Over Half will get a Diagnosable mental disorder

[TexasGal]

Ambien is a medication with psychotropic effects. Lots of medications are. Problem is many medications are prescribed for their side effects instead of the main label use. For example, Valium is a mild sedative, but it is also a mild muscle relaxant that does not have the risk of flexeril or the allergy problems with skelaxin. There are many benign medical conditions that have muscle tension as a symptom. I imagine that would make little difference to a gun grabber.
The medical records of millions of Americans should not be judged by non-medical people for what medications or conditions warrant a concern a person is not competent to own guns. Certain mental conditions are known to be a risk for violent behavior. Those conditions and those alone should be the only criteria and even then, there should be independent medical review. If you take a mentally ill person to a dozen psychiatrists, you are apt to get at least a half dozen different diagnoses. If you take a perfectly normal person to a dozen psychiatrists, you are apt to get the same thing. As has been pointed out, follow the money.

[atticus]

It is as certain as night follows day: the feds will use their new Obamacare health records power to disarm the population via a Washington mandated diagnosis of mental disorder, with the IRS and federal swat teams waiting in the wings as muscle. We are there.

[Beiruty]

There are many chronic diseases that have symptoms such as chronic depression. From my own experience, Chronic Kidney Disease (CKD) would lead to many symptoms including depression. However, many CKD patient are not treated for their depression as most cases are mild and can be treated by couple visits to a spa or 2-times per week trip to the gym.

[VMI77]

This is prompted by two things:

1) Follow the money. In a country where healthcare coverage is now mandated by law, is it any mystery that the book which officially determines the array of possible diagnoses has been expanded to include more and more diagnoses? And who is it who says that "we" as a nation are more anxious and neurotic than ever before? The same people who compiled book and who get paid by insurance for those diagnoses. This was utterly predictable.

2) Follow from whence power emanates. It is no secret that the psychiatry/psychology fields are dominated by sanctioning organizations with a powerfully liberal bent. The more diagnoses they "find," the more power they can exercise over our lives. Don't believe it? Just ask any veteran who has recently lost his/her RKBA because some liberal hack at the VA gave them a diagnostic label which too conveniently disarms them. Look at what is happening in NY this very week, in which perfectly normal people who are taking any kind of meds for any kind of anxiety are having their firearms licenses revoked without due process. This was utterly predictable.

It's all about money and power........the two things that always drive the leftists.......

BINGO!

[VMI77]

What happens if you attend a dentist and have a one off sedative to assist some big dental work.............guns gone ?

This is going to open up one huge can of worms and needs to be defeated. Sadly Boehner & Co. seem to be part of the machine and emotional politics now thriving in DC Does anybody up there represent their electorate anymore or is it just a club for the Ruling Elites ? Rand Paul and Ted Cruz occupy the same foxhole and are pretty well surrounded by mush !

As George Carlin said: "it's a big club, and we're not in it."

[cb1000rider]

Maybe this is the way we keep guns out of the hands of the crazies...

The DSM is hardly new. And remember, it's the "scientific" manual that labelled homosexuality a mental disorder for decades. It's hardly infallable, like most of science.
I assume it'd be relatively easy to get "liberalism" in there also?

I'm a pilot, so *anything* that might go into that manual or the use of any medication used to treat anything in that manual (generally) takes away my privileged to fly an airplane. I'm very concerned about it because I spent a lot more money on airplanes than guns.

What is interesting to me, is there about 10x as many firearm related deaths and something like 20x as many suicides as there were general aviation fatalities. Yet outside of a self-assessment at time of purchase, we do very little to qualify gun ownership as it relates to mental health.

I realize that any sort of new regulation or hurdle around gun ownership or purchase is going to go over on this forum less favorably than a bag of bricks. I also note that government regulations that started off with good intent get bent and broken to political purpose.

However - and I'll say this out loud: It might be appropriate to come up with some sort of procedure that links legitimately diagnosed people who have long term mental illness to the firearm purchasing process. Facilitating LESS negative firearms incidents is in the best interest of expanding (back) our 2nd amendment rights.

How we do that without opening the door to even more 2nd amendment erosion.. I dunno...

[Dadtodabone]

Maybe this is the way we keep guns out of the hands of the crazies...

The DSM is hardly new. And remember, it's the "scientific" manual that labelled homosexuality a mental disorder for decades. It's hardly infallable, like most of science.
I assume it'd be relatively easy to get "liberalism" in there also?

I'm a pilot, so *anything* that might go into that manual or the use of any medication used to treat anything in that manual (generally) takes away my privileged to fly an airplane. I'm very concerned about it because I spent a lot more money on airplanes than guns.

What is interesting to me, is there about 10x as many firearm related deaths and something like 20x as many suicides as there were general aviation fatalities. Yet outside of a self-assessment at time of purchase, we do very little to qualify gun ownership as it relates to mental health.
I realize that any sort of new regulation or hurdle around gun ownership or purchase is going to go over on this forum less favorably than a bag of bricks. I also note that government regulations that started off with good intent get bent and broken to political purpose.

However - and I'll say this out loud: It might be appropriate to come up with some sort of procedure that links legitimately diagnosed people who have long term mental illness to the firearm purchasing process. Facilitating LESS negative firearms incidents is in the best interest of expanding (back) our 2nd amendment rights.

How we do that without opening the door to even more 2nd amendment erosion.. I dunno...

I'm concerned about your rhetoric because I've invested more money in guns than you'll ever spend on "airplanes".
Of the double guns I own, selling any one of the top, value wise, 28 would provide me with the funds needed to acquire some pretty nice small aircraft.
And they are just a portion of a collection that's been growing and evolving for 40 years.
Let's look at your statistics. 300,000,000 firearms vs. 300,000 registered aircraft. Comparing use and availability, we would need at minimum, 100 times more firearm related deaths and 50 times as many suicides to reach meaningful equivalence. We don't even need to cite relative difference in access between the two or the training/skill set needed to operate them.
Using the anti-gun mindset and your stats, general aviation should be criminalized and/or banned. At the very least the tax dollars spent to fund infrastructure that supports it should be withdrawn. That would certainly eliminate the chances of folks having dinner at home, welcoming a Cessna as an uninvited guest.

[tommyg]

All I can say is that there are a lot of doctors who just give a mental diagnosis because they
don't know what to diagnose a patient with. Just put down something and go to the next patient.
No more guns. I can easily see this coming with Obama care

[Beiruty]

When guns are banned from suspected-crazy people, only crazy people will own guns!

[Redneck_Buddha]

This kind of thing drives me nuts.

[Beiruty]

This kind of thing drives me nuts.

Here you go, now you are on the list. Someone is coming for your guns

[Redneck_Buddha]

This kind of thing drives me nuts.

Here you go, now you are on the list. Someone is coming for your guns

Someone had to say it.

[VMI77]

Maybe this is the way we keep guns out of the hands of the crazies...

The DSM is hardly new. And remember, it's the "scientific" manual that labelled homosexuality a mental disorder for decades. It's hardly infallable, like most of science.
I assume it'd be relatively easy to get "liberalism" in there also?

The pyschobabble stuff is no more a "science" than economics is. There are few, if any, psychological problems that have a scientific diagnosis. You break your leg, they take an xray, they see a broken bone; the doctor doesn't just "believe" you have a broken leg: that's science. In fact, your example that homosexuality was labeled a mental disorder is actually a good example of the difference. The old diagnosis was based on religious belief and social tradition --prejudice if you will. Now we know, from science, that genetic factors are involved in homosexuality. What the pyschobabblers actually give is an opinion, not a diagnosis. The DSM is actually nothing more than psychological profiling.