Mentally Ill Patients, Not Guns Are Shooting Culprit

jbg · October 10, 2015

The recent spate of gun violence at schools has fueled debate and calls for actions against guns. The violence has been significant:

Two college shootings on or about October 9, 2015
Shooting In Oregon School
Sandy Hook in December 2012;
The Charleston Church Massacre; and
Numerous others

The argument seems to run that restricting guns would end the madness. The only problem is that there are too many guns in circulation to make this remedy effectual. In short, it is a "feel good" remedy. The problem dates back to the early 1970's when a fetish developed about releasing mental patients. An example is this December 1973 New York Times article,SEMINAR STUDIES PATIENTS' RIGHTS; Psychiatrists Disagree' Mental-Case Court Rulings Interest Lawyers Here excerpted:

Recent court rulings in several states have greatly broadened the rights of patients in mental institutions and sharply restricted the ability of state governments to commit people to mental hospitals, a seminar was told here last week.

***********

A ruling by a Federal court in Michigan that corrective brain surgery on a violent criminal could, in part, violate his First Amendment "freedom to generate ideas."

"The mentally ill are entitled to the same constitutional rights and protections as criminals and other citizens," said Bruce Ennis, a staff attorney with the New York Civil Liberties Union, who chaired the seminar….

In a later article,Where Can Mental Patients Go?; Controversy on Halfway Houses the position of the ACLU was further amplified:

The American Civil Liberties Union contends that once a patient is released, . he or she cannot be forced to live anyplace, take any medication or accept supervision against his or her will.

Notwithstanding the "freedom to generate ideas" the rights of ordinary people to go about their business safely are severely impacted by the freedom of severely mentally ill people to refuse confinement and even treatment. This must be addressed rather than embarking on a quixotic effort to restrict the rivers of guns flowing through the nation

waldo · October 10, 2015

The argument seems to run that restricting guns would end the madness. The only problem is that there are too many guns in circulation to make this remedy effectual.

.

.

This must be addressed rather than embarking on a quixotic effort to restrict the rivers of guns flowing through the nation

you can't do both... at the same time - to deal with your acknowledged "too many guns in circulation"?

I doubt any thinking American believes the, as you say, "madness", will end... just lessened. Do background checks restrict guns, or work to try to ensure the gun buyer is a legitimate candidate... perhaps even screening for some of the mentally ill you're so keen to attach 'the problem' to?

.

Scott Mayers · October 10, 2015

Logic:

(1) Some who are mentally ill are some of those that have access to guns

(2) Some who have access to guns are some of those who use guns to kill (illegally)

(Con) Some who are mentally ill MAY BE some of those who use guns to kill (illegally)

This suggests no logical link between the mentally ill and to those who use guns to kill. Note that the "MAY BE" is required as this doesn't logically assure any overlap or if there is one doesn't eliminate those outside of it or to other possibilities. So jbg, you can't argue any connection between the mentally ill to gun violence with any certainty.

However, notice that if you take out the 'guns' as a possible factor for all people, this makes even the possibility of gun violence to occur with the mentally ill. While you seem to recognize this in part but suggest we are beyond a tipping point to be able to do anything about it, you also imply that ALL severely mentally ill people are a danger by implication, and so this is the focus for which we should at attend to as a distinct discussion apart from guns. NOT all gun violence is a product of the mentally ill, unless you define them as such by default.

Topaz · October 10, 2015

OR could these people with mental issues being "programed" to do the shooting? Don't start the tinfoil going, why, all of sudden with the government wants gun control, there's all these people getting killed by guns. The government wouldn't do that ...how about the CIA, which has done worse in the past to citizens.

Wilber · October 10, 2015

So your trying to control who owns guns is a waste of time, you have more crazies than any other developed nation but not enough of them are locked up, in spite of the fact you have 25% of the world's prison population but only 5% of world population.

Seems like you are screwed to me.

Edited October 10, 2015 by Wilber

BC_chick · October 10, 2015

Mental-illness is universal whereas an infatuation with gun-culture is pretty unique to the US.

The mental-illness argument makes zero sense.

Bryan · October 10, 2015

Mental-illness is universal whereas an infatuation with gun-culture is pretty unique to the US.

The mental-illness argument makes zero sense.

Thinking you have a right to carry a gun is a mental illness.

October 10, 2015

Maybe it's narcissism...

http://www.spiked-online.com/newsite/article/after-oregon-we-need-to-talk-about-narcissism/17515#.VhldImeFN9A

Edited October 10, 2015 by bcsapper

bush_cheney2004 · October 10, 2015

Thinking you have a right to carry a gun is a mental illness.

Then the United States Supreme Court is "mentally ill". Please let them know....

Moonlight Graham · October 11, 2015

Mental-illness is universal whereas an infatuation with gun-culture is pretty unique to the US.

The mental-illness argument makes zero sense.

This.

You'll never get rid of mentally ill people. You won't get rid of gun murders by locking up the mentally ill. Most mentally ill people are undiagnosed and have never been institutionalized.

jbg · October 11, 2015

This.

You'll never get rid of mentally ill people. You won't get rid of gun murders by locking up the mentally ill. Most mentally ill people are undiagnosed and have never been institutionalized.

I think it is safe to say that the Rosebud, Oregon killer, Adam Lanza, James Holmes and Jared Lochner were on the radar long before they massacred.

