No weapons for the mentally ill push; how will this affect military active and vets needing help for PTSD?

Maj Kim Patterson — Mon, 05 Oct 2015 12:29:31 -0400

We are finally making progress in getting those returning military to set foot in the halls of behavioral health or other counseling programs and admit they might have a problem to address before they commit suicide. How are the new gun law proposals about back ground checks due to increasing mass public shootings going to affect seeking help? Once mental health issues are identified, theoretically, you should no longer be able to possess a weapon. And theoretically, suicides direct their feelings inward, not outward so are we going to see a change in the mode? Or am I misreading current thought?

Response by LTC Stephen F. made Oct 5 at 2015 12:32 PM

LTC Stephen F. — Mon, 05 Oct 2015 12:32:31 -0400

This could certainly adversely affect those with PTSD Maj Kim Patterson
The push by many to restrict the purchase and ownership of guns is troublesome but expected.
I won't be surprised if there are efforts to have HHS develop a standardized test and HHS and its ATF monitor the results and have a greater role in licensing of gun sales and vetting of potential gun owners prior to purchase. That is certainly a goal of some in the liberal/progressive camp.

Response by PO3 Private RallyPoint Member made Oct 5 at 2015 12:33 PM

PO3 Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 05 Oct 2015 12:33:37 -0400

... well ... they will lose their rights to own a firearms, or fear of losing their firearms force them to stop talking about their PTSD. i guess ...

Response by LTC John Shaw made Oct 5 at 2015 12:33 PM

LTC John Shaw — Mon, 05 Oct 2015 12:33:41 -0400

Maj Kim Patterson This is a likely result one of the unintended consequences that I think will happen as a result of well meaning policy.

Response by CPO Joseph Grant made Oct 5 at 2015 12:34 PM

CPO Joseph Grant — Mon, 05 Oct 2015 12:34:05 -0400

It already does affect vets with PTSD. Being declared incompetent without due process is done daily at the VA.

Response by SFC Wade W. made Oct 5 at 2015 12:35 PM

SFC Wade W. — Mon, 05 Oct 2015 12:35:32 -0400

No, you aren't misreading. This will put a massive halt to people seeking assistance with mental health issues and those that are already diagnosed will become criminals because they will not give up their firearms. This is already being played out in some locations where sheriff's deputies have been run off of some properties trying to confiscate weapons from veterans.

Response by SGT Jeremiah B. made Oct 5 at 2015 12:43 PM

SGT Jeremiah B. — Mon, 05 Oct 2015 12:43:51 -0400

This already happens. IF you are declared mentally unfit, VA has the power to take away your weapons. It's mostly just a firmly worded letter and a flag on your background check, but the new rules wouldn't add anything.

PTSD in and of itself is not considered a dangerous mental illness. The bar to reach is actually rather high, with you having to be legally declared mentally incompetent or a danger to yourself or others by a Psychologist/Psychiatrist. It's a pretty involved undertaking with an appeals process and everything.

Response by SSG Michael Scott made Oct 5 at 2015 12:46 PM

SSG Michael Scott — Mon, 05 Oct 2015 12:46:25 -0400

This post will hurt vets than more help them.

Response by SSG Michael Scott made Oct 5 at 2015 12:47 PM

SSG Michael Scott — Mon, 05 Oct 2015 12:47:42 -0400

Guns are just a tool mam, the person is the weapon.

Response by SCPO David Lockwood made Oct 5 at 2015 1:05 PM

SCPO David Lockwood — Mon, 05 Oct 2015 13:05:40 -0400

My question how do you know if a person is mentally ill?

Response by SSG Warren Swan made Oct 5 at 2015 1:13 PM

SSG Warren Swan — Mon, 05 Oct 2015 13:13:11 -0400

It's all fun, games, and politics until you start impacting first responders. Many of them suffer and successfully deal with their PTSD symptoms and have no problems doing their jobs. Even military members do too. But if you're going to use a blanket "mental health" name as a disqualifier, let's see how many cops, firemen, EMT's, and servicemembers end up jobless and without weapons. Funny they're not the ones acting ignorant.

