM
 
Location: Kansas
19,189 posts, read 14,127,847 times
Reputation: 18146

Advertisements

Here is another article that elaborates on the subject: Gun Access May Be Banned For Many With Disabilities - Disability Scoop
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 07-21-2015, 11:39 AM
 
Location: somewhere in the woods
16,886 posts, read 12,565,008 times
Reputation: 5210
Quote:
Originally Posted by TracySam View Post
But remember, SSDI/SSI are not like collecting welfare. With welfare, I agree, get a job, or be subject to a whole lot of scrutiny. But SSDI and SSI are for people with bona fide disabilities that prevent them from being able to work. Are there people faking or exaggerating symptoms? Probably. But there are people who truly cannot work, and in the case of SSDI, they've worked for years and paid into the system.

Here's an example:
Someone works 25 years, pays into Social Security, then gets hit by a bus. She's in a wheelchair now, and has some memory problems due to a head injury. These things prevent her from working. Because of the memory problems, she agreed to have her brother act as her Representative Payee, to make sure her monthly money is budgeted properly. But she is a long-time target shooter, and now going to the range is one of the few things left from her previous life that she can still do an that she enjoys. Should the government have the right to take away her guns?


no the government should not be able to take away her 2nd Amendment right.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-21-2015, 12:41 PM
 
Location: Milwaukee, WI
2,124 posts, read 1,452,996 times
Reputation: 2325
2nd amendment does not prohibit restrictions of mentally-ill people.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-23-2015, 12:41 PM
 
Location: Sugarmill Woods , FL
6,235 posts, read 5,421,588 times
Reputation: 13591
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-23-2015, 02:47 PM
 
Location: Round Rock, Texas
7,853 posts, read 7,847,484 times
Reputation: 6267
Quote:
Originally Posted by brrabbit View Post
2nd amendment does not prohibit restrictions of mentally-ill people.
Yet violent felons, gang members, and adjudicated mentally ill are forbidden to possess firearms.... here in Texas. I have no problem with that, and no law-abiding citizen should.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-23-2015, 04:09 PM
 
9,212 posts, read 18,107,610 times
Reputation: 21961
What do you mean by "adjudicated mentally ill?" People who have been involuntarily committed through the courts? People legally declared incompetent?


Because most people on disability benefits who have mental illnesses are not in those categories.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-24-2015, 09:48 AM
 
Location: Round Rock, Texas
7,853 posts, read 7,847,484 times
Reputation: 6267
Quote:
Originally Posted by TracySam View Post
What do you mean by "adjudicated mentally ill?" People who have been involuntarily committed through the courts? People legally declared incompetent?


Because most people on disability benefits who have mental illnesses are not in those categories.
Any mentally ill person who has been adjudicated as incompetent, unable to care for themselves (need 24/7 living care), shows violent tendencies, or otherwise an inability to control themselves in a safe manner.

That does not include people who have been diagnosed with PTSD, depression, or a controllable problem where there is no danger of violent action. Nor does it include granny who lives alone & survives with Meals on Wheels.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-24-2015, 10:01 AM
 
9,212 posts, read 18,107,610 times
Reputation: 21961
Quote:
Originally Posted by ScoPro View Post
Any mentally ill person who has been adjudicated as incompetent, unable to care for themselves (need 24/7 living care), shows violent tendencies, or otherwise an inability to control themselves in a safe manner.

That does not include people who have been diagnosed with PTSD, depression, or a controllable problem where there is no danger of violent action. Nor does it include granny who lives alone & survives with Meals on Wheels.
So if you mean any person who has had court-ordered action taken against them because of a mental illness, then I agree with you, and those people are already barred from buying guns.

But when you're talking about someone who has just gone through period of being "unable to care for themselves" or "showing violent tendencies" and no court action has happened, then I feel that those people still maintain their 2nd amendment rights. People who have gone through Major Depression have often had periods in which they "could not care for themselves" (not showering, not paying attention to bills, not eating), but that by itself should not determine that that person loses a constitutional right. "showing violent tendencies" is pretty vague. If a person gets very upset at receiving bad news and punches a hole in his wall, that's a "violent tendency" but it doesn't mean has should not be a legal gun owner. Unfortunately, if your undiagnosed neighbor who is a heavy drinker gets angry and punches a hole in his wall, he was just angry. But if a person diagnosed with bipolar disorder gets angry and punches a hole in his wall, he's seen as a person dangerous to society.

But getting back to the original post and linked article, people who are under Social Security Payeeship have not necessarily been adjudicated as incompetent. Yes, all people who are legally incompetent who receive SS benefits are put under Payeeship, but not all people under payeeship are legally incompetent. It's actually VERY easy for a family member to get Representative Payeeship over their mentally ill relative. All it takes is asking their doctor to sign a form, then unfortunately, the burden then falls onto the mentally person to prove they can handle their own benefits. I've seen many people lose the right to manage their own benefits, when they really could handle it, just because they had a very controlling family member who wanted to take over their money (sometimes for nefarious reasons).
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-29-2015, 02:21 PM
 
Location: Arizona, The American Southwest
51,102 posts, read 29,183,240 times
Reputation: 90178
Should Gun Control Extend To Some People On Social Security?

No.

Typical Obama logic, which doesn't makes any sense - Target decent law-abiding retirees who may want to have a firearm to protect themselves, instead of the REAL cause of violent crimes - Criminals.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Hobbies and Recreation > Guns and Hunting
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top