Lawmakers Say Military Suicides are Reason to Look at Gun Ownership
The Army today released its updated suicide data through the end of November: 177 potential active-duty suicides; 113 of these confirmed as suicides and 64 under investigation.
In 2011, there were 165 Army suicides. With other branches of the Armed Forces, the Army has multiple programs under way in an effort to reduce these statistics, from crisis counseling to suicide prevention training for families.
But some lawmakers see this tragic trend as reason to pinpoint gun ownership in the defense authorization bill that headed to conference.
Conference committee selections were finalized this week to hammer out differences between the bills passed in the House and Senate.
Rep. Hank Johnson (D-Ga.) and Sen. John Kerry (D-Mass.) urged their colleagues to include an amendment that would allow military officials to ask service members about their private gun ownership.
It amends the 2011 defense authorization to, as stated in Sec. 1071 of the House-passed version, “authorize a mental health professional that is a member of the Armed Forces or a civilian employee of the Department of Defense or a commanding officer to inquire if a member of the Armed Forces plans to acquire, or already possesses or owns, a privately-owned firearm, ammunition, or other weapon, if such mental health professional or such commanding officer has reasonable grounds to believe such member is at high risk for suicide or causing harm to others.”
The 2011 bill stated that the Defense Department “shall not prohibit, issue any requirement relating to, or collect or record any information relating to the otherwise lawful acquisition, possession, ownership, carrying, or other use of a privately owned firearm, privately owned ammunition, or another privately owned weapon by a member of the Armed Forces or civilian employee of the Department of Defense on property.”
Johnson and Kerry contend this provision is confusing and commanding officers could encourage such service members to store their firearms in a military facility or install gun locks. “A statutory clarification would alleviate any ambiguity,” they said.
“This is not an attempt to limit gun rights or an individual’s ability to own a firearm,” said Johnson. “Prohibiting commanders and mental health professionals from helping soldiers defies common sense and dangerously interferes with our obligation to ensure the health, welfare, morale and well-being of the troops. Military suicide is a complex problem that demands a range of actions to address it. This common sense provision adds another tool to help prevent tragic deaths.”
“We’ve come a long way since Vietnam in looking for and treating the invisible wounds left by months and years of combat, but we need to be even more vigilant about the signs that some in uniform are facing great difficulty. As of June, suicides were up 18 percent over the same period the year before – that’s a frightening figure but more importantly it needs to be a wake-up call,” Kerry said.
“Often it’s the commanding officers who are in the best position to make a difference and to help save lives,” the senator added. “We owe it to our brave men and women in uniform to do all we can to help them make safe and responsible decisions when they are struggling.”
The lawmakers, along with an unnamed “bipartisan group of 34 senators and representatives,” penned a letter to the leadership of the House and Senate Armed Services committees: Sens. Carl Levin (D-Mich.) and John McCain (R-Ariz.), and Reps. Buck McKeon (R-Calif.) and Adam Smith (D-Wash.).
“Nearly three quarters of the military suicides that occurred between 2008 and 2010 were committed with a personal firearm,” they wrote. “Amending this language would simply reaffirm and clarify the ability of military commanders and those tasked with protecting our service members, who identify someone that may be at risk, to discuss personally-owned weapons and perhaps suggest the safe storage of this weapon in a military facility or even the use of a gunlock. This sensible approach does not attempt to limit an individual’s 2nd amendment rights.”
“So often these suicides are unplanned, so delaying the act, even by a short time can mean the difference between life and death,” Kerry and Johnson’s letter adds. “…The bonds of service are important, especially when an individual is feeling isolated, angry or depressed. That is why it is critical that military commanders have the ability to talk to those at risk about their personal firearms.”
They cite Gen. Peter Chiarelli, former Army vice chief of staff, as stating in a January Christian Science Monitor article, “When you have somebody that you in fact feel is high risk, I don’t believe it’s unreasonable to tell that individual that it would not be a good idea to have a weapon around the house.”
Johnson and Kerry included a letter from former military commanders supporting “fixing this language” about gun rights in the 2011 bill.
“We so often hear that we must listen to military commanders ‘on the ground’ and that those in command know what’s best for our troops,” they wrote. “So let’s listen to what they are saying and protect our men and women in uniform from the deadly threat of suicide.”
This comes on the heels of Senate Republicans’ failed attempt to put language in the defense bill that would have stopped the Veterans Affairs Department from putting the names of vets deemed too mentally incompetent to handle their finances into the National Instant Criminal Background Check System to prohibit them from buying or owning a gun.
Sen. Richard Burr (R-N.C.) has tried for years to repeal this power of the VA, contending vets should be able to have the registry listing clear a court before being stripped of their gun rights.
Burr’s Veterans Second Amendment Protection Act passed the Senate Veterans’ Affairs Committee but has never gotten a floor vote.
Backed by 21 co-sponsors, including Democrats Jim Webb (Va.) and Mark Begich (Alaska) and Independent Joe Lieberman (Conn.), the bill amends U.S. Code to clarify the conditions under which a service member may be treated as adjudicated mentally incompetent.
“In any case arising out of the administration by the Secretary of laws and benefits under this title, a person who is mentally incapacitated, deemed mentally incompetent, or experiencing an extended loss of consciousness shall not be considered adjudicated as a mental defective under subsection (d)(4) or (g)(4) of section 922 of title 18 without the order or finding of a judge, magistrate, or other judicial authority of competent jurisdiction that such person is a danger to himself or herself or others.”
Sen. Tom Coburn (R-Okla.), another co-sponsor of the Burr bill, tried to add an amendment with similar language to the defense authorization.
Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) opposed Coburn’s failed effort. “I love our veterans, I vote for them all the time. They defend us,” he said. “If you are a veteran or not and you have been judged to be mentally infirm, you should not have a gun.”
