Visit the Archives for U.S. Politics Online -- U.S. Politics Online . net
Legend of USPO!
My friend MHP and I are having a disagreement about PTSD patients. MHP believes that a diagnosis of PTSD means a person should automatically lose their second amendment rights:
I disagree, for my experience with PTSD is that every patient is different, and a blanket suppression of Constitutional rights is not valid.Originally Posted by MeadHallPirate
And I am not alone in my belief here that not all PTSD is the same.
There is, as the article goes on to note, a higher incidence of domestic violence among PTSD patients. But to claim that every PTSD patient is potentially violent and thus must be stripped of their rights is not supported by the data.Post-traumatic stress disorder and traumatic brain injury can increase a person’s anger and hostility and diminish his or her self-control. But the link between those disorders and outright violent behavior is weak and hard to pin down with certainty.
Link between PTSD and violent behavior is weak - Washington Post
In any case, mental disorders arising from trauma are unlikely to be a big contributor to a person’s violent tendencies, many experts believe. “To pick PTSD and highlight it in the way it’s been played out in the media is a gross distortion and contrary to what we know,” said Matthew Friedman, director of the VA’s national center.Now, we DO know that PTSD patients who go untreated are likely to get worse over time. This would indicate that blanket punitive measures, like having rights stripped and property confiscated as MHP advocates, would likely result in some percentage of PTSD patients avoiding treatment.“There’s a misperception that PTSD is debilitating for anyone who has the diagnosis. There are actually varying degrees of how it impacts one’s life,” she said.
Now, let me slide to realm of the anecdotal for a bit. I used to work with a paramedic whom we will call Bill. He was working a weekend day shift one day, and was called to a particularly horrific scene. A woman had killed her baby, and done unspeakable things to the body. I will not recount details of the event here. Suffice it to say that Bill was the first one on the scene, and no human being should ever be forced to see what he saw that day. I was scheduled to come on duty that evening, and the shift captain paged me at home to come in early.
We had an unwritten understanding in the department that if an EMS provider caught a particularly bad call on a shift, he or she she would be offered the opportunity to be relieved from the unit and given a different assignment for the remainder of the shift if they wanted. I came in early and relieved Bill, who rode a fire truck for the rest of the shift. As a peer counsellor in the fire service, I sat with Bill and the captain and we held a debriefing there in the firehouse.
It was obvious that Bill was badly shaken up by the call. Not to drag the story out, but he ended up in counseling and was eventually diagnosed with PTSD. It would eventually end his career and nearly cost him his marriage. But although he was struggling with some fairly severe PTSD, he was never violent, and his treating psychiatrist (who discussed the case with me with Bill's permission) was very clear that he did not consider Bill a threat to himself or anyone else. He displayed many symptoms of PTSD, including sleep pattern derangement, hyper-vigilance regarding his childrens' safety, and other disruptive symptoms.
He is better now, these years and years later, but he still has problems from time to time. His symptoms still disrupt his day to day routine, but he is managing fairly well.
The suggestion that Bill is less deserving of Constitutional rights by virtue of his illness, even though he has never displayed ANY violent tendencies, offends me to my core. He's never given anyone the slightest excuse to seize his property, nor demote him to second class citizen status. He's a brother medic, and a close friend. And yes, we occasionally go shoot together when we get together. It gives him a chance to get away and do something he enjoys.
I still respect ye, MHP, but on this particular issue, I think yer spewin bilgewater....
“Well, congratulations, President Barack Obama, Conspiracy theorists who generally can survive in anaerobic environments have just had an algae bloom dropped on their fucking heads, thus removing the last arrow in your pro-governance quiver: skepticism about your opponents.” - Jon Stewart
President
No surprise i concur.... there are A LOT of PTSD guys who are not violent and to just wield a wand that "we think you do not deserve this right" is pretty slippery slope....
It seems to me in the zeal to support Obama i hear progressives getting pretty loose with the "rights" of citizenship ... let someone start restricting freedom of speech and i think they would change their tac ....
Since the Obama Administration is hacking and monitoring everything and everybody. IRS/FBI I did not vote for Obama , I did contribute to Romney and I do criticize the administration. AUDIT AWAY!
Administrator
This is one of the up and coming issues that will be used to push for more restrictive firearms legislation and it's one of the most dangerous.
Already we have tons of people who are uninformed or misinformed on firearms making knee jerk legislation and now these people who are equally ill informed regarding mental issues are going to use THAT to push their agenda.
I warned a few years ago that Obamacare would be used as a mechanism to restrict all kinds of freedoms and since that time my concerns have only been reinforced.
