Posted on Apr 4, 2018
Why aren't military/veterans the first to advocate for mental health screenings for gun ownership?
30.5K
602
199
145
145
0
And here's why I say that: what's the first thing we do when we identify a soldier as a mental health hazard? *TAKE THEIR WEAPON AWAY.*
2nd Amendment
Gun Control
Constitution
Mental Health
Posted >1 y ago
Responses: 107
0
0
0
0
0
0
Disarming the returning combat Veterans was the first step in attempting to disarm all, instituted by the VA, via Hussein Obama, because all "combat Veterans" had PTSD and were, therefore, mentally unstable. News flash . . . you don't have to experience combat to have PTSD. Duh! As I remember, that initiative didn't last very long, skulking quietly into the night. Even now, I will not discuss weapons ownership with any medical professional.
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
SSG (Join to see)
I would ask you - Mental Health Screenings for only military/veterans OR "Everyone"?
If we are singling out only military/veterans my immediate response is, "Up Yours!".
Understanding that you have been there along with all the others in this discussion, I'll give you a more courteous answer.
Using myself as an example. When this discussion came up at the American Legion, I told that if I ever went crazy then they should divvy up my guns and ammo – but only if my wife, my kids, my siblings, in-laws and close friends didn’t want them.
Inheritance laws take precedent over all other laws on property and they do cover cases of insanity.
Enough said.
I would ask you - Mental Health Screenings for only military/veterans OR "Everyone"?
If we are singling out only military/veterans my immediate response is, "Up Yours!".
Understanding that you have been there along with all the others in this discussion, I'll give you a more courteous answer.
Using myself as an example. When this discussion came up at the American Legion, I told that if I ever went crazy then they should divvy up my guns and ammo – but only if my wife, my kids, my siblings, in-laws and close friends didn’t want them.
Inheritance laws take precedent over all other laws on property and they do cover cases of insanity.
Enough said.
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
And who says they are a hazard- not all PTSD folks, are not totally mad. Yet there are NO safeguards in place to have due process on a mental hearing. Shrinks are the 1st to contradict themselves.
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
Mental screenings do nothing really, any smart person can make a judgement call and answer the questions the way they think they should be answered according to presumed prevailing social norms at the time the test was administered no matter what your actual thought process about certain things may actually be. Yes, having too perfect of an outcome on these things is a red flag as normal people have at least some flaws but they are easy to cheat. Also being on the extreme outside of the "normal" range is not an indicator of intention to do harm or participate in illicit activities.
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
SGT Mark Stewart - I will be up front - FU and your asinine and ignorant response.
WOW! Being down voted and then blocked for this response:
SGT Mark Stewart - Some of them do, most soldiers and even a greater number of civilians do not know that, unless they actually attend the courses.
Up (2) Down (1)
To the following comment:
SGT Mark Stewart
SGT William Higginbotham - Most people today are not familiar with the USSR and its human rights abuses. But institutionalizing people who disagreed not only with communism but even just being suspected of disagreeing with the specific clique of communists in power at any given time was a habit of the Soviet government. Government in the United States, being staffed by bureaucrats, who are human, and some of whom lack personal attachment to "the American way" would likely make use similar tactics if they had a way to do it. I don't doubt that for a second.
On a different point, but kind of related, I do think that some MOSes in the military and some schools should have a psych-screening of some sort because of the subject matter presented in those MOSes and schools.
Up (2) Down (0)
And SGT Stewart's comment was the following:
SGT Mark Stewart
SSG Robert Webster - Well, I actually attended the Sapper Leader Course, in which I learned to make things like ammonium nitrate and fougasse. There was no screening of any sort.
Interesting response and comment to show how much you do not know.
Tell me something - Which is easiest and most combat effective way of obtaining ammonium nitrate: a. make it or b. steal it? Why would you endanger yourself or your men by making it?