““We’ve come a long way since Vietnam in looking for and treating the invisible wounds left by months and years of combat, but we need to be even more vigilant about the signs that some in uniform are facing great difficulty. As of June, suicides were up 18 percent over the same period the year before – that’s a frightening figure but more importantly it needs to be a wake-up call,” Kerry said.”
The suicide rate among Vietnam veterans is LOWER than among their contemporaries.
Yeah, but ONE SUICIDE IS TOO MANY (Alinsky would be proud of such sloganeering) to therefore we need to “common-sense limitation” the 2nd Amendment away so “the troops” don’t have any of those evil guns on their own.
And TOTAL control is always the answer for those who want to rule without any resistance.
So, what better way to do this than to incrementally – stealth-like – chop away at the 2nd Amendment (for the people’s safety…pigs fly too…) and then to destroy the economy in tandem?
Want proof? http://adinakutnicki.com/2012/12/10/another-bullseye-painted-on-the-backs-of-u-s-military-vets-addendum-to-the-hunt-against-vets-commentary-by-adina-kutnicki/
From Nick Bacon, USA 1SGT (RET), Medal of Honor Recipient -
Vietnam veterans have a lower unemployment rate than the same non-vet age groups.
Vietnam veterans’ personal income exceeds that of our non-veteran age group by more than 18 percent.
There is no difference in drug usage between Vietnam Veterans and non-Vietnam Veterans of the same age group (Source: Veterans Administration Study)
Vietnam Veterans are less likely to be in prison – only one-half of one percent of Vietnam Veterans have been jailed for crimes.
After the 5-year post-service period, the rate of suicides is less in the Vietnam veterans’ group.
86% of the men who died in Vietnam were Caucasians.
http://www.vhfcn.org/stat.html
FeralCat, how do you know about Nick Bacon? The guy was (d. 2010) a hero, but he’s not exactly a household name. He spent his final years in Arkansas, serving as State Director of Veterans Affairs, first under Gov. Jim Guy Tucker, then later under Mike Huckabee. I heard Sgt. Bacon give a speech once, later researched his background, and found out the guy was a Sgt. York, a true hero, a great American whose performance was stellar in a war created by politicians whose performances were (to be kind) less than stellar.
weapons already require registration on u.s Army posts. if troops are going to commit suicide, you really believe they won’t get weapons? demorats, every week, like clockwork, propose new gun regulations that are ‘not intended to curb gun rights’. yeah, we believe.
let’s review: a u.s. president and s.o.s. went on t.v. week after week proclaiming (falsely) how 90%+ of the arms used by the mexican drug cartels were bought in the u.s. the s.o.s. had been working diligently since inaugration, in the u.n. to get the small arms agreement finalized to foist on us, once the stage was set. then border agents and hundreds of mexicans were found to have been murdered by u.s. arms, sold to them by the u.s. justice dept., a.t.f., and other u.s. government agencies. immediately the j.d. denied all wrong doing. transferred people involved far away from congress, promoted others, destroyed files and el presidente himself finally had to claime executive privilege to protect all the info. that couldn’t be destroyed. the official story resembled something similar to the tripe we got fed about benghazi. the msm never covered it for over a year, and never truthfully. the guns sold to the drug dealing murderers, by our high officials, never had any tracking devices on them to catch the bad guys. they were put in the hands of murderers to be found at the sites of hundreds of crime scenes (murders), to be blamed, yet again, as the root cause of the problems there.
yeah, let’s all listen to more of it from more planted stooges. wonder what next week will bring?
Mexico: the left/liberal ideal of gun control (only gov’t and criminals have ‘em there– you want to live there?).
In addition to being a Veteran and a supporter of the Second Amendment, I see this through another lens, so to speak.
At the moment, The Seond Amendment, an hundreds of millions of privately owned firearms in this nation, is all that’s keeping us from full-blown tyranny.
Historically, these things happen in almost step by step progression.
The conservative and Republican DHS and TSA gave us a defcato police state. Now, the left is in charge of them. Obamacare and other left-wing programs have given us a tyranny, in all but name. Presidents from both parties have signed Executive Orders giving the Executive Branch ever more power over American citizens.
The next step is tracking of everyone, everywhere, which power the TSA has recently abrogated to itself. Mandatory ‘black boxes’ in our vehicles is in the works, too. Now, we’re hearing left-wing talk of mandatory voter registration. The left has their controlled media (the right wishes they could have their own controlled media, themselves.)
Neither side is innocent. Both sides bear guilt.
However, the left is presently in power in D.C. and in most of our federal departments of government.
The left has now more or less successfully demonized the right. Every despotic regime needs an internal enemy, and the right seems to be the designated ‘enemy of the people,’ in this case.
One of the final moves is to disarm every American and leave the weapons in the power of the state. Today, they’re using Veterans as an excuse to take our weapons (yeah, that pisses me off). Tomorrow, it’ll be another reason that’s used as a reason to take our weapons. They’ll keep trying until they find an excuse that works.
The Second Amendment stands between us and full-blown tyranny…and that’s about all that stands between us and full-blown tyranny.
‘Do it for the Veterans’ is the same as ‘Do it for the children.’ It’s an insult and it’s demeaning. They’re really telling you that Veterans are too dangerous to have wepaons…of any type or kind.
That’s because they know what we can do with them…and because we will, eventually, stand in their way.
Good response. Working here in Afghanistan, helping the wounded get home, I can see and experience firsthand of the depression that starts to set in.
If the bureaucrats really wanted to help service members, they need to “man up” and let us do our jobs by eradicating dangerous ROEs, set commanders’ evaluations tied to goal-oriented, action-based results that kill the enemy or pacify a region. We are not the police, we shouldn’t be used as such. Our job is to break things and kill people (a dwindling supply of bad guys brings about peace). “Nation Building” is a farce, and if that’s what they want, the State Dept and the alphabet soup of NGOs should be on the front lines.
