Psych exams for gun purchases

[YoursTruly]

...shall not be infringed

The states have been infringing on the 2A since before the ink dried.
The 2A doesn't say anything about ex cons on parole, felons not being able to buy a gun. So their rights have been infringed. The 2A doesn't give states the authority to force permits on gun owners. But they do.

And those people with permits, don't mind having them. People who pass a psych test won't mind showing your their card either.

Are you part of the "Kill my kids, but don't take my guns" crowd?

 

[Missourian]

The times are uh changin. If the right doesn't do something about the lefts newly attempts to dismantle the 2A, the red flood coming in Nov. won't be much more than a small wave.

The right better do something besides ignore this situation that's upon them. Speaking from a political strategy stand point, if the right tries to ignore this gun violence issue, they won't gain near as many seats.

So, I was thinking (Oh noooo. Here he goes again)
If the right came up with a law that states one must pass a psych exam in order to purchase a gun, what should applicants be disqualified for.

I know, I know. It's retarded. But doing nothing is the government allowing more mass killings. I get the point, because I'm pro 2A. Laws don't stop crime. Gun laws aren't going to stop mass shooting. I get all that. So I'm asking for some common sense here.

Me personally, I didn't mind getting a gun permit. In fact, I bragged about it when I first got it. Even thought having to get one, meant I was allowing the state government to infringe upon my 2A. But in the end, I'm still able to carry. I'm still able to put myself in a position to save lives if the chance arises.

So I'm thinking, the things that would disqualify someone from legally buying a gun would be the following. Please add your ideas.

1. Anyone with a record of violence in their recent history. Say 5 years. (per 911 calls or provable reports)
2. Anyone who's committed any sort of crime, using a gun. Whether it was fired or not. (holstered doesn't count as using)
3. Anyone with a history of mental disorders in the last 5 years. Especially those on mental meds to control their behavior.

One thing that needs to be highly protected are decent gun owners from false accusations. Decent gun owners pose no threat to society. In fact, in many instances, they've protected and saved many lives using their weapons. Those peoples rights should in no way, shape or form, be infringed upon.
People like Ramos, I could care less about their rights.



Let's dance.

As long as a psych exam is required to exercise the rest of peoples Constitutional rights...like the right to vote...the right to protest....the right to free speech...

 

[YoursTruly]

As long as a psych exam is required to exercise the rest of peoples Constitutional rights...like the right to vote...the right to protest....the right to free speech...

Talking & voting never killed anyone. Neither did peaceful protests (actually peaceful)

P.S. One problem at a time. BTW, if voting worked, they wouldn't let us do it.

 

[Pete7469]

Except that it's un-Constitutional.

Would we suggest mental health tests to exercise any other Constitutionally guaranteed right?

How about a psyche eval to vote, which actually isn't a "right"?

There wouldn't be a democrook party if such a law was enacted.

 

[Rigby5]

Again, there is no 100% perfection when it comes to humans. No one is looking for perfection. Just trying to save lives.

This "Kill my kids but don't take my guns" attitude is just stupid.

No, its not stupid at all, but just looking at the bigger picture.
If you look at the biggest threats, it is not isolated criminals or crazies.
It is organized despots like Hitler, Mussolini, Napoleon, and about every single dictator or monarch who existed before the French Revolution.
The US as a democratic republic is a very new and fragile experiment.
So it is not at all stupid to fear the return of the autocratic dictatorship.
In fact, it is likely the US experiment in a democratic republic has already failed.
The evidence is how the federal government totally ignores the constitution, and we things like a federal War on Drugs, mandated sentences, asset forfeiture, etc.

We can protect kids by other means than draconian gun laws, but there is no way to maintain a democratic republic without an armed population.

 

[Rigby5]

The states have been infringing on the 2A since before the ink dried.
The 2A doesn't say anything about ex cons on parole, felons not being able to buy a gun. So their rights have been infringed. The 2A doesn't give states the authority to force permits on gun owners. But they do.

And those people with permits, don't mind having them. People who pass a psych test won't mind showing your their card either.

