(December 4, 2015 at 6:56 pm)Minimalist Wrote:Quote:“Of course, this is a tragic situation and the thought that maybe if the right person had the right information at the right time could have prevented this, of course it’s very frustrating,” Sclabassi said. “Clearly this was an individual who needed help. Clearly this is an individual who should not have been able to purchase a handgun just this past September.”
Clearly, Gun Nut Nation does not agree with that last comment.
And your solution is....?
It takes several sessions to even attempt an accurate psychiatric diagnosis for someone that knows they need help and actively seeks it. Except in the most extreme cases, short-term psychological evaluation of reluctant and/or evasive patients is simply not reliable enough to justify any positive diagnosis. Even then, symptoms may manifest sporadically or suddenly in otherwise apparently sane people. Syed Farook was not insane; he was a meticulous and motivated terrorist.
Suppose you deny gun ownership because they are receiving treatment, either because they have sought counselling for depression or are taking medication. How many people would be discouraged from seeking treatment if they thought it would put them under state scrutiny? Especially people prone to paranoid delusions? We need to be aware of unintended consequences.
Just because everyone agrees on the existence of a problem does not mean there is a simple or obvious solution. Nor am I saying we should turn a blind eye to gun-related violence. We just need to be practical and not reach for ineffective solutions because they feel good.