When people have solid, achievable goals, a sense of pride and responsibility, they tend to have much lower rates of depression and suicide. Congress is about power, whether directly or through nanny-state regs. If they really wanted to help us, they should stay out of the way and let us do our jobs.
I agree wrt war. You go to war to kill people and break things. Make the rubble bounce. Take all the shiny stuff you can find…and go home. Let the dead bury their dead. Anything less is complete and utter B.S., I don’ care who’s in power.
As for some of the rest of these bozos, if you’re the party of small government, every time the government says it wants to do something, especially if it’s ‘for your own good’ or ‘for the good of ____, you’d be fighting it. More government laws, rules and regulations equals more budget deficits and higher spending and less freedom and liberty for all of us.
Then, take a real close look at the criteria they’ll be using to determine the mental illness of Veterans. Anything and everything is a reason to claim that you’re nuts and can’t be trusted with weapons. This is the camel’s nose, people. Don’t let it in the tent.
It doesn’t matter who’s in power, when the government says it’s doing something for your own good, you’d best do a gut check…and remember your Oaths.
Well said; you and Warren summed it up nicely and we don’t need any other explanations.
As I understand it, this proposed legislation will not deprive soldiers and veterans of their right to own weapons. It will in the specific circumstance that a given person has been declared mentally ill, provide for the securing of their firearms in a safe location or condition.
The problem of suicide is real. A person may think about killing himself for a while, without actually doing anything. But they don’t actually want to kill themselves. The act comes only when the person no longer feels they have any other choice. The transition from being at risk (thinking about it) to actually doing something dangerous or suicidal takes place within a period of time as brief as ten minutes. Obviously, that is too short at time to intervene in most circumstances. If we want to save lives, we need to be able to protect at risk people earlier than that.
The trick is to protect these lives while at the same time respecting their 2nd amendment rights. Giving the medical staff or commanding officer the right to ask the soldier if he or she thinks it would be a good idea for now to secure his weapons in a safe place is a sensible option. In the circumstances most people will agree, because potential suicides don’t actually want to die. By agreeing to have their weapons safely stored for a while, the person is not giving up their right to own a weapon. The storage is not permanent, a time limit can be set, after which the decision can be renewed or reminded as needed.
This law won’t cut military suicides to zero. Some people may still find other ways to kill themselves, but other most other methods are more troublesome and therefore more likely to fail or be interrupted. The bottom line is this law will save lives. Isn’t that worth it?
The whole premise is silly. A suicidal person will find a way to accomplish his/her goal. Firearms are sometimes the most expedient.
Ban kitchen knives. Ban rope. Ban cars that deliberately hit abutments at 90 mph. Ban high buildings.
Suicidal people will find a way.
Only those who are predisposed to try to take firearms from the citizens would look at such a spurious source.
The thing about suicide by gun is that it is fast, easy & almost always effective. Other methods are not as easy and not as effective. As I wrote, this measure won’t stop all suicides, but it will prevent some.
The proposed law does not ban gun ownership. It does not give the right to seize guns from anybody. All it does is allow a medical professional or a commanding officer to ask a service member who is currently suicidal if they own any weapons and would they like to have them safely stored for a while.
This simple question could save lives.
It DOES ban ownership because once you are tagged with the mental illness label you can’t get your firearms back until You get proof you are not mentally ill
No, it does not. Read the bill:
“It amends the 2011 defense authorization to, as stated in Sec. 1071 of the House-passed version, “authorize a mental health professional that is a member of the Armed Forces or a civilian employee of the Department of Defense or a commanding officer to inquire if a member of the Armed Forces plans to acquire, or already possesses or owns, a privately-owned firearm, ammunition, or other weapon, if such mental health professional or such commanding officer has reasonable grounds to believe such member is at high risk for suicide or causing harm to others.”
The 2011 bill stated that the Defense Department “shall not prohibit, issue any requirement relating to, or collect or record any information relating to the otherwise lawful acquisition, possession, ownership, carrying, or other use of a privately owned firearm, privately owned ammunition, or another privately owned weapon by a member of the Armed Forces or civilian employee of the Department of Defense on property.”
And then there was the guy who said,”I don’t give a crap if someone wants to kill themselves. Natural selection works in many ways.”
This comes on the heels of Senate Republicans’ failed attempt to put language in the defense bill that would have stopped the Veterans Affairs Department from putting the names of vets deemed too mentally incompetent to handle their finances into the National Instant Criminal Background Check System to prohibit them from buying or owning a gun.
apparently endebted means mentally incompetent and they can take your guns for it. This has nothing to do with suicidal vets. Being diagnosed with a traumatic brain injury (TBI) or concussion from a roadside blast does not mean suicidal but it DOES mean the possibility of losing your ability to leagally own firearms. Scary…
have you read the existing firearms regs? ANYONE in this country adjudicated as mentally ill is debarred the use of arms, military or not. So just WHAT is the purpose of this legislation that purports to do something not already done by existing law? Keep this in mind as well… existing policy now permits the VA to report to the FBI/NICS system as “mentally deficient” any veterans who are struggling financially and are subject to “financial counselling” or management. Since when did not being able to deal with tough money decisions ammount to being too crazy to own a firearm? This is already overreach. The new proposed legislation furthers this. If ANYONE can ask any vet about firearms ownership and put that into his record, that’s just one step closer to confiscation. One vet at a time.. keep it up and those to whom they haven’t yet gotten will soon enough do what it takes to end ALL thus tyranny. Remember, it was King Georg’e orders to disarm the Colonials that led, directly and unstoppably, to the War for Independence. To quote the amazing and honourable Captain John Parker, formed up with his Command on the COmmons at Lexington 19 April 1775: “we don’t want a war, but if they mean to have one, let it begin here”. They did, and it did.
