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.
Mental ill ness is often misunderstood, many who suffer from it are not a threat to themselves or others.
Now replace the words "mental illness" with "PTSD"
Its the same thing-in the end we've deemed people with mental illness unable to own a weapon, PTSD or Vet is irrelevant. If you wanted to approach it as "not all people who have a mental illness should be prevented from owning a gun" Sure. Thats a discussion. This is just "but the rules dont apply to this group" with no special reason given.
"Over 127,000 Veterans have been placed on the Federal gun registry criminal check system because they have Post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) or a Traumatic Brain Injury (TBI). They are now unable to own a firearm."
Mental ill ness is often misunderstood, many who suffer from it are not a threat to themselves or others.
Now replace the words "mental illness" with "PTSD"
Its the same thing-in the end we've deemed people with mental illness unable to own a weapon, PTSD or Vet is irrelevant. If you wanted to approach it as "not all people who have a mental illness should be prevented from owning a gun" Sure. Thats a discussion. This is just "but the rules dont apply to this group" with no special reason given.
Who said the rules don't apply to this group?
Based on my op, it looks like they want to take guns away from this group and this group only.
Duh.
The bottom line is when they startd to limit right (2rd amendment right) of selected group of people, then eventually, nobody is safe.
I know some of you guys cringe when you hear "Veterans", what I see is that giving government too much power will eventually affect me, and me no like it. :P
Just out of curiosity, did you actually click on play and watched these two videos? Did you click on the link and read those two articles? Because I am surprised after reading and playing you come up with the conclusion that somebody are trying to make any excuses for them simply because they are veterans.
Last edited by lilyflower3191981; 04-24-2014 at 12:45 PM..
its better to be safe then sorry, with the idea of losing their rights if they get help many who might need it will just keep it bottled up inside, which is never good...
When your liberties and freedom are threatened its best to keep your head down..
So just to be clear...you support the idea of a mentally unstable person carrying loaded firearms.
There are a lot of people suffer from mental illnesses. A lot of people suffer from PTSD are not even veterans. I wonder if they all have to give up on their 2rd amendment right.
A lot of people suffer from mental illness. But only vets and law enforcement officers are trained to respond to a threat with extreme violence. Throw in PTSD, and you have the distinct possibility of imagined threats, too. See where this is going?
I don't know the answers but the above are facts which we should consider.
A lot of people suffer from mental illness. But only vets and law enforcement officers are trained to respond to a threat with extreme violence. Throw in PTSD, and you have the distinct possibility of imagined threats, too. See where this is going?
I don't know the answers but the above are facts which we should consider.
Yeah, I agree. But I still don't see the point of taking away the gun from a veteran (like the guy in the video) who has been out of the military for more than 20+ years. He was never a criminal, he was never violent. I suppose there are never easy answers.
also, "The truth is that research shows most Veterans (and non-Veterans) with PTSD are not violent. In fact, propensity for violence is not even included in the list of “common problems” associated with PTSD that the center provides on its website."
There are a lot of veterans who suffer from PTSD are not even combat veterans. So where exactly do we draw the line ?
Again, the most important thing to remember is that everyone who wants to own a gun should be able to, because a small group of small minded people worship guns and lose their minds over even the slightest suggestion that anything other than that approach be taken.
Cue the mass shootings by damaged vets with access to an arsenal.
Matter of fact, a lot of combat Marine friends that I have DON'T even want to own any guns. This is their individual choice. I also know couple combat veterans who use alcohol, drugs, compulsive behaviors to mask the pain of PTSD, (They shouldn't be near a firearm in my opinion)
But, taking away guns from every combat veteran who suffers from PTSD is outrageous It's a slippery slope and it's getting scary!
I support gun right, but I don't believe every idiot out there should own one. But how do we determine who is the "idiot" (for lack of a better word) should not own a gun? Where do you draw the line is the focus of this thread really.
Last edited by lilyflower3191981; 04-24-2014 at 02:04 PM..
So just to be clear...you support the idea of a mentally unstable person carrying loaded firearms.
Define Mentally unstable..If that are that much of a threat you have to prove so in a court of law before you can limit their rights, not just pass some moronic law, on a moronic premise that limits the rights of those best suited to defend this nation from a domestic threat.
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.
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.
