One issue I have with the Second Amendment crowd

[Horton]

How about redirecting the 500 billion PP gets to mental health treatment? Win win! saving kids all over the place.

 

[Ridgerunner]

Where have you been the past 10 yrs, significant money has been poured into Medicaid etc.

Specific to stopping violence, I don’t think the science is there yet to effectively identify and treat people as outpatients. We have to wait for an incident before we then segregate them from people to mitigate further harm.

It’s more than just Medicaid. VA and various state programs also support mental health treatment. So do a lot of employment-based health plans. Some of those programs have case workers and crisis intervention.

Where the real gap is, is with those who really ought to be institutionalized long term. The courts prevent their permanent or long term institutionalization, so there is nothing to be done with them other than to occasionally pick them up and get them “straight” again for a short time, then let them go back into the society they can’t deal with. Now and they they commit crimes and are put into institutions called prisons, where they are generally kept safe and on medication.

For children there are already a number of programs, both residential and “at home”.

As to people like this latest Texas shooter, I’m not sure he’s even mentally ill. Might just be evil.

 

[phil19034]

All that is required is that the leaders make a commitment to passing clean and bipartisan legislation.

But right now, the people in congress - both in the house and senate are more concerned with fighting the other party than coming together in regards to commonsense bipartisan legislation.

Also, mental heath bills often scare the heck out libertarians in both parties.

 

[mrsdizzyd]

mrsdizzyd:

All that is required is that the leaders make a commitment to passing clean and bipartisan legislation.

But right now, the people in congress - both in the house and senate are more concerned with fighting the other party than coming together in regards to commonsense bipartisan legislation.

Also, mental heath bills often scare the heck out libertarians in both parties.

Quite true on both accounts.

Our legislature is suffering from a failure of leadership. It’s pitiful.

 

[phil19034]

If the Republicans introduced a piece of legislation that simply provided additional funding for mental health without adding amendments and riders related to partisan issues, Ryan should be able to get enough Republican to pass the bill.

Also, I’m not even sure Ryan could get enough Republicans or not because the stanch anti-federalist wing of the Republicans in congress want the additional funding for mental heath, but they want the states to pay for it, not the federal govt.

 

[mrsdizzyd]

mrsdizzyd:

If the Republicans introduced a piece of legislation that simply provided additional funding for mental health without adding amendments and riders related to partisan issues, Ryan should be able to get enough Republican to pass the bill.

Also, I’m not even sure Ryan could get enough Republicans or not because the stanch anti-federalist wing of the Republicans in congress want the additional funding for mental heath, but they want the states to pay for it, not the federal govt.

But, this is where bipartisanship comes in. I know it’s a dirty word these days, but our government was designed to operate in a slow and deliberate bipartisan manner.

Not to mention that some of those anti-fed fears could be assuaged if the funding was meted out to the states to distribute.

 

[JanSobieskiIII]

funding was meted out to the states to distribute.

Doubtful, we’re the same people that want to abolish the department of education because the feds like to use that money to violate the 10th amendment and hold the funds over their head to pass laws the feds can’t pass themselves for one reason or another.

 

[phil19034]

phil19034:

mrsdizzyd:

If the Republicans introduced a piece of legislation that simply provided additional funding for mental health without adding amendments and riders related to partisan issues, Ryan should be able to get enough Republican to pass the bill.

Also, I’m not even sure Ryan could get enough Republicans or not because the stanch anti-federalist wing of the Republicans in congress want the additional funding for mental heath, but they want the states to pay for it, not the federal govt.

But, this is where bipartisanship comes in. I know it’s a dirty word these days, but our government was designed to operate in a slow and deliberate bipartisan manner.

Not to mention that some of those anti-fed fears could be assuaged if the funding was meted out to the states to distribute.

I agree on both counts.

Some anti-feds would accept if the funding was given to the states to distribute. But others would not be OK because those are the ones who want to move almost all domestic affairs to the state level.