Years after that war, one of those men who stood with Captain Parker that morning was interviewed by a writer. He was asked WHY were you there on the green? Was it because of the Tea Tax? No, I never drank any of that stuff. Was it the Stamp Act? No, I didn’t care about that. I don’t think they sold many of them. Well, then, what WAS it had you out there that morning? “They had a mind to tell us how to live, and we had a mind that they wouldn’t”.
The fact that John Kerry is behind this bill is reason enough to oppose it. He is stull hurting from the drubbing he took at the hands of the Swift Boat crew, which exposed the lies he told about his “service record”. Give it a rest. Its as crooked as a three legged dog. Why doesn’t Kerry stand up, grow a spine, and do some things to really HELP those Veterans? Or, how about giving them the tools they need to DO their jobs.. like decent Rules of Engagement, rather than making them sitting ducks with no legs half the time. It makes about as much sense as our Border Patrol being forced to use beanbags and rubber bullets. HEY!! THOSE GUYS ARE SHOOTING REAL LEAD BULLETS. How ya gonna stop em with rubber and beans? Get real. He cares for the VETS? Yeah, like the kinyun cares for our health. Or our liberties under the Constitition.
@kenneth
I think you missed something here. The ’11 law seems to prevent creating a record of a servicemember’s gun ownership. I don’t see where it keeps a shrink or a CO from asking Johnny or his spouse if he’s got a gun, or of recommending to him that someone else keep it for awhile, or a good platoon leader or PSG doing the same.
I’d bet dollars to donuts that that is exactly what is happening with many GI’s who come home a bit shaken, and that it is happening regardless of what the Senate, or the House, or the bureaucrats, or the VA or anyone else is doing.
The solution does not always have to be spelled out in the US Code. Maybe Congress, and especially Sen’s Kerry, Johnson and Schumer, ought to spend some time looking at the federal debt and Syria and, oh, stuff they are more or less competant to deal with, and let the military and veterans take care of their own?
When you have any program, legislation, etc. proposed, managed, overseen, or even contemplated by the likes of Johnson (total idiot who thinks Guam would tip over if too many Marines were stationed there), Kerry (liar and traitor of Vietnam) or Schumer (where’s the camera? where’s the camera?) you know project is worthless – as are those three!
Anytime it would get to the point of a Commanding Officer ‘suggesting’ that a personal weapon be secured, the owner of the weapon should have already been placed under medical restraint/observation and the C.O. advised after the fact – that is what good junior officers and seasoned NCOs are all about!
4 Warren Bonesteel,
As a veteran and supporter of the Second Ammendment plus the rest of the Constitution and Bill of Rights, I am in total agreement with your comment.
Our Republic is in dire straits. Were the DHS, TSA, Patriot Act instituted to protect the citizens as intended with those “good intentions”? Maybe so at the time. Does it now seem they are to protect the political class?
It can get as confusing here as it is in Syria.
Keep it simple. Read The Constitution as if it said what it meant and means what it says.
I’ve read damn near everything all of the Founders had to say, even private letters and public correspondence. Most of them said that they meant exactly what they said, and said exactly what they meant wrt The Constitution. A few wished they’d added more limitations on D.C. Some found the limitations constricting, but went along with it, anyway.
Then, remember your Oath. The part that doesn’t have an expiration date…
“I do solemnly swear that I will support and defend The Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic. That I wll bear true faith and allegiance to the same.”
You can pretty much ignore anything that anyone tries to add or subtract from either The Constitution or your Oath, doesn’t matter which party or ideology they claim to back.
Keeps it simple.
Works for me, anyway.
It is not the guns that are the problem, it is our citizenry, who are taking the talking points from the Liar-in Chief. He is the one downgrading our service members, discounting their votes, because they didn’t vote for him. So, their votes were held up by shipping errors (>?) and other assorted Cloward/Piven tactics. To top it all off, the American People have turned into a bunch of sniveling pansies, who want everything for free (Not all of us, just the 47% as Mitt Romney) so pointedly mentioned. Get rid of the 47%, ship them back to Africa, land of their fathers. We would all be better off.
I completely disagree with your 47% comment, but everything else?
(See ‘power law’, for one example. jesus – the poor you will have with you always, for another, etc. etc. What we have to do is get the government outta the way, so they can get to work, like it or not. That includes slashing government to half its present size, including military spending, government regulations, taxes fees, permits, licenses, etc., etc. ‘They’re all lazy, useless moochers’ is a simpleton’s response to the problem. Most poor people want to work. We just have to get government outta their way and let them get at it.)
But, yeah. Nobody is gonna stand up for freedom and liberty until it’s too late, or almost too late.
I wish I was dead every day. I have almost succeeded thrice in my 16 attempts in over 20 years. After awhile…it becomes comical. Now I just laugh at death. Hahahahahahaha.
P.S. I have plenty of ex-military nut-jobs in my family and I pity them but want nothing to do with them because they are scary. One thing military does to young men is they completely strip them of their individuality and their minds and it does grievous harm once said militant is out of said military situation.
Your post is scary, in more ways than one.
the ex- militay in your family are nuts but your the one who has tried to kill yourself 16 times, lady YOUR the NUTBALL
Delia,
The military doesn’t strip away our individuality. If anything, it makes us stronger, more resilient individuals with an ability to be team players when we know we’re fighting for a good cause. I’m an Afghan vet, and I’ve struggled with PTSD. At some points, I was suicidal. A lot of times if I wasn’t feeling suicidal, I thought my experiences in the war had made me so broken that I figured it was inevitable that my wife and kids would leave me for being a rage junkie. A few things saved my life:
1) An understanding wife who let me lock myself in my room for hours at a time to calm down, and who loved me despite the serious problems I had. But had I ever presented a danger to her or our kids, she would have walked out without hesitation.