Response by Maj Kevin "Mac" McLaughlin made Oct 5 at 2015 1:13 PM

Maj Kevin "Mac" McLaughlin — Mon, 05 Oct 2015 13:13:32 -0400

My opinion here... The simple diagnosis of PTSD by itself should not constitute an automatic ban from owning a firearm. There are various levels and symptoms for PTSD, not all of which would or should preclude someone from owning a gun. This should be left in the hands of a qualified psychologist. To avoid a diagnosis from an activist anti-gun psychologist, the individual should be able to request a second opinion (or more).

Response by MSgt John Grollimund made Oct 5 at 2015 1:38 PM

MSgt John Grollimund — Mon, 05 Oct 2015 13:38:10 -0400

This will be a blanket cover to all those that are affected with PTSD. Yet another knee jerk reaction.

Response by SrA Jonathan Carbonaro made Oct 5 at 2015 1:41 PM

SrA Jonathan Carbonaro — Mon, 05 Oct 2015 13:41:20 -0400

Ma'am, this is part of the reason why no one I know will go see Mental Health.
I have no desire to go see Mental health about any problems I may have had, be having, or will have because I will no forfeit my rights to anyone. PTSD should not be used to disarm Veterans but it will be and that is a shame.

Response by LTC Private RallyPoint Member made Oct 5 at 2015 2:19 PM

LTC Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 05 Oct 2015 14:19:11 -0400

Maj Kim Patterson There was a bill I believe passed several years ago affectionately known as the Veterans Disarmament Act which I view as a real problem.

http://www.veteranstoday.com/2008/01/08/veterans-may-suffer-from-the-veterans-disarmament-act/
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/1910016/posts
https://www.gunowners.org/op0751.htm

Veterans May Suffer from the Veterans Disarmament Act

Homeland Security is currently downloading information from the VA on veterans who ‘the VA’ has determined to be mentally incompetent and therefore at risk to buy or own a firearm. by Jere Beery, OFFEAccording to Operation Firing For Effect (OFFE), National Chairman, Gene Simes; “i

Response by SSG Gene Carroll SR. made Oct 5 at 2015 2:32 PM

SSG Gene Carroll SR. — Mon, 05 Oct 2015 14:32:01 -0400

I think every man or women have a present part of everyone has a bit of PTSD in tmem, I feel the American Government has to make some great sunificate changes in stead of blaming veterans. The guns help feed us just as fishing, it's not always about recreation. It's about serving in these days and times. It's drugs and alcohol behind the guns it's not the veterans, it's not the hunters. It's all the ones that or looking for something that makes them happy, but there doing it in the wrong way. Our Government has to stop the blame game and look for good solutions. The military are trained with how to use weapons for food and safety. Crack down on drugs and alcohol and you will see a change in America. America needs to turn back to the Bible and God to survive whats happing in our world today. I know most of you don't want to hears this but it's the truth in a nut shell. Our people who we elect need to respect or needs instead of their popularity and filing their bank accounts on our money and giving it away. There are ways of doing things right. they need to sit down and listen to we the people again. GOD BLESS US ALL.

Response by CPT Pedro Meza made Oct 5 at 2015 2:34 PM

CPT Pedro Meza — Mon, 05 Oct 2015 14:34:01 -0400

The right to own guns is a right that a lot of those of us that have served believe that we have rightfully earned and the fear/belief that we may lose that right will cause some veterans not to seek help.

Response by SPC David S. made Oct 5 at 2015 2:36 PM

SPC David S. — Mon, 05 Oct 2015 14:36:30 -0400

Not sure this is going to fix anything other than the way SM's are killing themselves. In one of the worst cases of mass shootings the shooter in San Ysidro McDonald's massacre had no prior history of any mental health problems. There have been a number of studies that demonstrate that most acts of violence are committed by people who are not being treated. One study from 2010 showed that most acts were carried out during the person's first psychotic episode before they were treated. I think this course will only aggrandize the stigma associated with mental health and act as an inhibitor in seeking help. Additionally the current health care system is poorly designed and rather optimistic. If in crisis mode an individual is expected to some how get to the nearest emergency room and admit themselves. I find this completely unrealistic if one is in the midst of a psychotic episode. Additionally there are inferring that all mental health issues are one in the same with all exhibiting the same dangerous potential of mass shootings. I look at this as just more knee-jerk legislation doing more harm than good.