Secretary of State
Aye. Much to worry about there. I said as much in this post: Another Benefit of Obamacare, but I have to admit, the passion was burning in me that day for that topic.
If a man were behind four months on his mortgage and was talking to you about his plans to build an addition on his home you would think him daft and delusional. But in Washington, ignoring a current crisis to discuss grand dreams is called “boldness” and “vision.”
Secretary of State
Not so sure I can get behind a PTSD diagnosis also meaning "automatic" removal of rights, or confiscation of someone's possessions.
You would think if we were going to have a rational discussion on this it would have to include the one making diagnosis, as in a set of guidelines using the DSM (Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders.) When it comes to classification standards then you can get into severity, or complexity, or source events (as in the reason) for a PTSD determination. It is often complex, and as such should not be subject to whimsical suggestions. PTSD as a diagnosis covers many things, not always being the result of warfare or witness to gun based violent acts. Firemen can have it, EMTs, medical professionals even, other first responders, someone who just happened to witness or go through some traumatic event, etc. So, it is not just about guns, or even just about other weapons.
What should not happen is some blanket Obamacare like line item in a legislation effort that takes out of the hands of a professional the step of diagnosis that one may be a danger to themselves or someone else. This is what happens when emotional driven desires to "do something" results in unintended consequence. Leave it to those we charge to make these PTSD diagnoses to determine when someone needs help from themselves.
- Frustrated Independent
"They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety." - Benjamin Franklin
"Every time something really bad happens, people cry out for safety, and the government answers by taking rights away from good people.” - Penn Jillette amazingly enough, and I agree.
Secretary of Defense
This is a fine point, but I wouldn't limit it to PTSD; mental illness in general has been stigmatized. In the post-Sandy Hook discussion about firearms there seemed to be an a pervasive belief that equated mental illness with violent behavior.
2011 USPOL Most Valuable Poster (MVP)
ahoy Sluggo,
i'll clarify, me hearty (and this response also be fer the mighty veteran 'o USPO, MattLarson);
if ye have PTSD, then ye have to be cleared to retain ownership 'o yer firearm. i do not believe that the 2nd amendment ought to be extended to the mentally ill.
PTSD and Domestic Abuse: Husbands Who Bring the War Home - The Daily BeastThe majority of studies of treatment-seeking veterans with post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) or combat-related mental health issues report that at least 50 percent of those veterans commit wife-battering and family violence. Male veterans with PTSD are two to three times more likely than veterans without PTSD to engage in intimate partner violence, according to the VA, which also found that the majority of veterans with combat stress commit at least one act of spousal abuse in their first year post-deployment.
'tis odd, fer "i won't give an inch" gun enthusiasts often try to redirect the conversation to mental illness, and when someone like meself obliges, a fellow poster actually replies;
Ron Paul on Chris KyleEven if those figures are correct "at least 50%" isn't the same as "all".
errrrm, aye?
it just shows how this bit 'o "concern" 'bout mental health really just be misdirection.
imagine if we were talkin' 'bout welfare fraud and ye wanted stricter o'ersite on the matter, and i responded, "only half the people on welfare are involved in fraud...its not all 'o them!".
- MeadHallPirate
Last edited by MeadHallPirate; 02-04-2013 at 06:55 PM.
Secretary of State
You say "cleared to retain ownership 'o yer firearm." I say leave it to a medial professional using DSM guidelines to determine when someone is a danger to themselves or others. It sounds like we are close on this subject but not really. Begs the question, cleared by whom?
- Frustrated Independent
"They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety." - Benjamin Franklin
"Every time something really bad happens, people cry out for safety, and the government answers by taking rights away from good people.” - Penn Jillette amazingly enough, and I agree.
Legend of USPO!
I find this position of yours to be odd, matey.
In order to be diagnosed with PTSD, one must sail into the harbor o' a mental health professional, come alongside, and be examined, aye?
So why not say that when such an individual be diagnosed as dangerous to themselves or others, THEN their rights can be suspended by a court, aye? That be the way it works in most states today.
“Well, congratulations, President Barack Obama, Conspiracy theorists who generally can survive in anaerobic environments have just had an algae bloom dropped on their fucking heads, thus removing the last arrow in your pro-governance quiver: skepticism about your opponents.” - Jon Stewart
2011 USPOL Most Valuable Poster (MVP)
ahoy Sluggo,
don't know, matey.
that doesn't mean that thar isn't a person or entity that makes this kind 'o determination in cases 'o mental illness, it just means that imma not well versed on the topic.
if yer okies dokies with folks with PTSD havin' the right to retain firearms without havin' to clear some kind 'o mental health bar, i just disagree with that.
i'd ask Chris Kyle his opinion on the matter, 'cept he's dead, and therefore has no opinion.
avast ye!
