Psycho-Babble Medication | about biological treatments | Framed
This thread | Show all | Post follow-up | Start new thread | List of forums | Search | FAQ

Re: Guns and the mentally ill: a response to Mark

Posted by Abby on April 12, 2000, at 16:59:53

In reply to Re: Guns and the mentally ill: disturbing article, posted by Sean on April 12, 2000, at 12:03:17

> Hmmm.
>
> Well, what if she wanted to buy an assault weapon?
> I think couching her desire to own an antique gun kinda
> borders on sophistry.

My point was only this: there are so many possible individual
circumstances, and I doubt that the bureaucrats enforcing such
a law would be particularly enlightened.

> First, I'm not convinced that gun ownership benefits
> society in general. I'd probably rather see hunting done
> with bows and arrows! And most of the "constitutional"
> arguments are based on the archaic notion that the
> people should be able to protect themselves from
> the government if needed. Well, that is impossible
> at this point. And statistically, the deaths from
> firearms in all countries which ban them are beyond
> contestation. Fewer guns means fewer deaths by guns.
> But I'm ok with gun ownership at this point (even
> though I was shot in the leg at age 8!)


Here's where we differ. I don't mind stricter gun control. I didn't realize until you posted that any country actually bans firearms outright. I mean, I know that the UK has much stricter laws, but there's still skeet shooting.
What I object to, is specifically discriminating against the mentally ill who, when medicated, are not statistically any more violent towards others than the rest of the population. A law which bans convicted felons and those committed to a psychiatric institution involuntarily from owning guns, makes it sound as though having a mental illness is itself a crime.
>
>

> How about this analog: would you want to be in a
> plane with a pilot who has epilepsy? Even if this
> person is medicated, there isn't a neurologist in
> the world who would say "Mr. X will never have
> another siezure if he takes Depakote for the rest
> of his life." It may in fact be the case that
> Mr. X will NOT have another siezure. Then again, the
> odds are overwhelmingly higher for him than a
> person with a siezure-free history that he will.
> Similarly, I also don't know of a bipolar person who has
> recovered 100% even with medication. You have to
> fight this thing like cancer - it takes enormous
> willpower and guts.

I have absolutely no problem with having a medicated epileptic flying a plane. That is why there are co-pilots. Everything in life is associated with risks. I think that if you're open about it and have appropriate safeguards in place, that it may actually be safer. An aware epileptic may be more careful about getting sleep, for example, and therefore more alert than another pilot. That's the question Kay Jamison asked about whether someone who suffers from a mental illness should be allowed to treat patients. Jamison seems to be more aware of her own fallibility and the limits of her knowledge that many
>
Abby
>
>
>


Share
Tweet  

Thread

 

Post a new follow-up

Your message only Include above post


Notify the administrators

They will then review this post with the posting guidelines in mind.

To contact them about something other than this post, please use this form instead.

 

Start a new thread

 
Google
dr-bob.org www
Search options and examples
[amazon] for
in

This thread | Show all | Post follow-up | Start new thread | FAQ
Psycho-Babble Medication | Framed

poster:Abby thread:29693
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/20000411/msgs/29754.html