Since Sandy Hook, 1,000 kids under age 12 have died from guns

[human]

Are parents and others who leave guns in places to get stolen, leave them out for children to find and use, leave them where teens can use them to commit suicide, shoot themselves while handling them such as dropping them, all mentally ill?

In the US, people are not put away for mental illness. They get meds.

 

[Jennifer17]

I've been gone for 4-5 days and didn't do anything online for that time (It was awesome!). Lots of posts here since I left but I wont go back through them all. Human, you raise interesting points there. Mentally ill people are all over the world. Without question we need to be doing a much better job at identifying and helping these people. There are lots of mentally ill people living on the streets, and while they occasionally can be violent, they rarely use guns. It is more non-homeless people with mental illness that seem to be dangerous. We need better ideas on how to spot mental illness and awareness of the public, de-stigmatizing mental illness. I don't really have an answer to that. We are going to have to change some laws regarding mental illness and make it easier for LE to detain some people. But we can't just lock them up.

Other countries have all those problems with mental illness diagnosed or not, non-compliance with medication and other problems, but what they do not have is easy access to guns.

 

[Ibiz]

Other countries have all those problems with mental illness diagnosed or not, non-compliance with medication and other problems, but what they do not have is easy access to guns.

Jen, it's really not all that easy for mentally ill people to obtain guns here in the US. We have strick laws about that. Like I was saying before, most kids that become victims of gun violence is because of street gangs. A lot of the gang members can be classified as children which would add them to the satistic. A lot of child victims are also a result of drive by shootings as well. As said before, this is do to the illegal gun trade. Also, a lot of the gang members do not even have citizenship statas. Sometimes they are caught and sent back to their own country.

 

[PrairieWind]

I don't dispute that at all. I am all for doing more to try to keep mentally ill people from having access to firearms. Its just difficult to do now. We need to change some laws. It is very difficult to get a person committed involuntarily now. Sometimes that is a good thing, but sometimes it leads to tragedy. And even when someone is diagnosed with a mental illness, medical privacy laws work to keep that secret. its not supposed to be that way, but it happens.

 

[flourish]

Lol @ the idea that guns really aren't so easy to come by... I live in a hunting state, so stories abound, but just in the last month my coworker bought her fiance a handgun, legally, from a local gun shop, on her lunch hour. No waiting, just super fast run through a database.

They didn't have her medical records.. (hi, HIPAA) I mean, I don't worry about her or fiance's mental state, but gun shop guy doesn't know her, database doesn't hold her mental health history...

I do have a family member who has been committed involuntarily, and attempted suicide via firearm, and barely survived, and I'll have to ask her mom to make sure but I don't think she even has any legal restrictions about purchasing a gun... She's not considered criminally insane or anything...

Gets me thinking... Like, how "serious" does a manifestation of mental illness have to rise to to get to the point of being deemed unfit for firearm possession? How is that determined proactively? Can it be? Should it be? Huh. Food for thought I guess.

 

[flourish]

I don't dispute that at all. I am all for doing more to try to keep mentally ill people from having access to firearms. Its just difficult to do now. We need to change some laws. It is very difficult to get a person committed involuntarily now. Sometimes that is a good thing, but sometimes it leads to tragedy. And even when someone is diagnosed with a mental illness, medical privacy laws work to keep that secret. its not supposed to be that way, but it happens.

How are medical privacy laws not supposed to work that way?
Like, who, other than my medical professionals, need to know about my, say, hypothetical chronic depression and anxiety disorder and PTSD? How does one go from the list of everyone diagnosed with a mental illness to who is potentially dangerous? Will gun lovers stop seeing mental health treatment?

 

[PrairieWind]

How are medical privacy laws not supposed to work that way?
Like, who, other than my medical professionals, need to know about my, say, hypothetical chronic depression and anxiety disorder and PTSD? How does one go from the list of everyone diagnosed with a mental illness to who is potentially dangerous? Will gun lovers stop seeing mental health treatment?