Response by MSgt Curtis Ellis made Oct 5 at 2015 2:37 PM

MSgt Curtis Ellis — Mon, 05 Oct 2015 14:37:36 -0400

It depends on how the definition is leveled as to what constitutes an acceptable "mental health" issue/condition versus what does not; and where that "proverbial line" down the middle will actually be... Either or, it will affect many AD and Vets as well as a great many non Vets...
It's about to get "really stupid up in here..." ;)

Response by CPT Bruce Rodgers made Oct 5 at 2015 2:48 PM

CPT Bruce Rodgers — Mon, 05 Oct 2015 14:48:06 -0400

It's all political because HIPPA and other privacy laws related to mental health makes any kind of restriction very difficult

Response by SPC George Long made Oct 5 at 2015 4:48 PM

SPC George Long — Mon, 05 Oct 2015 16:48:03 -0400

The law as currently requires you be adjucated a danger to yourself or others. The VA and SSA both started a program 3 years ago to try and declare people with PTSD or Social Security Disability as incompetent and if you failed to go along you could appeal to a VA judge,or SSA hearings officer who because his function is administrative cannot declare you a threat. In the end its a huge bluff. Push back. Get an attorney or better yet a VSO who knows the law and make it go away. I know all this from first hand experience. If you get a letter from the VA call your VSO IMMEDIATLY. What they are trying to do is not legal.

Response by MSgt Michael Smith made Oct 6 at 2015 9:59 AM

MSgt Michael Smith — Tue, 06 Oct 2015 09:59:47 -0400

I wonder how many vets with PTSD would have been alive today if they didn't have a firearm close by when they were feeling hopeless? It might sound trivial but sometimes a gun nearby to a suffering Vet is all it takes to decide to end it all. PTSD is very real and very sad. Our Vets are not getting all the help they need, and even the ones who are getting help are still suffering. Perhaps not having firearms within such an easy distance might save some of these lives- Just Saying.

Response by LCDR Rabbah Rona Matlow made Oct 7 at 2015 12:03 AM

LCDR Rabbah Rona Matlow — Wed, 07 Oct 2015 00:03:48 -0400

I know a number of vets who don't get treatment for their PTSD for fear that their guns will be taken. In many cases, they probably shouldn't have guns, because they are suicidal or unstable. In others, their guns may be needed for myriad reasons.

That being said, the push for gun control will never change the trend of gun violence in this country. Just as we don't ban cars for DUI drivers who kill, banning guns would not work either. The root causes of gun violence MUST be addressed. The rub is that this takes money and ruffles many feathers...

Response by SCPO Carl Wayne Boss made Oct 7 at 2015 4:28 AM

SCPO Carl Wayne Boss — Wed, 07 Oct 2015 04:28:57 -0400

Eventually it will get to the point that the "Gun Grabbers" will make a general pronouncement, that any Vet or Service Person that has seen combat is potentially a victim of PTSD or "Crazy" until proven otherwise, after they return home from a Combat Zone... Making a broad sweeping generalization... saying we're fit to bear arms on the battlefield, but not here, in our own country in defense of ourselves, our own families and property! The former Secretary of Homeland Security, Janet Napolitano, said as much in a report that she authored while she was the head of DHS a few yeas ago...

Response by Maj Kim Patterson made Oct 7 at 2015 7:36 AM

Maj Kim Patterson — Wed, 07 Oct 2015 07:36:11 -0400

A) all of you who believe a weapon can be obtained through other than legal channels are correct. A law on the books hasn't worked in decades, why would it work now?
B) yes, having a weapon in the house when suicidal can lead to a hasty decision that one can't have a do-over for..
C) self inflicted gsw are not always fatal. Nor are many other methods which I am not going to list because if you haven't thought of it, I'm not providing ideas.
D) what happened to the idea of a well-armed militia? "just build a wall?"
E) no guns for law abiding citizens that have seen things that no one should have seen but plenty for those who have not walked in those boots; it's a procurement issue as well as a conscience issue.
F) for those who are considering taking your life, please give your weapons to someone you trust for now. It doesn't have to be forever.
G) I'm starting to see more private proliferation of "off the books" counseling options
H) with an exception, has anyone noticed that most of these mass shootings involve a young male between the ages of 18 and 30, the time a schizophrenic break is believed to occur especially in men?
I) I no longer own a weapon, I don't want one because for self protection, it could be easily turned on me, I have seen first hand the results of self inflicted gsw and that is awful on so many levels. I came from a family of gun owners, gunsmiths and hunters. Just because I don't want one doesn't mean I think the government needs to step in and take yet another right (to keep and bear arms) away.
J) I see a trend of mental illness with the current answer of lock them up in jail and our prisons are overcrowded, our taxes are going up, and hundreds are not getting the care or medication they need and I truly believe this is the root of the problem. We need to reverse the decision to free all of the mentally ill and provide a place to get effective evaluation, medication, monitoring by someone that they have can build a foundation of trust with, and when living outside of a locked facility will cause greater harm, let's give them a place to go with adequate staff to patient ratios for more than 72 hours, and provided opportunities in a safe environment to face the demons we carry.

