Military Veterans - Mental Health Issues - 2nd Amendment

Procrustes Stretched

Dante's Manifesto
Dec 1, 2008
65,204
10,060
2,040
Location: Positively 4th Street
Military Veterans - Mental Health Issues - 2nd Amendment

How many military veterans have mental health issues, yet are legally arming themselves with deadly weapons while hiding behind the 2nd when this issue is raised?

How many Americans support strict background checks on weapons purchases? Should discharged military veterans be subject to mental health evaluations that are linked to ATF and homeland security databases?

Dishcharged military demand special treatment for mental health issues as they should. We all owe them, but ...

:eusa_whistle:
 
Last edited:
It's mostly a load of bullshit with the intent of disarming experienced combat troops from helping the 3 percenters and oath keepers from fighting back against the globalist agenda of maggot shit like Obama and his handlers once this ridiculous country finally implodes. There is no debate to be had because they've already implemented it.
 
Veterans who are so mentally ill that they receive a PTSD pension from the government should be prohibited from purchasing a firearm unless a government psychiatrist certifies that they are not a danger to society. The concept is simple. A person who admits to being mentally ill is in fact mentally ill.
 
And who made them mentally ill? That would be the government.

I'm perfectly fine with a few depressed military walking around loaded. The benefits outweigh the negatives. And does someone who suffered from depression 10 years ago or 3 months ago not get a gun?

Let the vets keep their weapons. There is a hidden agenda here.
 
And who made them mentally ill? That would be the government.

I'm perfectly fine with a few depressed military walking around loaded. The benefits outweigh the negatives. And does someone who suffered from depression 10 years ago or 3 months ago not get a gun?

Let the vets keep their weapons. There is a hidden agenda here.

The greatest Country in the world has seen fit to compensate Military personnel who were so overwhelmed by what they saw and experienced that they admit to being mentally ill. That's fine and it is ignorant and insensitive to lump them together with "depressed Military" what ever that means. Everyone wants to keep guns out of the hands of the mentally ill. Doesn't it make sense to keep persons who are so mentally ill that they collect a pension from purchasing firearms?
 
And who made them mentally ill? That would be the government.

I'm perfectly fine with a few depressed military walking around loaded. The benefits outweigh the negatives. And does someone who suffered from depression 10 years ago or 3 months ago not get a gun?

Let the vets keep their weapons. There is a hidden agenda here.

The greatest Country in the world has seen fit to compensate Military personnel who were so overwhelmed by what they saw and experienced that they admit to being mentally ill. That's fine and it is ignorant and insensitive to lump them together with "depressed Military" what ever that means. Everyone wants to keep guns out of the hands of the mentally ill. Doesn't it make sense to keep persons who are so mentally ill that they collect a pension from purchasing firearms?

For the slow and stupid, there IS a process for that. It is called putting the person before a Judge for a ruling. You think they shouldn't have firearms do the proper thing.
 
And who made them mentally ill? That would be the government.

I'm perfectly fine with a few depressed military walking around loaded. The benefits outweigh the negatives. And does someone who suffered from depression 10 years ago or 3 months ago not get a gun?

Let the vets keep their weapons. There is a hidden agenda here.

The greatest Country in the world has seen fit to compensate Military personnel who were so overwhelmed by what they saw and experienced that they admit to being mentally ill. That's fine and it is ignorant and insensitive to lump them together with "depressed Military" what ever that means. Everyone wants to keep guns out of the hands of the mentally ill. Doesn't it make sense to keep persons who are so mentally ill that they collect a pension from purchasing firearms?

For the slow and stupid, there IS a process for that. It is called putting the person before a Judge for a ruling. You think they shouldn't have firearms do the proper thing.

A pension for mental illness is akin to an admission of mental illness. Where do we draw the line? Should a gun shop be forced to sell a gun to someone who admits to having blackouts and anger issues and episodes where they can't remember what they did?
 
The greatest Country in the world has seen fit to compensate Military personnel who were so overwhelmed by what they saw and experienced that they admit to being mentally ill. That's fine and it is ignorant and insensitive to lump them together with "depressed Military" what ever that means. Everyone wants to keep guns out of the hands of the mentally ill. Doesn't it make sense to keep persons who are so mentally ill that they collect a pension from purchasing firearms?

For the slow and stupid, there IS a process for that. It is called putting the person before a Judge for a ruling. You think they shouldn't have firearms do the proper thing.

A pension for mental illness is akin to an admission of mental illness. Where do we draw the line? Should a gun shop be forced to sell a gun to someone who admits to having blackouts and anger issues and episodes where they can't remember what they did?

The law does not require that those that seek mental health care be barred from ownership of firearms, it SPECIFICALLY requires a ruling from a Judge. Further it does not require those that spend time in a mental health facility be barred either, they must have been placed there by order of a Judge.

Simply having a problem is not enough to warrant lose of rights.
 
You don't mean those like Aaron Alexis do you? His mental illness had nothing to do with his military service. He claimed to have PTSD and that had nothing to do with military service either.

Surely we need to do something to remove the dangerously insane from the public whether it includes deny them access to firearms or train platforms.
 
And who made them mentally ill? That would be the government.

I'm perfectly fine with a few depressed military walking around loaded. The benefits outweigh the negatives. And does someone who suffered from depression 10 years ago or 3 months ago not get a gun?

Let the vets keep their weapons. There is a hidden agenda here.

In your town. Let's let them walk around in your town.
 
PTSD can mean different things to different people. The Navy Yard shooter thought he was suffering from PTSD but evidence indicates that he was a garden variety paranoid schizophrenic. It's possible that former Military personnel who are diagnosed and receive a pension for PSTD are schizophrenic and the time in the Military exacerbated the condition. A PSTD sufferer with a government pension might be a slickster who beat the system collecting a pension for service in a conflict he didn't support. It's not for us to judge. We must take it for granted that persons who show symptoms so acute that a pension and continued treatment is authorized are indeed mentally ill. The question is whether society should give crazy people a pass and sell them a gun because they served in the Military.
 
PTSD has become the go to excuse for spousal and child abuse. It's expanded. It was used by those in combat so successfully that it became used by those who were never in combat but heard about combat from those who were in combat. Now the sufferer need not be in combat or hear about it. They know it exists somewhere in the world.

The Taliban, al quaeda, the cartels, even garden variety street gang have seen more dead bodies than the motor pool mechanic and doesn't suffer from PTSD.
 

Forum List

Back
Top