Initially when the background check concept came along, these records were contemplated to be available. But that never really happened. Then HIPPA came along and it became even more likely that mental health issues would not show up. Stuff falls through all the time. If a care provider isn't 100% certain they can provide some piece of information, they arent going to. And believe me, with the amount of regulations regarding HIPPA, very very few people know for sure.

But you also raise a good question about will people seek mental health care if they think it will have later implications for gun ownership. The answer is "yes." Its not limited to gun ownership either. Lots of professionals will not seek mental health care for fear it will cost them their careers. You see this with substance abuse as well. Its a catch-22 that I don't have an answer for.

 

[Jennifer17]

Initially when the background check concept came along, these records were contemplated to be available. But that never really happened. Then HIPPA came along and it became even more likely that mental health issues would not show up. Stuff falls through all the time. If a care provider isn't 100% certain they can provide some piece of information, they arent going to. And believe me, with the amount of regulations regarding HIPPA, very very few people know for sure.

But you also raise a good question about will people seek mental health care if they think it will have later implications for gun ownership. The answer is "yes." Its not limited to gun ownership either. Lots of professionals will not seek mental health care for fear it will cost them their careers. You see this with substance abuse as well. Its a catch-22 that I don't have an answer for.

Well, I have answer for it. It doesn't have to answer protected records, about who or who is not mentally ill, just stop people buying guns, like the rest of the world does.
You know the rest of the world who do not have mass shootings every other day. Is it really worth it for everyone being allowed to own a gun when there are so many deaths by gun. Many not in the commission of crimes other than road rages or killing the wives or their whole families or killing strangers at concerts or in theatres or in their work places. Really is the is the cost of your freedom to own a gun? Twisted logic to me and the rest of the more civilised world.

 

[Ibiz]

How are medical privacy laws not supposed to work that way?
Like, who, other than my medical professionals, need to know about my, say, hypothetical chronic depression and anxiety disorder and PTSD? How does one go from the list of everyone diagnosed with a mental illness to who is potentially dangerous? Will gun lovers stop seeing mental health treatment?

Flourish, when a person buys a gun they have to sign a paper saying that they have never been commited to a mental hospital. If it's found out that they lied then it would be fraud, and they can go to jail.

The problem is that a person can be completely sane on the day they purchased their gun, but there is no promise that they will still be sane a month, or 5-years later. Countless of mental ill people kill themselves every year with their own guns.

That said, not very many kids are ever killed by mentally ill people with guns. 99% of the kids that you guys are posting about with your statistic are killed by illegally purchased guns. Like i said before, inner city gang violance/drive by shootings and so-on.

 

[Ibiz]

Well, I have answer for it. It doesn't have to answer protected records, about who or who is not mentally ill, just stop people buying guns, like the rest of the world does.

Jen, the USA would not be the big super power it is today without guns. Most kids are taught to start playing with guns when they start to walk. If you go to any toy store they have shelves packed with toy guns. On the box it will say ages 3+.

 

[K_Z]

Inpatient, long term, residential, involuntary commitment essentially doesn't exist in the U.S. any longer, because of the ways our health care system has changed sine the 1970s, and because of de-institutionalization.

What we CAN focus on developing and improving is better and more streamlined outpatient involuntary commitment. Many people have never even heard of this as a treatment option. Think of it as a more intensive "parole/ probation" experience. Certainly part of the contract for supervision includes no access to weapons, and not living in or with others who have lawful access to weapons.

If someone like Adam Lanza had been subject to outpatient involuntary commitment at age 18 over the "sheltering objections" of Nancy Lanza, the 26 children and educators at Sandy Hook would still be alive, IMO. Nancy Lanza was not objective or experienced enough to provide competent supervision and care for Adam Lanza, who had multiple lifelong social and functional disabilities that rendered him incompetent. IMO.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Outpatient_commitment

Outpatient commitment—also called Assisted Outpatient Treatment (AOT) or a Community Treatment Order (CTO)—refers to a civil court procedure wherein a judge orders an individual diagnosed with severe a mental disorder who is experiencing a psychiatric crisis that requires intervention to adhere to an outpatient treatment plan designed to prevent further deterioration that is harmful to themselves or others.

