Grandmother shoots grandsons,self

http://news.yahoo.com/cops-grandma-s…145334468.html

Seriously what the fuck is wrong with people?? A history of depression, schizophrenia, bi-polar disorder and they let the children go with her? And she has a gun on top of it? Nice to see so many people paying attention. Her daughter didnt think something like this "would ever happen." Naahhh shizophrenics with bi-polar?? What could possibly happen? Un-believe-a-fucking-bull.

Yep, another tragedy on planet Earth, but what does this story have to do with you again?

I see no mention of schizophrenia in any of the articles I read. Sounds sort of like bi-polar disorder but I wouldn't want to diagnose someone based on two short paragraphs. Besides neither disorder necessarily makes you unfit to care for children.

This is what I once wrote as "there needs to be a kind of sanity check for bearers of weapons".

In that regard the National Rifle Organization is right - and that's the only thing from them I agree with.

But - on the other hand : As long as such "sanity checks" don't exist, I strongly believe that NOT allowing unstable persons to bear guns is the right way.

(Person A : "Why did you want to have that gun, even although everyone knows that you are psychologically unstable ?"
Person B, holding a gun : "I just wanted to defend myself against these … these … pesky things. Uh, it just slipped off my fingers … Sorry about that mess …")

As someone with bipolar disorder, the automatic assumption is that you're unstable and unable to do anything. It's pretty damn insulting, to put it politely, especially given the 'guilty until proven innocent' BS New York state just put into law.

The mentally ill are one of the few groups in society that it is okay to persecute or discriminate against, apparently.

I believe every American should have an assault rifle so that they can defend their opinions from those who disagree.

Since most of the disagreement comes from enlightened Euros, we might need something with a little more range, JemyM. And if it's worth doing, it's worth doing big, cuz we don't do nuttin small on this here side of the pond.

Family members said Denison, the boys' maternal grandmother, had a history of mental health problems

No one with a 'history of mental health problems' would ever be left alone for one minute with my child, family or not.

Originally Posted by Rithrandil
As someone with bipolar disorder, the automatic assumption is that you're unstable and unable to do anything. It's pretty damn insulting, to put it politely, especially given the 'guilty until proven innocent' BS New York state just put into law.

The mentally ill are one of the few groups in society that it is okay to persecute or discriminate against, apparently.

I don't agree with a lot of the new gun law in NYS, but this part:

require mental-health professionals to report any patients they believe could be dangerous to themselves or others.

Is spot on. That's not guilty until proven innocent (assuming this is what you are referring to), that's common sense.

It also looks like at least some police are takinga much needed step and cross referencing gun permits with lists of people involuntarily commited for psychiatric treatment. It's not perfect, but its a good first step.

Originally Posted by dteowner
Since most of the disagreement comes from enlightened Euros, we might need something with a little more range, JemyM. And if it's worth doing, it's worth doing big, cuz we don't do nuttin small on this here side of the pond.

Use snipers. Snipers are fine.

Nuclear armed snipers? I like it!

But even mental health professionals say they can't accurately predict who might be a danger, and what you're basically doing is *further discouraging* people from actually seeking mental health treatment in this country. There's a reason why New York's new law was so roundly condemned by mental health professionals.

Furthermore, the vast ultra-majority of shootings *are not carried out by the mentally ill*. It's just an easy, convenient scapegoat. No one actually gives a fuck about the mentally ill. If we're all so dangerous, how about the government flat-out pays for every single treatment that us evil dangerous ticking timebombs need?

These new laws totally screw with the ability of someone with a mental illness to seek treatment. What if someone is going through suicidal ideation and so wants to talk to a professional? They're going to be a lot less likely to do so if they're required to be reported to the government and arbitrarily have their rights stripped from them before even committing a crime.

I'm speaking as someone who was nearly expelled from his university for voluntarily checking himself into a hospital when he was feeling unstable.

More reading: http://www.npr.org/blogs/health/2013…duce-shootings

Originally Posted by blatantninja
No one with a 'history of mental health problems' would ever be left alone for one minute with my child, family or not.

Anyone can be diagnosed. No problem. The most lethal psychological cocktails, like depression and stress, will get to us all during a lifetime and many do not see them as "mental health problems" at all.

Originally Posted by Rithrandil
But even mental health professionals say they can't accurately predict who might be a danger, and what you're basically doing is *further discouraging* people from actually seeking mental health treatment in this country. There's a reason why New York's new law was so roundly condemned by mental health professionals.

Furthermore, the vast ultra-majority of shootings *are not carried out by the mentally ill*. It's just an easy, convenient scapegoat. No one actually gives a fuck about the mentally ill. If we're all so dangerous, how about the government flat-out pays for every single treatment that us evil dangerous ticking timebombs need?

These new laws totally screw with the ability of someone with a mental illness to seek treatment. What if someone is going through suicidal ideation and so wants to talk to a professional? They're going to be a lot less likely to do so if they're required to be reported to the government and arbitrarily have their rights stripped from them before even committing a crime.

I'm speaking as someone who was nearly expelled from his university for voluntarily checking himself into a hospital when he was feeling unstable.

More reading: http://www.npr.org/blogs/health/2013…duce-shootings

As I said, its not perfect, but its better than it is now. Mental health care is an absolute mess in this country.

What's your solution?

Originally Posted by JemyM
Anyone can be diagnosed. No problem. The most lethal psychological cocktails, like depression and stress, will get to us all during a lifetime and many do not see them as "mental health problems" at all.

That's just a strawman. There is a difference between being stressed and having real mental health issues.

So you think a solution that mental health professionals oppose as an unnecessary measure that will only serve to drive people with mental health problems away from treatment is a better way to address a problem that doesn't actually exist?

Here's something that would actually be far more effective at preventing gun deaths: Repeal the second amendment.

Originally Posted by Rithrandil
So you think a solution that mental health professionals oppose as an unnecessary measure that will only serve to drive people with mental health problems away from treatment is a better way to address a problem that doesn't actually exist?

The problem most certainly exists, just see the Colorado and Virginia Tech shootings. Most mass shootings are done by people with histories of mental health issues. That's not to say that all or even most people with mental health issues are dangerous, they aren't, but its an undeniable fact.

Do you really believe that a medical professional who thinks a person may commit an act of violence due to their mental health issues should keep it to themselves?

Here's something that would actually be far more effective at preventing gun deaths: Repeal the second amendment.

Not really. Most guns used in crimes are not owned legally, so the 2nd amendment doesn't come into play. And if even if they were, there are far too many guns in this country, or that would come up through Mexico, for it ever to be effective. The various mobs would throw a ticker tape parade if the 2nd amendment was repealled. It'd be a bigger heydey for them than prohibition was.

The most important thing we can do is address the mental health issues of our country.

So, again: let's take away the rights of an entire group of people to address an ultra-minority of gun deaths.

Well, glad to know I'm a second-class citizen in my own country.

Originally Posted by Rithrandil
So, again: let's take away the rights of an entire group of people to address an ultra-minority of gun deaths.

Well, glad to know I'm a second-class citizen in my own country.

You advocate the same thing. Take away the rights of law abiding gun owners to address an ultra-minotrity of gun deaths, except that its not the law abiding gun owners that are causing the gun deaths.

How about you answer the question (may not have seen it as I put it in an edit):

Do you really believe that a medical professional who thinks a person may commit an act of violence due to their mental health issues should keep it to themselves?

Actually, no, I don't advocate that, but try again.