Most people have seen or at least heard the usual talking points on this subject. Insane killers will find ways to kill. Oklahoma city was homemade bombs, 9/11 was box-cutters and planes. Disarming law abiding citizens only make them easier targets for the criminals, and so on.
Every time an insane person does something insane with a gun the knee-jerk reaction is gun-control. Most rational people who have seen the 2a under fire for some time realize at least some of the opposition is politicizing the tragedy to further their public disarmament initiatives. It is so obvious to the point that the media, and sadly many citizens first concerns in these attacks is to rush to find out what race the shooter was, what religion, what political party, and so on.
Why isn’t the other side of the equation, and arguably the most important being discussed, why did they go insane to begin with? If they were known to have mental issues, was there a professional that could/should have put them on a watch list, committed them, changed their meds, etc?
We can understand the liberal media not wanting to touch the mental health subject, we know their narrative. However, why aren’t our legislators (Rep and Dem) all over this. The immediate answer there could be they are in the pocket of Big Pharma. Or maybe they don’t get paid enough to tackle such a far-reaching issue (sarcasm).
Maybe it’s just easier to throw out a red-flag law and take the responsibility off of them, away from the insane person and the processes that failed them, and put it on “us” who failed to notice and report said person. This will inevenitably result in one action, over-compensation. No judge/official is going to be “that one” that didn’t act on a tip. Evert tip will be viewed as a worst-case scenario leading to an abundance of false-positive actions. Innocent people targeted and destroyed by a flawed process.
I don’t know what our politicians problem is. I do know they need to get over it.
There have been significant advances in gene testing for adverse reactions to psychiatric drugs. Previously a Doctor would prescribe a drug and then monitor it for a period of time, perhaps months. If the drug didn’t properly treat the condition, or produced even worse side effects, then the doctor would try another drug, possibly taking another month or two, and so on till they find one that works.
Psychiatric Pharmacologic Testing analyzes 11 genes and reports on 83 prescription drugs that are commonly and routinely prescribed for mental health conditions. This list includes but is not limited to drug used to treat depression, anxiety, ADHD, and several other mental health conditions.
The blood test can be performed at your local doctor and sent off with results in about 2 weeks. The results takes out most of the trial and error phase by giving the Doctor a list, based on the individuals genes, that clearly says which drugs are most likely to work, which ones may work with some side effects, and which drugs should be avoided at all costs.
Media, politicians, doctors, insurance companies, government… WHY is this test NOT MANDATORY for users of these drugs? Why is this opportunity to reduce/improve mental health issues not near the top of your list of “things to do”?
I’ve stayed away from the gun control side of the argument because, as I stated earlier, the downfall of red-flag laws, disarmament without due process, and all of the other pre-Communist actions will only hurt us (the lawful individual). Those points, and their counter-points (if any) have been beaten repeatedly with a stick. Disarmament of lawful citizens in a nation does not lead to a happy ending, for the citizens that is.
If you have higher rates of insanity, then address the insanity. Require this genetic testing. Look at the HIPAA laws and make it easier for a qualified mental health professional (not your Ex or angry political opposite) to put potential problem people on a watch list, perhaps blocking, or requiring extra steps (extended wait-times and evaluation, etc) to purchase guns for those individuals instead of throwing an snare net over every citizen. In extreme cases, maybe look at seizure of existing property… again, this coming from a medical professional as part of an agreed upon and documented process. (At this point I would question if institutionalization would not be the best action, as killers will find a way to kill.)
If you are a legislator, you are getting paid for your service. Sometimes the easy way is the best way, sometimes it’s not. Look beyond the tool and address the user of the tool.