Are you part of the "Kill my kids, but don't take my guns" crowd?

The states doing anything, does not infringe upon the 2nd amendment.
The 2nd amendment only restricts the feds.

 

[Michelle420]

Hold people legally accountable if they are aware of someone's mentally ill or unstable state and don't report the concerns. How many times have these mass shooter nutters said it all on youtube or Facebook, or Instagram about their plans prior to the incident. Prevention starts with those closest to the nutter.

 

[Big Bend Texas]

You're worried about people saying there are more than two genders.

Others are worried their kids might get shot and killed at school.

Can you imagine?

Statistically your kid is more likely to be raped by a teacher than to ever witness a school shooting much less be the victim of one.

 

[Big Bend Texas]

The psych field has its own built in lefty bias. Trusting the psych field for a non biased assessment of individuals mental stability is like trusting the foxes to guard the ole chicken coop. One would be far better off to hire an assessment of the crime problem within & outside the U.S. border by sociologists which WILL find out the negative factors that are contributing to the violence on America's streets.

You don't necessarily even need a degree of any kind to understand why we are becoming ever more violent as a society.

 

[bripat9643]

The times are uh changin. If the right doesn't do something about the lefts newly attempts to dismantle the 2A, the red flood coming in Nov. won't be much more than a small wave.

The right better do something besides ignore this situation that's upon them. Speaking from a political strategy stand point, if the right tries to ignore this gun violence issue, they won't gain near as many seats.

So, I was thinking (Oh noooo. Here he goes again)
If the right came up with a law that states one must pass a psych exam in order to purchase a gun, what should applicants be disqualified for.

I know, I know. It's retarded. But doing nothing is the government allowing more mass killings. I get the point, because I'm pro 2A. Laws don't stop crime. Gun laws aren't going to stop mass shooting. I get all that. So I'm asking for some common sense here.

Me personally, I didn't mind getting a gun permit. In fact, I bragged about it when I first got it. Even thought having to get one, meant I was allowing the state government to infringe upon my 2A. But in the end, I'm still able to carry. I'm still able to put myself in a position to save lives if the chance arises.

So I'm thinking, the things that would disqualify someone from legally buying a gun would be the following. Please add your ideas.

1. Anyone with a record of violence in their recent history. Say 5 years. (per 911 calls or provable reports)
2. Anyone who's committed any sort of crime, using a gun. Whether it was fired or not. (holstered doesn't count as using)
3. Anyone with a history of mental disorders in the last 5 years. Especially those on mental meds to control their behavior.

One thing that needs to be highly protected are decent gun owners from false accusations. Decent gun owners pose no threat to society. In fact, in many instances, they've protected and saved many lives using their weapons. Those peoples rights should in no way, shape or form, be infringed upon.
People like Ramos, I could care less about their rights.



Let's dance.

Clear violation of the 2nd Amendment.

 

[Big Bend Texas]

Guaranteed right for whacko's who kill 19 kids.

And for the 329,999,999 who didn't and never will.

If we're going to start stripping All Americans of their most basic rights because some will abuse them and commit crimes we won't have any rights left at all.

 

[Big Bend Texas]

We've been struggling for the wrong reasons, IMO. Mass shooting are getting a lot worse. I'm so pro life that I don't even hunt. I would if it was a matter of self preservation. Nor would I have a problem drawing down on someone who's about to kill an innocent person. In preservation of the innocent.

I'm a sane guy. And would have no problem taking a psych exam. If I were to fail it, I'd get another test from a different psychologist. Someone who wasn't so left leaning, who was anti gun. Maybe even a couple of them to prove the first one was bias and should not be giving psych exams. If a psychologist has a long record of denying folks, it'll be recorded and looked into and adjusted.

The conspiracy is that all shrinks are leftist anti gun liberals. That's not even close to being accurate. Some, yes. All, no.


Lot's of scared people commenting on this thread. And some "surface level thinkers" who aren't really pro life.

Might want to educate yourself on that subject.