2) Fellow vets who had been through the same kind of thing I had. Not group therapy, just friends from Afghanistan and other wars who could relate to me. I’ve had two friends tell me that just talking with me saved them from suicide. They didn’t know they saved me too.
3) Finding a resolution with God about the people that were killed, both military, civilian, American and Afghan.
4) Finding a purpose in life again after the war.
It’s not being in the military that messes us up. It’s life. Bad things happen to lots of people. Look at that school that got shot up this morning. Bad things happen. What we need is a support network, a reason to live, and the realization that God is there to bind up the brokenhearted (Isaiah 61:1) if we take advantage of it. Death is nothing to laugh at. Life is precious. Life can be a joyful experience. You CAN be happy. But it is us who have to take the steps to make it so.
And taking the guns away from veterans is nothing but treating the symptoms, not addressing the issues involved here.
if you’ve ever read or studied any of Marx, Engels, Alinsky, Ayers, you’d realise the aabove scenario is letter perfect for their means of taking over a culture. Divide and separate, turn factions against each other, isolate people from each other. Tear down the family (you are incredibly blessed to have the family you do…. and I’m sure you know it). Using government, and government agencies, to separate, isolate, etc, is right out of their playbooks.
War is simply another tool to divide and isolate. The war itesle divides.. some for, others against, few really know WHY we’re there. Stupid politicians trying to run them with insane ROE, troops in some 150 different “actions” around the planet means we need too many soldiers taken out of society and trained to think differently. Return them home they rarely can fit into civilian life well, divided again. Your solution, taking care of each other now you’re home, is the perfect one… given the mess we’ve got. Now, how about the likes of Kerry getting busy and DOING some things about changing this scenario? He is “so concerned”……
iow you not good at anything huh?
Your last sentence is totally full of B.S.! I am a retired Navy CPO and enjoyed every day of my 20-years service, and am proud of the job I did for my country.
Your problems are your problems – don’t try to foist them them off on someone else or claim someone else/the system is at fault. You sound like you are one of the persons identified in the article and should seek immediate help before you hurt yourself of someone else.
First of all, DROP DEAD law makers, every last rotten one of you. You DON’T TELL US WHAT TO DO. When people start jumping off buildings, are you going to restrict access to high places? How about rocks? Metal, wood, drowning, I guess we can’t have WATER then.. no bath tubs for sure. LAWS are made for CONTROL.. People with common sense and respect for one another do not needs LAWS from ROTTEN LAWYERS, i.e. POLITICIANS. ES&D all you POS.
In fact, in the US a person can be involuntarily committed to a psychiatric hospital if they are deemed mentally ill and pose an immediate danger to themselves or others. The term of commitment can range from a few days to a few weeks. For the commitment to be extended the supervising doctor must reassess the patient and sign a new form authorizing the stay in hospital.
This is done to protect lives. Because of this law there is no need to ban high places, kitchen knives, rocks or pieces of wood.
@Jack hacker- laws also provide guidance, i.e. speed limits, and penalties, ideally from the community, i.e. Jail for minor stuff like muder, rape, robbery?
@annonymous- laws, in this country at least, also provide for a judicial hearing for any involuntary ,commitment over, typically, 72 hours. Plus a right to counsel, right to call witnesses, and the burden of proof is on whoever wants to do the committing. There’s also a right to sue the h_ll out of whoever instigates or commits an improper involuntary commitment. Granted using those rights can be difficult sometimes, but if we watch over one another just a little we are a long way from the psychological gulags of the USSR. If we watch over one another!
Time for some ‘leading from the front’ from our soon-to-be Secretary of State John Kerry. Hey John “Vietnam Vet” Kerry, why don’t you blow your own brains out so you can be the poster boy for this movement. JUST DO IT FOR “THE BOYS”! You could become a legend among your leftist (communist) brothers (and at the same time save the country from the disaster of another communist traitor at the control-levers of this administration’s foreign policy). b.”INSANE” obama would probably give you another unearned purple heart for your efforts (possibly even the Congressional Medal Of Honor)!
on a lighter note, I just bought a new upper receiver from my AR-15. My commander knows all about it since he sits right next to me in the office. I showed him pictures of it. It’s from Bravo Company USA.
Just saw a youtube vid of a beltfed 12 gauge ar-15 upper.
It rocked.
Boohoo, for the troops! (Pay no attention that folk will just kill themselves with different means, of course.)
A new recruiting slogan:
“Join the Army & lose your right to own guns.”
This is idiotic in extremis. It burdens commanders with more paperwork.
It distracts from the mission of the military. And it will do nothing to
stop vets or military personnel from committing suicide.
Yeah, but it allows left/liberals to snatch… er, “locate” guns and potentially be used to bar every “veteran” from owning them for the reasons of “safety.”
Part of the long game to disarm that part of the population the statists are truly afraid of and who they fear would resort to arms to oppose where the statists want to take us. Also stigmatizing veterams with PTSD to potentially deprive them of their 2nd Amendment rights is part of the long game to disarm those who will oppose tyranny.
Left/liberals just love inceremental, salami-slicing tactics.
Remember, the communists use[d] mental institutions to incarcerate and punish political enemies. From their perspective, if you are anti-communist, you must be insane.
If anything causes suicides in the military today, it’s having a Hitler type Obamunist President creating the rules of engagement in Afghanistan, raising the stress levels of our soldiers and Marines to unsafe levels.
Having a communist Obama led administration that doesn’t have their back must be awful and must get our men in harm’s way awfully angry. Especially due to the fact they also realize Obama’s a useless tactician.
