I can tell you what is not the middle ground; having the government involved in the decision of whether or not someone is mentally competent. Even with all the problems the mental health industry has, they pale in comparison to what mental health care would look like in the hands of the government. First of all, it would be fraught with potential for fraud and favoritism. Secondly it would cede to the government unlimited power over the lives of all citizens.OldGrumpy wrote:Is there a middle ground on the mental health issue or do we have to continue to suffer through the mental imcompetents having guns in order to protect 2nd amendment? Not trying to start a war here but I am concerned about the number of people with know mental issues who are getting access to guns.
As it currently stands, to find someone incompetent before the law requires the decision of a judge based upon presented evidence. There are protections in place, including rights to appeal, that make it difficult to fraudulently commit someone and assigns penalties for getting caught doing so. The interests of all parties are considered, and the government is, or at least should be, an impartial third party.
If the government takes over the decision, the fox is guarding the hen house and freedom is gone. This is an issue worth going to war over.