Tell me something else - If you went to the Sapper Leader Course, why are you using the term fougasse, when you are probably wanting to talk about napalm (or jellied gasoline (which by the way diesel can be used in place of gasoline)), because fougasse is actually a normal field expedient of a mortar specifically for dispensing a flammable substance normally napalm.
Interesting that you think that Engineers are the only ones trained in "Flame Field Expedients," CBRN or NBC (or whatever the current acronym and terminology is) are trained on it also, they do not go through psychological screening either. Heck all you have to do is to order FM 3-7. If you need one, I can send you one if you need it, the one I send you may be a little out of date (my newest one is probably dated in the early 1990s). So what is your point in selecting those two specifics?
It is also ignorant and asinine on your part to be so full of yourself that the use of ammonium nitrate in explosive mixtures and the making and use of jellied fuels would not be general knowledge to a significant number of people, especially farm hands.
As far as your contention about psychological screening and testing, the military for the most part does that for the really important ones such as Sniper School and SF.
So SGT take your egotistical asinine BS and shove it.
WOW! Being down voted and then blocked for this response:
SGT Mark Stewart - Some of them do, most soldiers and even a greater number of civilians do not know that, unless they actually attend the courses.
Up (2) Down (1)
To the following comment:
SGT Mark Stewart
SGT William Higginbotham - Most people today are not familiar with the USSR and its human rights abuses. But institutionalizing people who disagreed not only with communism but even just being suspected of disagreeing with the specific clique of communists in power at any given time was a habit of the Soviet government. Government in the United States, being staffed by bureaucrats, who are human, and some of whom lack personal attachment to "the American way" would likely make use similar tactics if they had a way to do it. I don't doubt that for a second.
On a different point, but kind of related, I do think that some MOSes in the military and some schools should have a psych-screening of some sort because of the subject matter presented in those MOSes and schools.
Up (2) Down (0)
And SGT Stewart's comment was the following:
SGT Mark Stewart
SSG Robert Webster - Well, I actually attended the Sapper Leader Course, in which I learned to make things like ammonium nitrate and fougasse. There was no screening of any sort.
Interesting response and comment to show how much you do not know.
Tell me something - Which is easiest and most combat effective way of obtaining ammonium nitrate: a. make it or b. steal it? Why would you endanger yourself or your men by making it?
Tell me something else - If you went to the Sapper Leader Course, why are you using the term fougasse, when you are probably wanting to talk about napalm (or jellied gasoline (which by the way diesel can be used in place of gasoline)), because fougasse is actually a normal field expedient of a mortar specifically for dispensing a flammable substance normally napalm.
Interesting that you think that Engineers are the only ones trained in "Flame Field Expedients," CBRN or NBC (or whatever the current acronym and terminology is) are trained on it also, they do not go through psychological screening either. Heck all you have to do is to order FM 3-7. If you need one, I can send you one if you need it, the one I send you may be a little out of date (my newest one is probably dated in the early 1990s). So what is your point in selecting those two specifics?
It is also ignorant and asinine on your part to be so full of yourself that the use of ammonium nitrate in explosive mixtures and the making and use of jellied fuels would not be general knowledge to a significant number of people, especially farm hands.
As far as your contention about psychological screening and testing, the military for the most part does that for the really important ones such as Sniper School and SF.
So SGT take your egotistical asinine BS and shove it.
(0)
(0)
SSG Robert Webster
MSgt Steve Sweeney - Being derisive, are we?
Well you can take your snide remarks and shove them, too.
Well you can take your snide remarks and shove them, too.
(0)
(0)
0
-1
1
Nope..so over it..nobody gets guns..the only reason you need a gun is because you are scared..and the lack of knowledge..the basis of fear, whether religiously motivated or not. Is what makes you think you need a gun...other than that..idiots that post pictures of themselves with a bottle of jack...and a weapon or a gun in there belt..."to look cool"? Wtf? How about this...manditory 8weeks basic training..at 17...everybody's drafted...Build schools not walls...
(0)
(1)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google