Psychologists Looked In The Mirror … And Saw A Bunch Of Liberals

When New York University psychologist Jonathan Haidt asked about a thousand attendees at the annual meeting of the Society for Personality and Social Psychology…

fivethirtyeight.com

Are Psychologists Too Politically Close-Minded Today?

And how this might affect our capacities to heal divides.

www.psychologytoday.com

 

[Big Bend Texas]

Lot's of scared people commenting on this thread. And some "surface level thinkers" who aren't really pro life.

"Pro Life" has never been about anything but abortion.

 

[Big Bend Texas]

I don't care how sane you are, there is no way you can guarantee with 100% accuracy you would pass or fail one. The process of evaluating the questions is just too subjective.

I once had a psychologist say flatly that 90% of people who think they need to carry for self defense are too paranoid to be trusted with a gun.

That level of thinking and judgementalism permeates both psychiatry and psychology.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

The states have been infringing on the 2A since before the ink dried.
The 2A doesn't say anything about ex cons on parole, felons not being able to buy a gun. So their rights have been infringed. The 2A doesn't give states the authority to force permits on gun owners. But they do.

And those people with permits, don't mind having them. People who pass a psych test won't mind showing your their card either.

Are you part of the "Kill my kids, but don't take my guns" crowd?

When you say things like that it tells me who and what you are and you're not worthy of a reply.

Get yourself right with the Lord.

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

The states doing anything, does not infringe upon the 2nd amendment.
The 2nd amendment only restricts the feds.

Except for that clumsy 14th Amendment which makes the 2nd apply to the states too, but as originally intended (before the stupid 14th) it was a ban on federal authority.

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

I once had a psychologist say flatly that 90% of people who think they need to carry for self defense are too paranoid to be trusted with a gun.

That level of thinking and judgementalism permeates both psychiatry and psychology.

They should have no say. Only treat.

 

[Big Bend Texas]

This "Kill my kids but don't take my guns" attitude is just stupid.

And yet that is the product of only your own mind.

Might want to reconsider your position.

 

[Big Bend Texas]

But we need a system in place, backed by laws, that prevent mentally ill people from LEGALLY buying guns

That is covered by existing law. How about we just fully enforce existing law?

 

[2aguy]

The times are uh changin. If the right doesn't do something about the lefts newly attempts to dismantle the 2A, the red flood coming in Nov. won't be much more than a small wave.

The right better do something besides ignore this situation that's upon them. Speaking from a political strategy stand point, if the right tries to ignore this gun violence issue, they won't gain near as many seats.

So, I was thinking (Oh noooo. Here he goes again)
If the right came up with a law that states one must pass a psych exam in order to purchase a gun, what should applicants be disqualified for.

I know, I know. It's retarded. But doing nothing is the government allowing more mass killings. I get the point, because I'm pro 2A. Laws don't stop crime. Gun laws aren't going to stop mass shooting. I get all that. So I'm asking for some common sense here.

Me personally, I didn't mind getting a gun permit. In fact, I bragged about it when I first got it. Even thought having to get one, meant I was allowing the state government to infringe upon my 2A. But in the end, I'm still able to carry. I'm still able to put myself in a position to save lives if the chance arises.

So I'm thinking, the things that would disqualify someone from legally buying a gun would be the following. Please add your ideas.

1. Anyone with a record of violence in their recent history. Say 5 years. (per 911 calls or provable reports)
2. Anyone who's committed any sort of crime, using a gun. Whether it was fired or not. (holstered doesn't count as using)
3. Anyone with a history of mental disorders in the last 5 years. Especially those on mental meds to control their behavior.

One thing that needs to be highly protected are decent gun owners from false accusations. Decent gun owners pose no threat to society. In fact, in many instances, they've protected and saved many lives using their weapons. Those peoples rights should in no way, shape or form, be infringed upon.
People like Ramos, I could care less about their rights.



Let's dance.

The typical anti-gun response……give us the useless gun laws we want now or we will take all guns…..

Next mass public shooting happens because the useless gun laws did nothing….

Anti-gun fanatics?

Give us more anti-gun laws that don’t work, or we will take all of your guns


That you don’t understand this makes you part of the problem.