“It’s the guns”

[Grape Ape]

No I haven't done interviews, just read the net plus I did ask about it here previously and that was the impression I got. I think I also asked about having a medical marijuana drug card and a gun license; correct me if I'm wrong people have to choose one or the other? I've seen on forums that many smokers therefore buy their weed illegally, but I think someone here said the gov should fuck off in this instance and allow both. As you admit in an other reply the definition of mentally ill is extremely complicated. Say someone is depressed and takes an antidepressant? Most people are clinically depressed at some point in their lives. Some think those who use SSRIs are dangerous and shouldn't have access to guns, but what if they use weed for their "depression" instead? LOL. Or another class of antidepressants. What about if you have ADHD? Antisocial personality disorder ("psychopathy")? Some would argue that everyone could get a "mental illness" diagnosis if assessed extensively. A few argue there's no such thing as a mental illness, it's all made up by "big psychiatry" and the pharma industry

The mental illness, weed, ssri, etc are a long nuanced discussion for sure.

As for the bolded, who here gave you the impression they think there should be no restrictions and/or think those with mental conditions should be able to purchase and own firearms?

[LurkerNoMore]

LOL @ the leftist retard trying to pin excessive violence on people on the right.

LOL @ the rightist retard trying to deny this is a right wing MAGA nut behind said violence.   

[Coach is Back!]

.

[Van_Bilderass]

The mental illness, weed, ssri, etc are a long nuanced discussion for sure.

As for the bolded, who here gave you the impression they think there should be no restrictions and/or think those with mental conditions should be able to purchase and own firearms?

I don't remember exactly. I would assume most would say "insane" people shouldn't have access to guns but like I said who decides what insane is? There's the fear that the government could easily class dissidents as mentally ill, that it's a slippery slope if you bar certain people from getting guns. So as long as someone hasn't engaged in criminality the regulations should be pretty loose. Another thing that came to mind, what about alcoholics? Reasonably you could assume they are more likely to do something insane, grab a gun when drunk. But then you run into the problem of determining who is a potentially dangerous alcoholic. We don't really have firearms here in Sweden the same way as the US but something interesting happened here recently. There is a lab marker that tells how much someone drinks and docs started checking that marker without telling the patient. The authorities started taking peoples' drivers licenses based on the marker after docs reported them, without them ever having driven when drunk and it caused a row. I think they changed that practice but it's maybe a bit like if you prevented "dangerous" people from owning guns.

I know many people who aren't really mentally ill but where I think them having guns might not be a good idea, simply because they are aggressive or really impulsive and emotional

[mops]

I would assume most would say "insane" people shouldn't have access to guns but like I said who decides what insane is?

[Grape Ape]

I don't remember exactly. I would assume most would say "insane" people shouldn't have access to guns but like I said who decides what insane is? There's the fear that the government could easily class dissidents as mentally ill, that it's a slippery slope if you bar certain people from getting guns. So as long as someone hasn't engaged in criminality the regulations should be pretty loose. Another thing that came to mind, what about alcoholics? Reasonably you could assume they are more likely to do something insane, grab a gun when drunk. But then you run into the problem of determining who is a potentially dangerous alcoholic. We don't really have firearms here in Sweden the same way as the US but something interesting happened here recently. There is a lab marker that tells how much someone drinks and docs started checking that marker without telling the patient. The authorities started taking peoples' drivers licenses based on the marker after docs reported them, without them ever having driven when drunk and it caused a row. I think they changed that practice but it's maybe a bit like if you prevented "dangerous" people from owning guns.

I know many people who aren't really mentally ill but where I think them having guns might not be a good idea, simply because they are aggressive or really impulsive and emotional

See that's nuts.

We have 330+ million folks, so we are never going to get it perfect.  I threw it into grok just to see what qualified as "mental illness" and it gave me this:

Anyone who has been adjudicated as a "mental defective" (a term still used in the statute, meaning found mentally incompetent by a court) or has been committed to a mental institution.

So, it's obvious substance abusers, SSRI people, others etc can acquire.  However, I can assure you that the overwhelming majority of firearms owners use them responsibly, which the math proves out by the fact that we don't live in an open war zone.  But I can also assure those who own don't want lunatics owning them either.

How to guarantee this?  I don't know.  Might be impossible.

[walkerblocker]

people need to quit blaming SSRIs,...Ive been on paxil 32 years and am completely normal