On Guard for Thee · October 11, 2015

Then the United States Supreme Court is "mentally ill". Please let them know....

Nope, the courts are simply enforcing your constitution, which they are required to do. The mentally ill part is not catching onto the obvious notion that it's time to amend that little second thingy.

Shady · October 11, 2015

The OP is spot on about mental illness and the capacity to deal with high risk individuals.

According to a 2002 report by Central Institute of Mental Health for the European Union, the number of involuntarily detained mental patients, per 100,000 people, in other countries looks like this:

-- Austria, 175

-- Finland, 218

-- Germany, 175

-- Sweden, 114

-- England, 93

The absolute maximum number of mental patients per 100,000 people who could possibly be institutionalized by the state in the U.S. -- voluntarily or involuntarily -- is: 17.

Shady · October 11, 2015

Mental-illness is universal whereas an infatuation with gun-culture is pretty unique to the US.

The mental-illness argument makes zero sense.

Utter and complete nonsense as per my previous post.

kimmy · October 11, 2015

The OP is spot on about mental illness and the capacity to deal with high risk individuals.

According to a 2002 report by Central Institute of Mental Health for the European Union, the number of involuntarily detained mental patients, per 100,000 people, in other countries looks like this:

-- Austria, 175

-- Finland, 218

-- Germany, 175

-- Sweden, 114

-- England, 93

The absolute maximum number of mental patients per 100,000 people who could possibly be institutionalized by the state in the U.S. -- voluntarily or involuntarily -- is: 17.

Cherry-picking at its finest. Institutionalization of people, voluntary or involuntary, is a minuscule piece of the overall mental health picture. In all of those countries, including the US, the number of people undergoing treatment for mental health issues of some sort or another is is in the thousands or tens of thousands per 100,000 people.

There's zero evidence to suggest that any of these mass shooting killers would have been candidates for forced institutionalization, so the probative value of that particular statistic in analyzing this issue is dubious at best.

-k

sharkman · October 11, 2015

Still, there's a better chance of reducing these mass murders by institutionalizing the violent mentally ill vs trying to increase restrictions on new gun purchases when there are roughly 300 million in circulation already.

Wilber · October 11, 2015

The US is below the OECD average when it comes to the number of psychiatrists per capita but not much lower than Canada, Australia and New Zealand and not enough to explain the big difference in homicide rates.

http://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/sites/health_glance-2011-en/03/06/g3-06-01.html?itemId=/content/chapter/health_glance-2011-25-en&_csp_=43ca8945549e270ddddfd32e4873bba5

GostHacked · October 11, 2015

I recall when I brought up mental illnesses with regards to these shootings and many who seem to agree now were not in that mindset previously.

What changed?

eyeball · October 11, 2015

Still, there's a better chance of reducing these mass murders by institutionalizing the violent mentally ill vs trying to increase restrictions on new gun purchases when there are roughly 300 million in circulation already.

Why...how?

You know of a blood test that indicates violent mental illness? Is there a hotline to report people suspected of being violently mentally ill?

Wilber · October 11, 2015

Do you think the gun lobby and its supporters would be OK with the state paying the billions it would cost to institutionalize these people and actually treat them? They would probably go the incarceration part. Anything other than take basic steps to see that the wrong people don't get firearms, but treatment, that would smack of socialized health care.

Edited October 11, 2015 by Wilber

bush_cheney2004 · October 11, 2015

Do you think the gun lobby and its supporters would be OK with the state paying the billions it would cost to institutionalize these people and actually treat them? They would probably go the incarceration part. Anything other than take basic steps to see that the wrong people don't get firearms, but treatment, that would smack of socialized health care.

The U.S. already dismantled such a system...decades ago. Something about "constitutional rights". Funny how that works, eh ?

Popular culture defined the acceptable risk years ago with terms like "going postal".

waldo · October 11, 2015

The OP is spot on about mental illness and the capacity to deal with high risk individuals.

According to a 2002 report by Central Institute of Mental Health for the European Union, the number of involuntarily detained mental patients, per 100,000 people, in other countries looks like this:

-- Austria, 175

-- Finland, 218

-- Germany, 175

-- Sweden, 114

-- England, 93

The absolute maximum number of mental patients per 100,000 people who could possibly be institutionalized by the state in the U.S. -- voluntarily or involuntarily -- is: 17.

cause... if she says it... it's gots to be true!

On Guard for Thee · October 11, 2015

Do you think the gun lobby and its supporters would be OK with the state paying the billions it would cost to institutionalize these people and actually treat them? They would probably go the incarceration part. Anything other than take basic steps to see that the wrong people don't get firearms, but treatment, that would smack of socialized health care.

They seem to prefer funneling money through to private firms running prisons than actually spending it on helping them. Maybe we could rent out some of those cells that Harper has had built.

Wilber · October 11, 2015

They seem to prefer funneling money through to private firms running prisons than actually spending it on helping them. Maybe we could rent out some of those cells that Harper has had built.

What cells? Prison over crowding is a big problem in Canada.

On Guard for Thee · October 11, 2015

please sir! The esteemed 'Ann Coulter' put a notice on that article... one you didn't respect by crediting it: "COPYRIGHT 2015 ANN COULTER"

cause... if she says it... it's gots to be true!

Aha, ow this is making a bit more sense. Thanks for pointing that out. I wonder if Shady "forgot" to credit the article because he knows what a flake she is in most peoples minds.