This form of involuntary treatment is distinct from involuntary commitment in that the individual subject to the court order continues to live in their home community rather than being detained in hospital or incarcerated. The individual may be subject to rapid recall to hospital, including medication over objection, if the conditions of the order are broken, and the person's mental health deteriorates. This generally means taking psychiatric medication as directed and may also include attending appointments with a mental health professional, and sometimes even not to take non-prescribed illicit drugs and not associate with certain people or in certain places deemed to have been linked to a deterioration in mental health in that individual.

Criteria for outpatient commitment are established by law, which vary among nations and, in the U.S. and Canada, among states or provinces. Some jurisdictions require court hearings and others require that treating psychiatrists comply with a set of requirements before compulsory treatment is instituted. When a court process is not required, there is usually a form of appeal to the courts or appeal to or scrutiny by tribunals set up for that purpose. Community treatment laws have generally followed the worldwide trend of community treatment. See mental health law for details of countries which do not have laws that regulate compulsory treatment.

 

[Jennifer17]

Flourish, when a person buys a gun they have to sign a paper saying that they have never been commited to a mental hospital. If it's found out that they lied then it would be fraud, and they can go to jail.

The problem is that a person can be completely sane on the day they purchased their gun, but there is no promise that they will still be sane a month, or 5-years later. Countless of mental ill people kill themselves every year with their own guns.

That said, not very many kids are ever killed by mentally ill people with guns. 99% of the kids that you guys are posting about with your statistic are killed by illegally purchased guns. Like i said before, inner city gang violance/drive by shootings and so-on.

That is so not true. Many, many gun deaths are by men shooting their wives and children, black or white with legally purchased guns.

 

[Jennifer17]

Inpatient, long term, residential, involuntary commitment essentially doesn't exist in the U.S. any longer, because of the ways our health care system has changed sine the 1970s, and because of de-institutionalization.

What we CAN focus on developing and improving is better and more streamlined outpatient involuntary commitment. Many people have never even heard of this as a treatment option. Think of it as a more intensive "parole/ probation" experience. Certainly part of the contract for supervision includes no access to weapons, and not living in or with others who have lawful access to weapons.

If someone like Adam Lanza had been subject to outpatient involuntary commitment at age 18 over the "sheltering objections" of Nancy Lanza, the 26 children and educators at Sandy Hook would still be alive, IMO. Nancy Lanza was not objective or experienced enough to provide competent supervision and care for Adam Lanza, who had multiple lifelong social and functional disabilities that rendered him incompetent. IMO.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Outpatient_commitment

I am not sure why you are focusing on Adam Lanza, who was mentally ill, according to you, but there have been many other mass shootings that were not as strange looking as Adam. Many, many others have.
And, do you really think that other countries do not have Adam Lanza types? They do, but they do not have access to rapid fire weapons which all nut cases do in the US. Is there a point when the US will make some change?
Only 600 shot in LV. What will it take? Thousands?

 

[human]

I am not sure why you are focusing on Adam Lanza, who was mentally ill, according to you, but there have been many other mass shootings that were not as strange looking as Adam. Many, many others have.
And, do you really think that other countries do not have Adam Lanza types? They do, but they do not have access to rapid fire weapons which all nut cases do in the US. Is there a point when the US will make some change?
Only 600 shot in LV. What will it take? Thousands?

I think it will take education. Children being treated in different methods than they have been.Not punishment, but children learning to problem solve.

Then we won’t have adults that are so needy. They will learn they have power in their own selves. They won’t need to be afraid or have rage. They will be more self actualized.

 

[EuTuCroquet?]

Goodness, I mean, hypothetically speaking of course, if PTSD or depression and/or anxiety disorder — all three are pretty common — became restrictions to gun ownership, then very few Americans would be able to own firearms.

Sixty percent of men and 50 percent of women experience some sort of trauma in their lifetimes.

Major depression is one of the most common mental illnesses in America. Anxiety disorder is THE most common. That’s, like, 20 percent of the US population.

