How Gun Control Laws for “Mentally Ill” Could Disarm Those Who Question Authority

 In the growing debate surrounding the natural right to self-defense,  one of the most popular proposed methods of gun control has been  restrictions on gun-ownership for those who are deemed to be mentally  ill. This is a measure that is often suggested by liberals and  conservatives alike, but it is important to stop and consider what  something like this might entail. 

When any collective group is banned from owning a gun, they are  effectively turned into second-class citizens. In the case of mental  illness, that classification is so vague and open to interpretation that  it could possibly be applied to over half of the population, depending  on which criteria you use. 

Mental illness can be very hard to identify since there is no kind of  official test for most conditions, most people are diagnosed according  to the subjective opinions of the doctors that observe them. Even the  most severe conditions, like schizophrenia, can be very difficult to  identify and is often misdiagnosed. Psychiatric drugs are another possible factor that could get someone  marked by the government as mentally unstable, but a classification like  this would allow for large portions of the US population to be  disarmed. 

According to a 2016 study  by JAMA Internal Medicine, more than 1 in 6 Americans are on some type  of psychiatric drug. This is not to mention the large number of people  who report symptoms of depression or anxiety and don’t take medication. 

A policy like this could also allow the government to disarm  dissidents and political enemies. As psychiatry became more influential  towards the middle of the 20th century, rulers around the world began  using “mental illness” as an excuse to lock away anyone who might  disagree with them. 

The Soviet regime became notorious for this practice  by labeling all political dissidents as “mentally ill” so they could be  locked away in institutions where they were no threat to the  establishment. The United States government also has a long history of slapping  unruly citizens with the mark of mental illness. President Franklin  Roosevelt famously called his detractors “the lunatic fringe,” and this  type of attitude towards activists has carried on in the halls of  government to this day. 

In the dictionary of mental illnesses, known as DSM-5, published by  the American Psychiatric Association, there is actually a condition  listed for people who have a problem with authority. Oppositional Defiant Disorder is a name that psychiatrists made up to identify children who won’t do what they are told, and now even adults are being diagnosed with this condition as well. 

Meanwhile, politicians and mainstream media are quick to label anyone  who questions the official narrative as a “conspiracy theorist,” a term  that has been falsely associated with mental illness in pop culture. 

A study in 2017  set out to determine whether or not believing in conspiracy theories  was a form of mental illness. As expected they found the exact answer  that they were looking for, people who don’t trust the government and  mainstream media are crazy, and suffering from something called illusory pattern perception. 

There is another dilemma that arises in the discussion of disarming  people who are accused of having a mental illness, and that is the fact  mentally ill people are 10 times more likely to be victims of violence than the rest of society because they are often seen as easy targets. 

Complicating matters further is the fact that these people can’t  depend on the police to help them in these situations, as studies have  shown that the mentally ill are 16 times more likely to be killed by a police officer than the average person. According to the Virginia-based Treatment Advocacy Center, a minimum  of 1 in 4 fatal police encounters ends the life of an individual with  severe mental illness. 

To prevent mentally ill people from owning firearms is a severe form  of “ableist” discrimination, and also opens the door for nearly anyone  to be classified as mentally ill. There are sometimes extreme cases where a person’s mental instability  is creating a dangerous situation for the community, like the recent  Parkland shooting, for example. 

In this case, the shooter had a known  history of violence, regularly made threats and was visited by police on  numerous occasions because of his threatening behavior. In cases like  this, it is reasonable to keep an eye on someone, restrict their access  to firearms, or possibly quarantine them from society in the most  extreme situations. There are many laws on the books currently would have allowed the FBI  or local police to intervene in their initial encounters with the  shooter, but they decided that a student known for violent outbursts and  talking about carrying out school shootings was not worth looking into. 

As TFTP reported earlier this month,  there is a law on the books known as the Extreme Risk Protection Order  or ERPO, which went into effect in June of 2017. This law is used when a  person is considered an “extreme” threat as reported by police and  family members. An ERPO must be approved by a judge and only after this  person is proven to be a danger to themselves or others can police move  in to confiscate their weapons. 

These types of targeted approaches specifically aimed at individuals  who are a known source of violence in the community would do far more to  prevent tragedies from happening, than a wide-reaching law that could  threaten the rights and safety of millions of innocent gun owners. 

---

I wrote this story @ http://thefreethoughtproject.com/discriminating-against-the-mentally-ill-with-gun-control-laws-is-a-bad-idea/

---

AUTHOR BIOGRAPHY:

---

---

My name is John Vibes and I am an author and researcher who organizes a number of large events including the Free Your Mind Conference. I write for numerous alternative media websites, including The Free Thought Project @tftproject and The Mind Unleashed. In addition to my first book, Alchemy of the Timeless Renaissance, I have also co-authored three books with Derrick Broze @dbroze : The Conscious Resistance: Reflections on Anarchy and Spirituality, Finding Freedom in an Age of Confusion and Manifesto of the Free Humans

I just won a 3-year-long battle with cancer, and will be working to help others through my experience, if you wish to contribute to my medical bills, consider subscribing to my podcast on Patreon.