The Violence Project’s analysis found that 24% of mass shooters had previously taken psychiatric medication. Again, to be clear: The vast majority of people prescribed antipsychotic drugs do not commit violent crimes. But it is still reasonable to create a temporary, reviewable pause of gun rights tied to active treatment with specified antipsychotics. To protect liberty and avoid stigma, the pause should be (1) time-limited, (2) rebuttable through a rapid petition or possibly through a physician’s attestation that the individual is not dangerous, and (3) privacy-respecting, relying on minimal, purpose-built reporting (or voluntary certificates) rather than broad disclosures of medical records.
Pauses contingent on prescribed medication create the risk that some people in need of psychiatric treatment would choose not to seek it out in order to preserve their access to guns. The aviation industry gives us reason to take this possibility seriously, as the New York Times recently reported that many commercial pilots, faced with the threat of losing their stringent FAA clearance to fly, choose to hide their mental illnesses rather than receive a formal diagnosis. However, the potential chilling effect of tying gun rights to antipsychotics should argue for robust safeguards — not paralysis. We already pause the ability to drive or operate heavy machinery for far less.
— Ian Ayres in Why psychiatric holds don’t stop people from buying guns
Ahh… a world of many shades of grey.
True.
Per one of the links in the article, the NYC gunman bought a used AR-15 for $1,400. That’s a pricey AR.
The vast majority of people prescribed antipsychotic drugs do not commit violent crimes. But it is still reasonable to create a temporary, reviewable pause of gun rights tied to active treatment with specified antipsychotics.
If that is reasonable (it isn’t), then wouldn’t it be logical to automatically limit certain demographics as well, unless they prove to us that they aren’t a threat? I don’t think they want to go down that road.
“… the NYC gunman bought a used AR-15 for $1,400. That’s a pricey AR.”
I can believe it, NYC prices being what they are.
A single slice of NYC street pizza is like $3.50…
And you have any expertise to say its “reasonable” to deny gun rights due to medication prescriptions. Get a grip. You know nothing
Driving heavy machinery is not a right. If someone can’t be trusted to have all of their rights, they can’t be trusted to be out in public. Conversely, if they can be trusted to be out in public unsupervised then they are a free man and deserve the rights of a free citizen.
Now there’s a good comment
These “mental” illnesses are incurable and chronic so no pausing or temporary banning. No guns and that’s it. Somehow, these people get guns and use them to our detriment anyway.
What an ignorant comment. You have no clue about mental illness or psychiatry.
A small percentage of the small number of people who commit mass murder are on certain meds so let’s take away gun rights from everyone on the same meds. Makes total sense if you’re a totalitarian who hates freedom. Don’t think pausing gun rights stops here.
good comment
While the idea is good, it is hard to trust the people that would implement these rules. This could easily be abused. And like mentioned in the article with pilots it would stop people from going to get treatment. Potentially making things worse. There are certain mental health disorders that should not own firearms like being manic bipolar or people that hallucinate due to extreme paranoia or PTSD. Also, medications that are considered antipsychotics are used for treatment much less severe mental illness like treatment resistant, depression and anxiety. Most people with depression and anxiety have no interest in harming themselves or anyone else they just want to feel normal. People with mood disorders like manic bipolar should be monitored by their psychiatrist and it is the psychiatrist’s job report dangerous mood swings/ anger issues they observe. If we implement a law, it needs to be very specific and not based on the medication but on the diagnosis and observation of the psychiatrist.
My opinion comes from my own personal experiences with friends and family. It’s also my opinion that people that are a suicidal should not be blacklisted from owning firearms as once they are on proper medication or work through the issues with a psychologist /therapist they are no longer a threat to themselves and it would be very difficult to prove that they’re no longer typed to themselves.
Family members also should be stepping in in many of these cases. I have intervened personally to prevent such things in my family. Proper morals and values need to be returned to family households and taught in schools. There are a few countries that still teach firearm safety in schools and I believe that would be greatly beneficial in schools in the US.
I’ve been on anti depressants for 20 years. Stuff it up yours if you think that makes me dangerous. This is total BS. Just an excuse to take my guns away. THEN I’m dangerous. Most Seniors are on them. No gun rampages with them. I hate it when morons who know nothing about mental health come up with crap like this.