The rates are increased in military servicemen and women.

Hmmmmm. HIPPA isn’t the problem. Privacy isn’t the problem. Mental illness is a CONTRIBUTOR to the gun violence epidemic.

It is not the cause.

Easy access, unsafe handling and storage, proliferation of access and an abundance of high-power firearms are much larger factors.

I mean, toddlers don’t shoot and kill each other or themselves because they have a psychotic break.

“Gangsters” selling hundreds of thousands of unsecured firearms stolen from law-abiding citizens every year didn’t influence Adam Lanza to use an AR-15 to slaughter and wound dozens of innocent children. Nor did they inspire him to use a Savage Mark rifle to murder his own mother.

 

[MelmothTheLost]

In the US, people are not put away for mental illness. They get meds.

Here in the UK mentally ill people can be involuntarily committed if they are judged to be a danger to themselves or others. This is almost always a temporary thing for a few weeks or months to get them stablised and their meds sorted out. Then they are released.

Rinse and repeat.

 

[Ibiz]

Here in the UK mentally ill people can be involuntarily committed if they are judged to be a danger to themselves or others. This is almost always a temporary thing for a few weeks or months to get them stablised and their meds sorted out. Then they are released.

Rinse and repeat.

That's basically the way it is here in the US as well. Usally a week or two, where they are kept under close observation, and a doctor has to sign off on their release. If the doctor feels the patient is still a danger then the hospital can obtain a court order to keep the patient for a longer period.

 

[EuTuCroquet?]

That's basically the way it is here in the US as well. Usally a week or two, where they are kept under close observation, and a doctor has to sign off on their release. If the doctor feels the patient is still a danger then the hospital can obtain a court order to keep the patient for a longer period.

Unfortunately, it’s not that cut-and-dried in the U.S. It’s a complicated process.

Involuntary inpatient psychiatric commitment (of adults, anyway) is a “last resort.”

It’s difficult to do. In most states it must meet specific legal guidelines and/or be court-ordered. In some states, the patient must be currently at risk for homicidal violence or suicide. Some states allow some instances for drug use/addiction.

And care quality, if there isn’t a bed wait, varies greatly from state to state. Stays can range from hours or days to (in extreme cases) weeks or months.

Coerced treatment can be exceedingly difficult to get, especially for those who need it most.

And then there’s the huge question of who pays for it, insurance, etc.

It isn’t easy. By any stretch. I’m not saying it should be, necessarily; it just isn’t. At least husbands can’t involuntary commit their “hysterical” wives instead of divorcing them, as the “Mad Men”-era trope goes.

http://www.pressherald.com/2012/12/...werless-when-mentally-ill-adult-resists-help/

http://dls.virginia.gov/GROUPS/MHS/TAC_2014survey.pdf

 

[MaryG12]

Well, I have answer for it. It doesn't have to answer protected records, about who or who is not mentally ill, just stop people buying guns, like the rest of the world does.
You know the rest of the world who do not have mass shootings every other day. Is it really worth it for everyone being allowed to own a gun when there are so many deaths by gun. Many not in the commission of crimes other than road rages or killing the wives or their whole families or killing strangers at concerts or in theatres or in their work places. Really is the is the cost of your freedom to own a gun? Twisted logic to me and the rest of the more civilised world.

In some countries, it's bombs, not guns, used to kill people - almost every day.

Nigeria, Afghanistan, Iraq, Turkey, Yemen et al.

What is the answer for this?

 

[MaryG12]

I think it will take education. Children being treated in different methods than they have been.Not punishment, but children learning to problem solve.

Then we won’t have adults that are so needy. They will learn they have power in their own selves. They won’t need to be afraid or have rage. They will be more self actualized.

Human:

That is why I think this is more of an anger management issue that many shooters have, not necessarily mental illness.

Las Vegas being the best example I can think off the top of my head.

The bottom line is this:

There are many mentally ill individuals in the USA who would never just pick up a gun and decide to shoot people.

The mass shooter/mentally ill argument maybe needs to be rethought.

MOO