- MeadHallPirate
2011 USPOL Most Valuable Poster (MVP)
ahoy MattLarson,
*salutes*
i admit ye have me at a severe disadvantage on not just this, but all discussions relatin' to guns, matey. i just don't know alot 'bout the topic, and me interest and education on such matters be fueled mostly by USPO, whar it seems near and dear to so many hearts.
the only thing i really know 'bout firearms is that i have 3 'o them in me studio (one was misplaced, and i've no idear whar it is, arg). one 'o me partners be a survivalist kind 'o fella - waitin' fer the end 'o civilized society. we have one handgun in our equipment locker - from time to time i take it out 'o its drawer and look at it.
from me own readin' on PTSD, i just don't think any 'o them folks ought to be armed. granted, only 'bout half 'o the veterans diagnosed with the affliction end up beatin' thar wives or maulin' thar children, but i'd prefer they do such things without a firearm at thar disposal.
i mean no offense to yer friends with PTSD and wish'm a speedy and safe recovery, aye.
- MeadHallPirate
Secretary of State
That is not quite what I said. What was was I would rather we leave it to a professional to make the determination if someone with PTSD (or some other issue along the lines of DSM guidelines) needs to have their firearms taken from them. What I am not ok with is a blanket statement, or legislation type effort, that says anyone with PTSD should be stripped of rights. This is what I am saying about us still refusing to have a serious discussion about mental health. We have tools to help here, even if more work needs to be done. Even the evidence you provided did not say everyone with PTSD will go out and harm someone or themselves. We have some risks to handle, and we have a profession to do that.
You also have still failed to really address that PTSD does not start and stop with a military source for the issue. In fact, women who have been raped can end up dealing with a form of PTSD as an example. Usually characterized as re-experiencing the traumatic event causing distress. With all the difficulty this could present, it does not mean every woman that has been raped is a danger to herself or someone else. Thus, there is no need for a blanket statement here either that women should be stripped of their rights. PTSD is way to complex for such an oversimplistic answer, no way around this. We should leave it to professionals to make a determination when someone is a potential danger, keep the person responsible for their actions.
- Frustrated Independent
"They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety." - Benjamin Franklin
"Every time something really bad happens, people cry out for safety, and the government answers by taking rights away from good people.” - Penn Jillette amazingly enough, and I agree.
2011 USPOL Most Valuable Poster (MVP)
ahoy Sluggo,
i want to make sure imma really clear on this point, oh reasonable Sluggo; i don't think many folks who be avid pro-gun swabbys want to have a serious discussion either. as i said, 'tis just misdirection.
imma not talkin' 'bout raped women, matey. this thread grew directly outta the Chris Kyle thread. thats what imma talkin' about. ex-military who be trained to use deadly force in the most extreme manner with dispassion, afflicted with PTSD, and fully armed.You also have still failed to really address that PTSD does not start and stop with a military source for the issue. In fact, women who have been raped can end up dealing with a form of PTSD as an example. Usually characterized as re-experiencing the traumatic event causing distress. With all the difficulty this could present, it does not mean every woman that has been raped is a danger to herself or someone else. Thus, there is no need for a blanket statement here either that women should be stripped of their rights. PTSD is way to complex for such an oversimplistic answer, no way around this. We should leave it to professionals to make a determination when someone is a potential danger, keep the person responsible for their actions.
look...i don't really care if they be armed and mentally unstable as long as they only shoot thar wives, children or themselves - it would be tragic, but life be full 'o tragedy, aye? it just so happens that i live in state with a robust military presence, and from time to time find meself workin' rather close to Camp Lejeune and Fort Bragg, and i don't wanna get shot in me noggin' if one 'o these fellas has an "incident".
*puts his foot down*
aye.
- MeadHallPirate
Legend of USPO
It seems pretty obvious Mr. Kyle would have said people suffering from PTSD should retain their rights, because he took someone with that very ailment that to a shooting range.
“Nations have no permanent friends or allies, they only have permanent interests.” - Lord Palmerston
2011 USPOL Most Valuable Poster (MVP)
ahoy CYDdharta,
it seems more obvious to me that whilst Mr. Kyle was a mighty patriot and rendered a heroic service to his country in the battlefield, he should leave psychiatric measures fer PTSD to the professionals.
now he has eternity to dwell on it, i guess, if thar be life after death - or he has oblivion to not think 'bout it, if death indeed be the end 'o our journey.
- MeadHallPirate
Posting Permissions
10Likes
LinkBack URL
About LinkBacks
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks