Should the mentally ill be allowed to have guns?

Personally I believe your mental health is irrelevant the 2nd amendment should include everyone except those with violent records. What do you think?

Absolutely not. No way should someone with a severe mental illness have a gun (I am not talking about run of the mill anxiety or depression). It scares me reading the stories of people on this forum with guns. So very very thankful I live where I do and do not have to worry about this issue. Honestly Americans are so blind to how devastating guns are.

Either nobody or everybody. No exclusions based on whatever.

I am scared of guns in general. Imho rednecks with guns scare me more than crazies with guns, eh.

Hmmm ... well let's see. For me to be excluded from owning a gun because of my mental illness, it would have to become public record. Now for that to be the case, I ... who has only gotten a warning once for driving 5 mph over the speed limit ... would have to be in the same registry as ... oh ... felons.

That's right. I would be the same in the public eye as child molesters and murderers and my medical history would determine what rights I have.

While we're at it, how about I have to register my mental illness too? We can put my picture on Watchdog.org next to the guy that has 16 counts of aggravated indecent liberties with a minor.


No, you can't take away someone's 2nd Amendment rights because of something they might do.

A lot of what ifs there. First define "mentally ill." Diagnosed? As far as I know most murders by firearms aren't committed by people who meet the public definition of mentally ill.

I think sometimes the words MENTAL ILLNESS are used with just as much sensationalism as CRAZY or PSYCHO. I know that many mental illnesses are just mood disorders and don't involve psychotic tendencies, but even then those often torment only the sufferer. I don't own a gun, but am from a place where hunting is normal. This would be taking away one more piece of normal from people less dangerous than the guy neck door screaming at his wife.

I wouldn't hurt anybody (unless they came after my family) but I might hurt myself. I shouldn't have a gun.

If I had a gun in the house I would be dead. I have been in such a dark, low depressed state that pulling a trigger would have been to easy. I am grateful we do not have a gun.

Well, I'm liberal. So you can pretty much guess my stance on guns. Period.

But... in a society that does allow them. It's all circumstantial. And it should always be circumstantial, regardless of mental illness. Someone who has a history of suicidal ideation, for example, should not be allowed to purchase one.

IMO everyone who purchases a gun should get a background check. I knew someone who gave away his 2nd amendment right on purpose, because he knew he had issues.

I feel this way - I had the opportunity to blow my brains out last year, and I was close. It was there, and convenient, and I knew would be effective. Should I have had access to it -- absolutely. It's my life, as Bon Jovi says, and I am NOT property of the state, to be told when to live, when to die. Mental illness or not. It's my life and my choice, and I won't give that up. That DOES NOT MEAN I THINK IT'S A GOOD IDEA TO HAVE ONE. It's not, I don't now, it went bye bye via a responsible method. Where it won't hurt anyone - frankly, it was old and kinda sad, from the 1920's, I don't know if it would even have fired, I know NADA about guns.

Now, to agree with Webgoji, I am absolutely terrified of being lumped in with criminals, predators, sex offenders. What have I done wrong -- like another person commented, my entire "criminal record" also consists of going 32 mph in a 25 mph zone back in 1994, with a $100 fine and no points on my record. Tough rap sheet, eh, puts me right up there with gang bangers and Mexican drug smugglers I guess.

I haven't done anything wrong, and I enjoy having civil rights. That being said, there are SOME people who should have their rights limited, but only as long as they are legitimately proven in the legal system to not be able to handle them. It should NEVER be open-ended, and it should NEVER be discriminatory or arbitrary based on "future crime" - only if someone actually does something and is properly put through the legal system.

As far as some blanket "ban" on people with mental illness having guns, fine ONLY if there is a blanket ban on people, all people, having guns.

If they make a law that you can't buy a gun with a history of suicidal ideation or psychosis or certain mental illnesses that would mean that everyone running a gun store would be privy to my personal info. I can see ones information being available if you are a violent criminal who has made a choice deserving of a punishment. I didn't choose bipolar, but I do want to be the one in control of my personal information. There is a bigger issue here.

Plus... I keep me safe from myself, not the guy selling or not selling a gun.

I signed my rights away to own a firearm when I was put in IP. I didn't care, I never want and do not want a gun.

I don't think guns are that crucial to a societies development, but rather, they lead to downfalls and incorrect social structures and leave us fighting wars that are simply solvable.

So. No, no guns.

If someone is a risk with regards to harming others then whether they had legal access to a gun or not is irrelevant... In the uk guns are generally illegal (you can get a lisence but it's down to tight criteria) but people still get killed.

To catogorise a group of people due to the actions of a few is a slippery slope with relation to human rights in my opinion... And should be tread with caution.

Depends on what's wrong with them. Just because someone is mentally ill, it doesn't mean they're a psychopath.

"We need guns. Lots of guns"

Zwangsstörung:
Sadly, we live in a society where the stigma is that every murder, every cruelty, is done by someone mentally ill. Because it's easier to accept a falsehood than it is to accept that all humans are flawed, no matter their mental status. And that anyone can be capable of harming another.

I think the media and politicians from both sides tend to sensationalize events specially tragedies like school and mall shootings and report the shooter had mental issues and then the debate becomes about what should be done about the mentally ill and background checks. The main flaw with this scenario is any one can "snap" even people with no mental illness records. Certainly I support people with violent criminal records should not be allowed to have guns, but non-violent felons should also be allowed. I fail to see why a person who got convicted of writing a bad check (felony) should be considered the same as some one who was convicted of armed robbery (felony). There is a world of difference between non-violent felonies and violent felonies. And mental illness should not even be a factor unless they have a violent history. But of course when ever a terrible shooting occurs everyone's emotions flair up and logic goes out the window. And yes I feel both sides are guilty of that. Certainly we could use reasonable background checks that filter violent criminals better and faster, but not at the expense of innocent people or non-violent felons. Just my 2 cents

This is ypour choise, everyone should have a choice. I respect you for yours and knowing what is right for you

I expect the same though.

I'm guessing this stigma is mainly present in the US, because in the UK, I don't get that same feeling, ... there are certainly ignorant bigots, but I've never really been confronted with the whole "mentally ill = psychopath" deal. With so many crimes in the US, it must be really easy for the Government(s) and police to blame it all on mental health.

Here is my thing, how many gun related incidents, robberies, etc are related to mental health issues? Even moreso how many of them were diagnosed prior to the incident? I mean think about it, aren't most perfectly "sane" and more related to desperation, fear, etc? Does that mean the poor shouldn't own guns since they are more likely to commit a robbery? Should we take away the guns or should we put more energy into jobs programs, mental health programs, anti-bullying programs, empowerment, etc.

It's an excellent point one I have made in other forums. If we go by statics, the mentally ill should be allowed to have guns and not non-mentally ill people because most of the crime and killing is done by nons. But hey I would not want to say all nons are bad

Guns should not be owned by those with a history of violent felonies or people who risk danger to themselves or others. Mental illness need only be considered when the particular illness/behavior is a danger. We do not effectively enforce felons who are not legally allowed to have firearms so good luck with adding mental illness to the mix.

Keeping guns away from people with mental illness is a complex issue - Los Angeles Times

Hi everyone,

We, the community support team, are closing this thread at this time in response to our community guidelines (Please read the Community Guidelines - Updated 7/15/2013)

which state:

Thanks