 

[mrsdizzyd]

Well, I did say some…

 

[Lemuel]

Mental health is not a federal government issue and any money spent by the federal government for mental health services is blatantly unconstitutional.

 

[Lost_Sheep]

I am one of the “Second Amendment” crowd.

And unfortunately there are no easy answers to the mental illness and guns question.

The term “Mental Illness” paints with a very wide brush. Maybe it would be a good idea to prevent people like Jared Lee Loughner or James Holmes from having guns. But what about people at the opposite end of the mental health spectrum; someone with an easily treatable mild depression? Do you propose keeping guns away from people like this too? What kind of scale do you use? How crazy is crazy enough to keep guns away from a person? And who makes these decisions?

It all boils down to predicting the future which no one is able to do. Just because someone fits the profile of a mass shooter or is a “little weird” is not sufficient justification to deny them their constitutional rights.

I don’t believe it was possible to predict any of the mass shootings in recent years and it never will be possible. The only practical solution (and I know a lot of people won’t like this) is to provide people with the means to defend themselves. It is much less likely somebody is going shoot at you if they know you might shoot back.

And whatever we do, we have to STOP BLAMING THE GUN.

 

[Ender]

And whatever we do, we have to STOP BLAMING THE GUN.

Whatever the facts about mass shootings in general, it seems that the overwhelming percentage of school shooters are still in school themselves. Investigating what is going on there would seem like a reasonable place to start. Guns were more readily available to school kids before now but there was never this carnage. As you say, it’s not just access to guns that has gotten us to this point.

 

[Lost_Sheep]

Lost_Sheep:

And whatever we do, we have to STOP BLAMING THE GUN.

Whatever the facts about mass shootings in general, it seems that the overwhelming percentage of school shooters are still in school themselves. Investigating what is going on there would seem like a reasonable place to start. Guns were more readily available to school kids before now but there was never this carnage. As you say, it’s not just access to guns that has gotten us to this point.

If guns are more available to school kids it’s because adults are being less diligent about safeguarding them (guns). The gun is an inanimate object. It cannot do anything on its own. A person has to pick it up, load it and use it. Banning guns - even the nefarious “assault” rifles will not solve the problem. Guns must be kept away from people who could do harm to others or themselves. Only responsible people can do that.

 

[Lemuel]

Quit sending your kids to the public prisons . . . uh, er . . . schools.

 

[Theo520]

If guns are more available to school kids it’s because adults are being less diligent about safeguarding them (guns).

I don’t think that plays into it.

Wide use of gun safes is a fairly recent development. We certainly didn’t lock up our rifles when I was a kid.

Perhaps it’s more ‘adults are being less diligent about educating/socializing their children on guns’

 

[Augustinian]

Quit sending your kids to the public prisons . . . uh, er . . . schools.

I think that’s just around the corner. A lot of money can be saved by making public education a cyber experience. No transportation costs, no gas bills for the building.

 

[Theo520]

I think that’s just around the corner. A lot of money can be saved by making public education a cyber experience. No transportation costs, no gas bills for the building.

Not gonna happen, need the prison so parents can go off to work.

 

[Brad1]

Government funding is not the end-all be-all of problem solving. In fact, it often times becomes more of a problem than that which it set out to solve by encouraging more of the problem in order to justify funding.
The homeless “problem” is a prime example.

 

[Inisfallen]

I think the real problem is no one has political will to challenge Hollywood and video game industry for the graphic violence.

The NRA certainly doesn’t, having installed a paid shill for violent video games as it’s president.

Obviously, they’re just fine with violent video games. Don’t expect a challenge from the NRA.

 

[phil19034]

The NRA certainly doesn’t, having installed a paid shill for violent video games as it’s president.

Obviously, they’re just fine with violent video games. Don’t expect a challenge from the NRA.

didn’t the NRA used speak out about the violent video games?