There is a widespread perception within political circles that voting to curtail access to semiautomatic military-style rifles through a ban or more extensive background checks could be catastrophic to individual Democrats and the Democratic brand in large swaths of the country. So, you have that on the one hand, and then on the other hand you have polling data that shows that everything the president has proposed is popular. You also have the example of the NRA’s abysmal failure to help their preferred candidates win in the 2012 elections. Perhaps the perception is overstated.
If I were the running the administration’s effort to pass gun legislation, I’d get really granular in my polling so I could go to any member of Congress and tell them what their constituents support and what they don’t. I think extending background checks to private non-licenced sales and limiting magazine sizes to ten bullets are probably the two items that poll well in every district in the country, and they may wind up being the only two things that pass. That actually wouldn’t be a terrible result if it were coupled with something useful on the mental health end of things.
However, it is really hard to link mental health to gun ownership in a way that doesn’t have adverse effects. You don’t want to dissuade people from seeking help because they worry they’ll lose their 2nd Amendment rights. Yet, that’s precisely what needed to happen to the shooters in the Tucson, Aurora, and Newtown massacres. Someone smarter than me needs to develop legislation on this, but there should be some study done on it before the government goes in and screws with the incentives people have to seek psychological help. They could easily make the country more dangerous by increasing the number of people whose problems go untreated. For now, it may be a better route to just increase the number of beds available for people with serious debilitating mental problems and to fund some studies.
I’d like to hear what Sen. Joe Manchin (D-WV) thinks about the mental health end of this. He’s leading the effort to make sure crazies can’t buy guns, and I support that effort, but I have some concerns.
I’m intriged by the parallel between Ted Kennedy’s fight against Big Tabacco and the current one we’re having with guns.
So many similarities going in with some tried and true resolutions Kennedy fought for and argueably won. So let’s look at a tax on ammo that goes directly towards some kind of mental health program.
I have quite an interest in this whole discussion of mental health and guns. My younger brother has suffered from mental illness, specifically schizophrenia, for about 30 years. He had zero treatment during all those years because he, first, does not believe there is anything wrong with him; and second, because he managed to only have minor interactions with law enforcement during all that time. He currently, however, is confined in a criminal mental health facility due to a gun related incident. Fortunately, no one was hurt and there was only property damage. But the incident occurred less than 1000 feet from a school, so that turned it into a very serious felony. He was adjudicated Not Guilty By Reason of Insanity, But Restorable With Treatment. That is why he is currently residing in a facility, where he is on a forced medication regimen. So I have a somewhat personal and emotional perspective, both on the mental health side and the gun side of this whole argument. The culmination of this whole situation with my brother so parallels a lot of the things that everyone is talking about. I think it would probably be better to write a diary on this than to try and go into all the detail that is swirling in my head on this subject right now. I have some very strong opinions on this subject, as it has hit very close to home in our family. And it will continue to be the elephant in the room for my parents and my other sibling.
I look forward to your diary.
From what little we know about the suspect in the Newtown massacre, the proposed new regs wouldn’t have stopped him.
However, it’s easy to see why the mental illness registry is popular. The Virginia Tech massacre killer wouldn’t so easily slip through the cracks — his court ordered psych assessment should have been enough to put him on a no-gun/no-ammo registry. The Tucson massacre killer was suspended from college for bizarre behavior and required to obtain an mental health clearance to return. No reason why such actions by institutions shouldn’t also place an individual on a no-gun registry. A registry might have dissuaded the Aurora massacre alleged killer from seeking mental health services, but …
Odd behavior isn’t so very rare, and so few of those identified as such ever engage in violent behavior. Making distinctions wrt classes of people that are denied the privilege of the 2nd Amendment troubles me. How soon before only “conservative” white men can own guns?