Obama was against the surge in Iraq. Is that all forgotten? Has Obama taken away the memory of the press?
Obama said the surge in Iraq was doomed to failure.
Our fighting men and woman say Obama’s doomed to failure.
B. Hussein never really instituted a surge in Afghanistan. What he really did was to give the enemy a moving out date. Obama is as dumb and dangerous a commander in chief as was Hitler when he went after the Russians. Obama and Hitler, when it comes to military tactics total about a half a brain between them.
Talk about Dumb and Dumber.
Of course, even dumber Americans elected Obama for a second term. Enough to put suicide in any soldier’s mind.
Taking a somewhat larger view, every ballot cast for Obama put us closer and closer to national suicide, which should come as no surprise.
Obama’s looted the treasury; in four more years, we’ll owe the Chinese 27 trillion smackers. Then the whole world can call us Greece because we’ll live up to the name.
Barry’s also in the process of neutering our military.
What’s more, he prides himself when he kills things like the Keystone pipeline which would have sent the U.S. cheap and steady oil from Canada. Like any good progressive communist, Obama prides himself making decision after decision that keeps us oil dependent, not to mention designating no public American land to be used to find oil. A miscreant of a President doesn’t begin to tell the story.
Plus,let’s not forget Obama’s lobbying against our Constitution’s first and second amendments and corrupting the voter system. I still don’t believe Obama fairly and squarely won the November election. The millions overseas in our military had not a single vote counted which generated only belly laughs from Michelle and Obama.
Who wouldn’t consider suicide when a soldier’s in harms way and it’s common knowledge that we have a pathological liar as president, one who went to bed on Sept. 11, 2012, instead of trying save the battling bastards in Benghazi.
Letters from overseas.
“Get me home mom and dad; we have a little, big eared man unfit to command who needs to be fitted for a straightjacket because he’d rather be the Russian Premier.”
That exactly how letters being sent from Afghanistan sound to moms and dads from heroic sons and daughters who are afraid Obama’s insane leadership will put them six feet under.
Maybe what we need is the implementation of the 25th amendment because Odrama is obviously unfit for command.
Just watch him prancing around the white house rose garden these days as he reads about his brownshirts in Michigan yanking a tent out from people they disagree with. Obama reads about union thugs beating up, Steve Crowder, a Fox news guy who tried to talk to the union pukes and Obama laughs his ass off. Obama reads about an African American hot dog salesman caught in the tent by two union thugs who destroyed his property and left him there to die. Calling him of all things the n word over and over.
Obama called the attacks a taste of Chicago in Michigan, Chicago style. Fox contributor, Steven Crowder should have sent the bridge of the thugs nose into his little bitty brain.
What does Obama really want? Did you ever consider that question?
I think that he wants total authority. Like Harry B., the washed up singer says, Obama wants to put in prison those who disagree with him.
Obama wants to take the land away from wealthy people even though all their money wouldn’t keep this nation running for two weeks, but he wants all their money. When they die, he wants 90% of the estate in exorbitant taxes. A rose by any other name. Reparations. Always playing to his base.
Truth be known, Obama is as corrupt as they come. Compared to Hitler. Compared to Stalin. Compared to Jimmy Hoffa, you’ve got congruence that would make a geometry teacher tingle.
O’s MO. If you don’t want Rice to be the new sec. of state, you’re a racist.
O wants branded racists to be thrown in prison. He wants tea protesters to be lined up and shot.
He’s so much like Hitler I can’t believe nobody here has seen the similarities.
Hitler slaughtered Jews and Catholics et al at the same rate Obama slaughters the newly born and unborn; 1.2 million per annum.
Obama hates Catholics with a vengeance because Catholics hate abortion; Catholics are just about the only hope for millions and millions of God’s newly and unborn survival.
The only purpose for most newspapers in Obama’s U.S. is wrapping fish.
Hitler shut down any newspaper that didn’t parrot the party line. Obama’s got most every paper in his back pocket. He’s tried to kill Fox News, but as yet hasn’t succeeded.
“Hurricane Catrina was Bush’s fault. Bush must hate blacks.” That was the left mantra.
Hurricane Sandy was Obama’s finest hour because he showed extraordinary leadership. Obama must care for people. The narrative makes me sick. That Chris Christie made it so believable was the act of a traitor.
It makes me sick how the mainstream media sucks up to Obama’s every whim?
The only way the Obama cancer on the Presidency can be stopped.
Obama must be convinced it’s time to resign.
The plan is complicated and I won’t get into it here, but the Obamas are so corrupt these puke miscreants can’t go on destroying our nation four more years.
Obama must be given an offer that’s too good to turn down.
But that’s another story.
The 25th amendment will have to come into play. The cowards surrounding Obama must have things explained to them in words they understand.
As I said before, Obama’s brownshirts roughed up Steven Crowley, yanked down a tent on people in wheel chairs and ruined a hot dog man’s business. Crowley should have sent the union thugs nose right to the mid point of his brain.
“To everything there is a season.”
Returning military vets. Returning special forces. State and local police can be powerful motivating factors when they’re dealing with thugs and bullies. Most hate Obama already. We have to give them a comfort level that solidly gets them on our side. Returning soldiers and Marines already are with us in droves. Texas money will keep them satisfied.
Four more years is too many for Obama.
Something tells me he’ll see the light.
Oh this is infuriating. You want to remove one of the main triggers of suicide by military member why don’t you start looking to alcohol. Military suicides, despite the type of duty they do, the long months spent away from their families is lower than their civilian counterparts. To add to the gun fallacy be , many service members regularly handle firearms as a matter of their day to day assignments. This another ridiculous gun grab on the part of fascist democrats like our soon to be Secretary of State John Kerry.
Maybe the question should be asked whether gun registration is in itself unconstitutional.
