|
|
#241
10-14-2007, 06:03 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: mandatory mental health evaluation for gun-rights supporters
[ QUOTE ]
how come no one commented on mmy observation that once mental health check is required, then it must be done like drug testing, periodically or randomly or both. [/ QUOTE ] Most people here don't accept the premise, so arguing about the conclusion is a waste of time... 
|
|
#242
10-14-2007, 06:12 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: mandatory mental health evaluation for gun-rights supporters
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] how come no one commented on mmy observation that once mental health check is required, then it must be done like drug testing, periodically or randomly or both. [/ QUOTE ] Most people here don't accept the premise, so arguing about the conclusion is a waste of time... [/ QUOTE ] I disagree. I enjoy discussing the hypothetical conclusion because I don't accept the premise. Its really a fine way to prove the point to those who agree that mental evaluations would be a positive. However, in reality, the only people to be swayed are those on the fence, because anyone who is for mental evaluations (which I believe to be unconstitutional) would likely have no problem with other unconstitutional acts, such as government searches and in home interviews and state ordered drug screenings, so it's really an argument you can't win without getting to a baseline understanding of why they are willing to throw away liberty for (statistically percieved, not real) safety. [ QUOTE ] They who would give up an essential liberty for temporary security, deserve neither liberty or security. [/ QUOTE ] - Benjamin Franklin
|
|
#243
10-14-2007, 06:54 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: mandatory mental health evaluation for gun-rights supporters
[ QUOTE ]
I disagree. I enjoy discussing the hypothetical conclusion because I don't accept the premise. Its really a fine way to prove the point to those who agree that mental evaluations would be a positive. [/ QUOTE ] This doesn't make any sense. If you agree that mental "check ups" should be mandatory to own a gun, on what basis could you argue that they shouldn't be done on some kind of schedule?
|
|
#244
10-14-2007, 06:59 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: mandatory mental health evaluation for gun-rights supporters
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] I disagree. I enjoy discussing the hypothetical conclusion because I don't accept the premise. Its really a fine way to prove the point to those who agree that mental evaluations would be a positive. [/ QUOTE ] This doesn't make any sense. If you agree that mental "check ups" should be mandatory to own a gun, on what basis could you argue that they shouldn't be done on some kind of schedule? [/ QUOTE ] I'm not. I'm of the opinion that mental evaluations are a ridiculous idea. I'm merely discussing where these evaluations would obviously lead.
|
|
#245
10-14-2007, 07:21 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: mandatory mental health evaluation for gun-rights supporters
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] I disagree. I enjoy discussing the hypothetical conclusion because I don't accept the premise. Its really a fine way to prove the point to those who agree that mental evaluations would be a positive. [/ QUOTE ] This doesn't make any sense. If you agree that mental "check ups" should be mandatory to own a gun, on what basis could you argue that they shouldn't be done on some kind of schedule? [/ QUOTE ] I'm not. I'm of the opinion that mental evaluations are a ridiculous idea. I'm merely discussing where these evaluations would obviously lead. [/ QUOTE ] You're not arguing over the conclusion then, you're arguing that the premise will lead to bad things.
|
|
#246
10-14-2007, 07:51 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: mandatory mental health evaluation for gun-rights supporters
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] I disagree. I enjoy discussing the hypothetical conclusion because I don't accept the premise. Its really a fine way to prove the point to those who agree that mental evaluations would be a positive. [/ QUOTE ] This doesn't make any sense. If you agree that mental "check ups" should be mandatory to own a gun, on what basis could you argue that they shouldn't be done on some kind of schedule? [/ QUOTE ] I'm not. I'm of the opinion that mental evaluations are a ridiculous idea. I'm merely discussing where these evaluations would obviously lead. [/ QUOTE ] You're not arguing over the conclusion then, you're arguing that the premise will lead to bad things. [/ QUOTE ] I'm not quite sure I follow the difference. The conclusion being the end result, ie mental evaluations for gun owners, if that is the end result, how do we separate the premise of the idea from the conclusion? I'm merely discussing where this can/most likely will lead. The US government does not have a history of stopping short. Ideas everyday build and build and what once was a wonderful idea becomes a horrible burden. See the American's with Disablilities act for more examples. Some of the language in there is, for lack of a better term, horrifying. FWIW, the exact wording of MidGe's post that started all this was "Mental Evaluations for gun-rights supporters." Welcome to the wonderful world of thought-crime.