( Althought I could easily go through the rest of the alphabet, I am stepping down from my soap box now)

Response by SGT Private RallyPoint Member made Oct 7 at 2015 9:11 PM

SGT Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 07 Oct 2015 21:11:28 -0400

This is a very easy question to answer. Unless there is something mental on a back ground check, your PTSD is your business. I have NOT been declared mentally unstable. So, when it came to that check box, I checked "NO". Since I'm not a criminal, or insane, or a terrorist, and I know the difference between right and wrong, I have a carry permit. The only way anyone would know if you have been diagnosed with PTSD, is if you tell them.

Response by SGT Private RallyPoint Member made Oct 7 at 2015 9:43 PM

SGT Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 07 Oct 2015 21:43:52 -0400

This is from "Crazy vet' assumptions after shootings more stereotype than reality". I thought no it will put to rest some of these assumptions I have read in this post.
WASHINGTON -- When renowned sniper Chris Kyle was killed by a fellow veteran on Saturday, the news brought familiar headlines of the instability of returning warfighters and the dangers of post-traumatic stress disorder.
But health experts say that’s more Hollywood stereotype than reality, and that blaming veterans’ violence on their PTSD makes as much sense as blaming it on their broken leg.
“There is zero linkage between PTSD and criminal behavior,” said Barbara Van Dahlen, a clinical psychologist and founder of the veterans charity Give an Hour.

http://www.stripes.com/crazy-vet-assumptions-after-shootings-more-stereotype-than-reality-1.206948

'Crazy vet' assumptions after shootings more stereotype than reality

When U.S. sniper Chris Kyle was killed by a fellow veteran, the news brought familiar headlines of the instability of returning warfighters and the dangers of post-traumatic stress disorder.

Response by SGT Private RallyPoint Member made Oct 8 at 2015 1:08 PM

SGT Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 08 Oct 2015 13:08:54 -0400

35 School shooters/school related violence committed by those under the influence of psychiatric drugs, and only one Vietnam veteran committed one of these crimes. Here's a link to the 35 shooters.
Veterans with PTSD are not violent. They are no more violent than cops, firefighters, and EMT's.

http://www.cchrint.org/school-shooters/

School Shooters & Stabbings Committed by those on Psychiatric Drugs | CCHR International

32 school related acts of violence including shootings and stabbings were committed by individuals under the influence of psychiatric drugs

Response by SSG James Arlington made Oct 9 at 2015 10:42 AM

SSG James Arlington — Fri, 09 Oct 2015 10:42:53 -0400

What new gun laws? None will get through Congress.