Bingo.
We have a winner.
Nobody seems to ask or create any studies related to the rise in the amount of anti-depressant drugs being administered to the troops. Many of these drugs cause serious problems, especially when combined with drinking alcohol.
Remember. that soldier that recently shot a number of Afghans and didn’t remember that he did that.
Interestingly, if you look at the mass murders such as Columbine, you will find that many of the perpetrators were on anti-depressant drugs.
One of the shooters at Columbine had been prescribed an anti-depressent to treat his obsessive compulsive disorder, but it is unknown whether he had ever taken the drug. Toxicology tests showed he had no drugs or alcohol in his system.
Taking guns from Soldiers is only treating the symptoms. It does nothing to address the underlying problems.
Very true. In fact, I would go further to say that taking guns away from somebody who is suicidal is not treating a symptom, it’s keeping them (or others) safe. Other work has to be done to help them get better.
Keep in mind, the proposed legislation does not take guns away from soldiers. All it does is allow doctors and commanding officers to ask a service member who has been assessed as mentally ill if he owns any weapons and would he agree to have them safely stored for a while. The service member would not loose the right to own a firearm.
7. Delia
I wish I was dead every day. I have almost succeeded thrice in my 16 attempts in over 20 years. After awhile…it becomes comical. Now I just laugh at death. Hahahahahahaha.
P.S. I have plenty of ex-military nut-jobs in my family and I pity them but want nothing to do with them because they are scary. One thing military does to young men is they completely strip them of their individuality and their minds and it does grievous harm once said militant is out of said military situation.
—-Such a sad and cowardly individual you are, in addition to moronic and an a**clown…You’re “scared” of former military yet you have tried to kill yourself 16 times?….I guess practice doesn’t make perfect…
“Never let a good crisis go to waste.” This administration will continue to grasp at every tragedy involving a firearm until they can eventually convince people it’s time to disarm decent, law abiding citizens so they are at the mercy of the government. We all know that criminals will be more than happy to turn in their firearms in their efforts to portray themselves as law abiding citizens, even if they are not here legally.
Oldguy. IMHO, the answer is yes.
“This is not an attempt to limit gun rights or an individual’s ability to own a firearm,” said Johnson.
Translation: It’s an attempt to limit gun rights and an individual’s ability to own a firearm.
rachel peepersfff:
“If anything causes suicides in the military today, it’s having a Hitler type Obamunist President creating the rules of engagement in Afghanistan, raising the stress levels of our soldiers and Marines to unsafe levels.
If you doubt this, read Chris Kyle’s ‘American Sniper’. The ROEs our soldiers have to go by are an exercise in insanity in a war with savages. When you’re sent into harm’s way, you should be able to do your job without some paper-pushing desk jockey questioning how you do it. Our men & women in uniform often have to make split-second, life-or-death decisions and to hamstring them with ridiculous rules is beyond insane – but as rachel points out, it’s part of this administration’s MO to bring down America.
Any time you combine the name Kerry with the word guns, you are talking about infringement of our Second Amendment rights. Enlisting in the military voids the Bill of Rights? Drip…..drip…..drip……dripping our way to the totalitarian America.
“But some lawmakers see this tragic trend as reason to pinpoint gun ownership….”
For the anti-gun ownership nuts, the sun coming up in the east is excuse enough.
Suicide rates and gun crime rates among vets are no higher than among the general population. Give it a rest and get over it.
Repeal the 2nd amendment if you don’t like it. Othewise, STFU.
Just took a look at some data. Police Officer suicides are double that of the general population. So, I say we take away all the guns from Police Officers.
We also ought to take all sharp things from dentists, because dentists have very high rates of both suicide and divorce. Have fun the next time you want a cavity treated and your dentist has to dig it out with a wooden toothpick.
And also please have fun the next time you want a war fought and your military has to do it with spit-balls and squirt-guns.
I had to check my rifle out of the armory every week to clean it when I was on active duty. How does this make sense? I couldn’t bring some ammunition when I checked it out? Or kill myself with a car (not banned), or drugs, or even a razor blade?
The war on drugs ought to caution intelligent people about the effectiveness of legislation in solving problems. I do recognize that we are talking about Congress here, but even they must have noticed that’s not going as planned. Do keep doing the same things though, because some day soon it’ll work…
They better be planning to bring back the draft, because if I wanted Mickey Mouse I’d go to Disneyland, not serve.
If Barack Obama was my commander-in-chief, I’d shoot myself too.
Why do so many Leftist/Liberals/Marxists/Communists/Obama-ites fear veterans? I expect because veterans know how to use guns, while Leftist/Liberals/Marxists/Communists/Obama-ites do not. Therefore the obvious solution is to disarm veterans in order to make everyone more “equal”. Looks to me like just another form of “affirmative action” so that those-who-can’t won’t need to fear those-who-can.
Veterans can potentially train an insurgency.
Haven’t you heard? All military (active or veteran) and their families are now regarded as potential “homegrown terrorists.”
Give me the Starship Troopers model any day.
Rep. Hank Johnson (D-Ga.) and Sen. John Kerry (D-Mass.) urged their colleagues to include an amendment that would allow military officials to ask service members about their private gun ownership.
Hank Johnson is the genius who thinks putting too many Marines on Guam will cause the island to tip over. You have to admire the Naval officer who refrains from collapsing into hysterical laughter:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cesSRfXqS1Q
And Kerry lied under oath about US troops in VietNam. Kerry is incapable of differentiating facts from his delusional VietNam fantasies and lies.
“The thing about suicide by gun is that it is fast, easy & almost always effective. Other methods are not as easy and not as effective.”
You’re delusional if you believe this. Suicide is a private, secretive venture. Once a person decides to commit suicide, you’re not going to stop them. For that matter, most friends and relatives aren’t even aware of the suicide contemplation.