|
|
#247
10-14-2007, 08:21 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: mandatory mental health evaluation for gun-rights supporters
[ QUOTE ]
how come no one commented on mmy observation that once mental health check is required, then it must be done like drug testing, periodically or randomly or both. [/ QUOTE ] How about we start off with random lie detecting tests for congress, judges, and all law enforcement first, run by civilian review borads of course.
|
|
#248
10-14-2007, 09:30 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: mandatory mental health evaluation for gun-rights supporters
[ QUOTE ]
I'm not quite sure I follow the difference. The conclusion being the end result, ie mental evaluations for gun owners, if that is the end result, how do we separate the premise of the idea from the conclusion? [/ QUOTE ] To argue the conclusion, you'd be arguing about whether it follows from the premise of mandatory mental health exams for gun ownership that there should be multiple mental health checks or just one. But you're arguing (rightfully, imo) that the premise of mandatory mental health checks are bad. This just a nit I guess, not a deep, philosophical point.
|
|
#249
10-14-2007, 10:03 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: mandatory mental health evaluation for gun-rights supporters
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] I'm not quite sure I follow the difference. The conclusion being the end result, ie mental evaluations for gun owners, if that is the end result, how do we separate the premise of the idea from the conclusion? [/ QUOTE ] To argue the conclusion, you'd be arguing about whether it follows from the premise of mandatory mental health exams for gun ownership that there should be multiple mental health checks or just one. But you're arguing (rightfully, imo) that the premise of mandatory mental health checks are bad. This just a nit I guess, not a deep, philosophical point. [/ QUOTE ] I understand your point. I'm very much anticipating the return on MidGe, and his opinions, being that he begged for this discussion.
|
|
#250
10-16-2007, 06:06 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: mandatory mental health evaluation for gun-rights supporters
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] I am starting to think that, as usual, this is an orchestrated NRA tactic to try to drown out those arguments they have no answer to, by turning them into a discussion about super boring guns effectiveness comparison, or ballistics! Common, you guys have got to have answer, not just ignoring the mental health issue of people wishing to be gun owners, by changing the topic! [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img] [/ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] Umm, it seems that the NRA really has no worthwhile answers to the OP or any other post related to it. The ONLY thing then can talk about is ballistics.... LOL [/ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] I've viewed the behaviour of hundreds if not thousands of college students. [/ QUOTE ] How many were "drunk and stupid" while in class? After all, you are talking (by your own admission) about carrying weapons AT SCHOOL. [/ QUOTE ] Oh, and of that group that show up to class drunk, how many are also members of the group of students who have concealed carry permits? [/ QUOTE ] Why should they need carry permits? Isn't that just the tyranny of the state denying them the right to carry their own property? [/ QUOTE ] Yes, of course. I'm trying to work within his assumptions, here, though. If I don't, everyone bitches about "AC hijacks". If I do, I get stupid posts like yours. A real no-win situation. [/ QUOTE ] Lets get back to the OP! [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img] AC'er or not, should mentally deranged people have access to guns? If the answer is no, then lets test all applicants gun owners for sanity! I am not sure where you live, but where I do some mentally deficient people are not allowed, and quite rightly in my opinion, to hold a car driving license. To own a gun seems even more silly than letting psychopaths as drivers out on the road. I think that the problem we have here, is that most people desirous of owning guns would fail the sanity test, and therein lies the crunch! [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img] [/ QUOTE ] <font color="red"> MidGe. Paging MidGe. I've asked multiple times. What is your sanity test? Twice you've answered other questions, then you've just ignored me. Please answer or stop using this [censored] about "Deranged people with guns." Thank you. </font> [/ QUOTE ] MidGe. I posted that 3 times too. Thats 5-0 for me. Five direct responses to mental health, you never answer. I don't think this is making things look good for you. When you answer our questions, you'll get answers. Before we submit to more government control, we'd like to know how that government control will work. [/ QUOTE ] Just gonna try to get a response here once more.
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
