Why aren't military/veterans the first to advocate for mental health screenings for gun ownership?

I think a lot of conceptions about Vets is that we all have "mental health issues" in the eyes of the civilian world. Our military way of life was ingrained in each and every one of us.

Who decides? Some fucking liberal PHD that really believes anyone who wants a gun is crazy anyway?

Major Nidal Malik Hasan, USA (FIABUH) ??

Who is a "mental health hazard"? And what is that anyway? Anyone who has PTSD? There are people who believe anyone whom is able to perform in combat is insane. They may be right, a sane person would probably run away.

I think my ancestors had it right. Warriors don't ask permission to bear arms. Slaves, do. Subjects, do. Citizens, do not. Free men, do not. That became famous in Rome, but really, it was everywhere. In medieval Europe, a free man could bear arms, a serf could not unless in service to a noble of some sort. Gotta control the slaves, after all, can't let them get uppity.

I prefer to be a citizen, or a free man, as I am now too old to really be a warrior any more. As for guns, my opinion is that I was born with the right, and anyone who wants to take it away, violates my basic human rights, and the constitution of the US, which I have sworn multiple times to defend against all enemies foreign and DOMESTIC.

Come and get it, little metrosexual bitches....I will hold true to my oaths.

Or, just leave me the fuck alone, and I won't hurt anyone because I don't want to anyway, and I'll sit at home polishing my weapons and giggling occasionally for no apparent reason.

Easy to say...
Hard to enforce...
Impossible to identify...

It is easy to say that we need to do something like this, however those are mere words and you cannot do much more than that.

It is hard to enforce since individual State Laws have to be weighed as opposed to a simple UCMJ action. While I am on that topic, it is also hard to enforce in the Military without just cause, due diligence and some kind of unit leader counseling/ interaction. We do not pull 'Joe or Josephine Private" out of the unit and yank their weapon. UCMJ or at least personal counseling and unit leadership have to agree that it is necessary.

It is often impossible to identify these things until it happens (or hopefully at best is in the process of happening...) but oftentimes it is only AFTER the occurrence has already "...made history on the Rifle Range". that we then "do something".

Otherwise in the Military (and even more so in the "Civvie World") we run the alternate reality of "thought Police" wandering around with special mental monitors pulling people from the street because " they were about to do something in the future and we will stop them beforehand...".

I refuse to give anyone the ability to stop someone in the street based upon arbitrary things written into a mumble jumble code so they can detain me, arrest me, and take my rights away from me without my 6th Amendment rights ("innocent until proven guilty")

Until Human beings are born with a LED monitor on their forehead that reads "404 Human Error- Processor is bad, take something away"... we will never have an easy solution to another human beings thoughts and actions.

I agree a nut should not own a gun. But the constitution says shall not be infringed. That means nobody's rights nuts and all. Where I'm going with this is where did the government get the right to change this. I didn't, they took it upon themselves to do it. Moral of the story they don't need our permission they will sneak things through and tell us it was legal along. You and i will not do a damn thing about it, and the political liberals know it.so let's just sit down like good little children we are and shut up while they continue to take our rights.

I'll say this it's not about health issues. The government could damn well care less about your health or safety. It's all about gun control, as long as the American people are armed they cannot control us, and you had better trust what I'm saying. Hell even China is pushing for are disarmament. That should really open your eyes. Japan once said that they couldn't take America because there was a gun behind every blade of grass. People wake the hell up, socialism is coming as surely as the sun is going to rise tomorrow.

Because mental health screenings are subjective and discriminatory. You can bet your sweet bippy combat vets will be the first ones denied their rights.

I do. There is no Constitutional right for every citizen to own a firearm. If there was, convicted felons would be able to legally own them. I advocate for licensing, mandatory insurance and for violent offenders to be denied ownership, including domestic abusers. A lot of people are saying 2A gives them the absolute right to own any firearm they want. That's just not true. Also, Amendments are able to be repealed. They are not in the body of the Constitution itself. Reference prohibition.

I find it funny that people think that because Rights are enumerated in the Bill of Rights that they are wholly inviolable or inalienable to the extreme.

The freedom of expression (speech, gathering, etc) is an inalienable right, but has limits. Those limits SHOULD be self imposed through ones own understanding that any freedom comes with responsibility, i.e. one is free to subscribe to and practice (or not) any religion or belief of conscience they desire, up to the point where it infringes upon the life, liberties or ability to pursue happiness of any other person.

The right to keep and bear arms is no different. The right of self defense is inalienable. However, and it even says this in the damn wording of the amendment, well-regulated (which doesn’t just mean muster and drill, especially since those have fallen away from usage) means that rules can be put into place. If mental health screens are a part of the process...what is wrong with that? So long as, as with any process, there is a right and ability to appeal any adverse decision that denies or severely limits ones ability to exercise their other rights.

My issue with the whole gun “control” movement is that they try to sell people on the idea that their whole thing is about lowering and controlling violence. Removing a tool doesn’t control violence. Look at London. The number of stabbings in that city is outrageous. The Mayor of London has stated that their is no legitimate reason for anyone to carry a knife. The Brits practically eliminated any and all private ownership of firearms and yet those disposed to violent behavior still commit violent acts that injure maim and kill.

If we want to lower incidence of violence, then let us return to civility. Teach how to f@&$ing think and debate and reason through problems, instead of glorifying violent behavior. Do we still allow for outlets where aggression and violence and frustration can be vented ? Absolutely. But they should be through sports that are refereed and regulated.

So tired of both camps (and this doesn’t just refer to the gun issue) sitting on the extremes of their positions and refusing to budge. Ideas come from the extreme positions. Rules, regulations, laws...those come from the compromises and the weighing of the pros and cons so that THE PEOPLE are able to enjoy the most freedom and receive the most benefits from those rules and laws while having the least restrictions and penalties imposed upon them. Hell, the whole purpose of law and government is so that when a person or group fails in their responsibility to exercise their freedom without causing harm to or violating the rights of others they there is a means of redress that doesn’t resort to Lex Talionis and shit like blood feuds.

in the field there are RAMPANT politicians who are ready ,willing and ABLE to declare anyone insane simply based on what THEY think,there really isn't any mental health system to even oversee.MOST realize if they betray us os on guns we would opt out fast.

The first thing is tack there wepons away right down to any Kinfe's they have, Some comand's go as far as going to one's home and tacking there wepons on and off Base. Even this Is eligle. The comand threatens the Individual with U.C.M.J. actions. We all know that there are some that need to have there wepones seized. But it needs to be done the right way. Then some go to the V.A. and get the ASS HOLE that thinks they are gods and do not like people having any guns at all. The way the law's are heading You go to get any help for P.T.S.D. The Goverment wants to use this to take any and all guns you may have. Most of us that are Combat Arm's carry Someting at least the people I know. I am not speaking for all. I say unless you are a real danger to your self or some one elec leave peoplr alone.