Response by PO1 Cliff Heath made Oct 12 at 2015 3:54 PM

PO1 Cliff Heath — Mon, 12 Oct 2015 15:54:59 -0400

YES MAJOR I SEE WHAT YOU MEAN VETS IN MY OPINION WILL NOT SEEK THE HELP THEY NEED IF IT DENIES THEM THEIR RIGHTS. I AM AFRAID THAT ALL IT WILL DO IS PUT THEM FEELING MORE ON THE OUTSIDE OF FEELING LIKE A PART OF THE SOCIETY THAT THEY FOUGHT FOR. IT SEEMS TO ALIENATE THEM EVEN FURTHER AND CONTRIBUTE TO THEM SEEKING HELP. YOU CANNOT THROW EVERYONE WITH A MENTAL HEALTH ISSUE IN A BOX THERE ARE MAJOR DIFFERENCES IN THE TYPE AND LEVEL OF MENTAL HEALTH ISSUES TO LUMP THEM ALL TOGETHER CREATES A MINDSET OF MISTRUST. MANY VETS LIKE TO HUNT AND IT IS A TRADITION TO TAKE THAT AWAY IS THE CRIMINAL ACT AS IT ONCE AGAIN HAS THEM ON THE OUTSIDE LOOKING IN AND FEELING OUTCAST, HAVING TO ANSWER AWKWARD QUESTIONS WHICH PEOPLE THEY KNOW ARE BOUND TO ASK NOT MEANING TO TO DO ANY HARM BUT CEMENTING THE FACT THAT THE VET IS DIFFERENT AND STANDING ALONE FEELING HOPELESS, SO I AGREE MANY VETS IN NEED WILL INTERNALIZE THEIR FEELINGS AND PROBLEMS TO AVOID BEING SINGLED OUT AS BEING DEFINED THE SAME AS SOMEONE WHO INDEED IN THE THROES OF SEVERE MENTAL ISSUES AND NEED TO BE ON AN INPATIENT STATUS.

Response by LCpl Todd Houston made Apr 18 at 2017 9:35 PM

LCpl Todd Houston — Tue, 18 Apr 2017 21:35:47 -0400

I would hope that all the politicians STUPID enough, and the voters who would support them, would at least be smart enough to make it as difficult to rob someone of their civil liberties as it is as difficult to get VA benefits for the catylist that allows us to rob them in the first place. Most would say that our right to bear arms is guaranteed by the 2nd amendment of our Constitution, but this is inaccurate. Our right to self defense is an inalienable right from GOD. All the second amendment does is acknowledge this. So before we propose, or even acknowledge the idea of taking someones GOD given right simply for thoughts they may or may not have had, and before an action has been taken, we should look at ourselves and ask exactly what thoughts should be considered so aggrieves that such an action could be justified. THEN we should be forced to write down for all the world to see our own thoughts that would qualify for such a preemptive action. Such a law is more dangerous than no law at all. Sigmund Freud himself could not begin to understand ones thoughts before they think them, regardless the amount of psychoanalysis that may be done. Like they say, the road to hell is paved with good intentions. We DO NOT live in the Matrix, there is no such thing as precrime. Given the opportunity, we would not shoot Hitler in WWI. Not because of what we know, but rather because of what we do not. So, dispite the tens of millions of needless deaths out of WWII, we could not prevent this because we do not know if in the future there would be hundreds of millions of needless deaths. Same reason we would not kill Gavrilo Princip in May of 1914. But if someone did, and then claimed they killed him because GOD said it would prevent The Great War, they would spend the rest of their life in a mental institution. So I ask, what is more crazy, the unknown thoughts of another, or the idea of saving them or others based on what we say they are thinking? Pretending to know what is best for society or just another individual based on what we think they are thinking, well, as you can see, is a fickle bitch.

Response by PVT Raymond Lopez made Jul 15 at 2017 10:29 AM

PVT Raymond Lopez — Sat, 15 Jul 2017 10:29:12 -0400

No weapons for the mentally ill push; how will this affect military active and vets needing help for PTSD? Based on personal experience since I am utterly addicted to books and reading and when I was in Vietnam I had a very paranoid Troop commander who sent for a psychiatric evaluation because I did not drink or do drugs. To quite General of the Army George Catlett Marshal, Jr the World War two Chief of Staff of the Army and a fellow smart mouthed Pennsylvania boy like myself “I need an officer for a secret and dangerous mission I want a West Point football player.” My Troop Commander was a former West Point football player and must have taken one too many hits to the head so I really enjoyed playing with him. The Divisional Psychiatrist talked to me five minutes and walked outside looked came in said “Ray, I think we are the only sane people in this hell hole.” I suffer from PTSD and over the years because of assignments in the military and in civilian law enforcement including multiple ones in over a quarter of century federal law enforcement I have never had a problem. However my wife went to see a psychologist after her mother’s death and lo and behold he was an activist anti-gun psychologist and wanted to take her guns away and put her in the funny farm!! Come to think of it she is an engineer…. Okay I just had to say that! My wife is the engineer who resized the Protector vest and had them upgraded so they would stop AK47 rounds and not just anemic 9mm NATO rounds.