Hanging, carbon monoxide poisoning, drug overdose, motor vehicle collision are just as easy, relative quick and certainly, just as effective.
I’m not at all delusional. I recommend the book, “Night Falls Fast” by Kay Redfield Jamison, for a thorough study of suicide, how it happens and why people do it. People don’t want to kill themselves. If given a chance to save their life, most people contemplating suicide will take it. Yes you can stop somebody from killing themselves. Many people have been stopped.
Yes, sadly, the other methods are very deadly too. However, the statistics are clear: the survivability of suicide by gunshot is much lower than other methods.
We have to do something. Today, some guy just slaughtered a kindergarten in Conn. Preliminary reports are 27 killed, mostly small children. He used an AK-47, plus other weapons.
The American society has suffered massacre from nuts for too long. It should be possible to wire the NRA, Brady people, Dems, Repubs, military, civilian, medical, and military command structure together, and do something, weed out the devils. First we must admit that evil exists. A theological debate is not needed; just bad, bad people walk amongst us. Some say they are psychotic. Maybe. A year from now, we will know the names of people who “knew it would happen”, and did nothing, because nothing could be done. If he was military they might take him to see the Islamic shrink who murdered the unarmed troops at Ft. Hood. Who can we trust? Only an alert, armed free American people. People who carry weapons carry a heavy responsibility, as well as freedom.
We have drunk driving laws; we need nut-with-a-gun laws. Call 911, then a cop, then jail, an arraignment, a court ordered shrink, then a judicial review centered on the right to drive, or own a weapon, for some period of time. Appeals should exist. Right to confront your accuser should exist. To my mind, a man who stands over babies and deliberately shoots them should die in a hail of bullets from teachers, janitors, principles, and school visitors. Good guys may go down, but not 18 targeted babies. I would favor horse whipping if it could prevent what happened today.
I ask a question: If I was the nut-with-a-gun, what would I consider a reasonable act to prevent me from slaughtering innocents? That is the law I want. Now.
Reporting is fluid and chaotic, but I correct my error. The weapon was not an AK-47; it was a semi-automatic .223 Bushmaster. Other weapons were recovered.
My thinking is not altered by these updated facts.
I’m sorry–but laws really didn’t do one damn thing to stop what happened here, did they? Laws don’t deter the lawless. Do you even have any inkling of what you are saying? The laws didn’t work so we need more of the things that don’t work? That will be the solution?
Maybe it would have been better if some of the folks that worked there had been armed. Maybe they could have shot the bastard down before he caused the extent of carnage he did. Hey, if we made guns illegal we could be just like Mexico–it works there so well. No gun violence there at all, right?
More damage has been done by nuts wanting stupid gun laws than has ever been done by nuts wielding guns.
There should be a law against deranged young men stealing guns and going on a murderous rampage.
Oh wait, …that’s already against the law?
Yeah–this is garbage, but its just one of the first steps. Back here on PJM a while back a doctor wrote an essay on Obamacare where he stated that he was required to ask patients a list of personal questions which included, among other things, whether you had any firearms in your house. And of course, they plan to get everything on a unified database with everyone’s medical information on it. Right now you don’t have to answer those questions, and there is no penalty for giving a false answer to them. I suspect that will change where answering them becomes mandatory and false answers are subject to the penalties of perjury.
The next step? I suspect it will be impounding people’s guns if they have children in the house.
And after that–taking guns away from people who have had close relatives die recently–because after all, that puts people into a depressive mood that makes them more prone to committing suicide.
And with statistics, one of the most opaque forms of lies, they will identify more and more groups that are more likely to commit suicide based upon diet, medical conditions, psychiatric categories (such as declaring members of movements such as the TEA party being more prone to violence than average) and the like as being a reason to take their guns away from them.
Its coming.
The trouble with relying upon psychiatrists to evaluate people’s “fitness” to own a firearm is that the shrinks can be as subject to political pressure as any other pack of academics. Remember, homosexuality used to be considered a mental illness. Then, at some point in the 1970′s, they changed that idea.
Psychiatrists already have the power, within certain circumstances, to order somebody committed to a psychiatric ward if they present a danger to themselves or others. These orders are for short terms (days or a few weeks) and must be renewed if necessary.
The proposed legislation specifically states that service members cannot be banned from owning a weapon for being diagnosed with a mental illness.
Let’s see, Sen Kerry, who in ’69 labeled all of us who had served with him war criminals- unless, presumably, we agreed with him- and Sen Schumer, who thinks anyone who wants to own a gun is per se psychologically challenged, think limiting the 2nd Amendment rights of active duty members of the Armed Forces is a good idea. Hmmm……
It’s probably a good idea to think twice about changing current law?
You would say banning suicide and making suicide illegal with laws against suicide would be just as efficient.
Guns?
What you gonna ban ropes, high places, trains, razors and sleeping pills?
They would have more luck banning death.
Suicide rates among military are both currently and historically LOWER than those among civilians. Furthermore, most military suicides are committed by servicemembers WHO HAVE NEVER DEPLOYED (so much for the “combat stress” excuse).
Reputable reference: http://timemilitary.files.wordpress.com/2012/07/msmrsuicide2012-06.pdf
Johnson and Kerry just want to keep guns out of the hands of those actually trained to USE them. By any means necessary. Including by shamelessly exploiting the Sandy Hook tragedy.
– Spike, wife of military medical professional
Rather than Gun ownership, How about looking at the ROE’s that put our troops at such a confusing disadvantage, and Get the men and women murdered because of political correctness on the battle field run amok.
Great information and reference! Two things I like about the post, one it is straight forward and two it does not attempt to promote anyone’s position particularly. I appreciate you sharing this with the rest of us Bridget.