Posted on 04/16/2013 5:50:55 PM PDT by re_tail20
As the Senate moves toward a comprehensive gun control bill that would include extensive background checks that would threaten the legality of private transactions, House Republicans are taking a different tack on a gun bill:
House Republicans' focus on mentally ill criminals has become sharper in recent days, as a bipartisan plan to expand background checks on prospective gun buyers gained momentum in the Democrat-led Senate - thanks in part to emotional calls for action in Washington by family members of victims of the Newtown, Connecticut, school shooting.
Boehner has pledged that the House will act on any gun bill that emerges from the Senate. He has indicated that the House's review would allow a lengthy debate without many of the deadlines and restrictions that usually guide the chamber's work.
(Excerpt) Read more at townhall.com ...
Ping for later
I know Boehner takes a lot of flak on this forum, but he's doing a number of things right. He's leader of a herd of cats who run half of one third of the government. Obama's got the rest under his thumb. For being a one sixth leader, he's throwing a lot of monkey wrenches into Obama's plan to destroy capitalism.
NATIONAL CONCEALED CARRY.
The headline compared to the content of the article makes not sense... All I read was Boehner says he will act on the Senate bill when passed ... Who writes these things?
Article doesn’t follow the title at all. This just says that Boehner is a spineless wiener.
Truthfully, I think the US needs four regional mental health care reservations. This is because the states have proven themselves unwilling to pay for and incapable of providing mental hospitals that are on one hand, humane, yet on the other hand, protect society from the dangerously mentally ill.
These reservations would have to be under strict controls, so that it would take a local court, a county court and psychiatric doctor, a state court and psychiatric doctor, and a federal court and psychiatric doctor to put someone there; and every case would have to have an annual review by an independent board of doctors to insure that they were not there inappropriately, and that their treatment and provision for their care were appropriate.
With a review sooner, if their attending physician attested to their recovery.
What this would replace would be both the “drugging and warehousing” of troublesome patients in many states; putting clearly mentally ill people in prisons; and conversely, letting loose people who represent a threat of harm to themselves and others.
I think the House SHOULD write a gun bill and it should 1. repeal the Gun Free School Zone Act 2. affirm that the RKBA is a universal right and that citizens should be free to carry arms peacefully by instituting national concealed carry and repealing the 1968 GCA.
Go for broke- the 1934 NFA needs to go too. It hasn’t done a bit of good anyway.
In the olden days there were a lot of smaller hospitals which treated only patients with a mental health diagnosis. There was generally enough money available through insurance to cover two weeks. When the money ran out, the patient was deemed to be well, discharged and no benefit dollars available for any kind of adequate follow-up until the next calendar year’s benefits were renewed. Lots of psychiatrists and hospitals made a whole lot of money in a relatively short period of time but only compounded the problem.
We also used to have state institutions and lots of “old folks homes”. I remember one in Osawatomie, Kansas, which when I was small was referred to the “Funny Farm”. I thought it was interesting that Obama went there to speak about his health care proposal - apparently no one on his staff did any homework on the history of the place.
No doubt some of the places over medicated, were inhumane and some people had no business being incarcerated there. But they did serve a purpose for a portion of our society.
I wonder if the percentage of dangerously mentally ill has grown or if there are just almost no services available to them. We hear of so many programs “for the children”. The long term care of the dangerously mentally ill is an issue that needs to be publicly discussed and resolved.
The press will not even cover Gosnell’s trial so I would not expect them address the mental health needs.
If Nancy was speaker and A bill was introduced to legalize concealed carry in all 50 states, how much debate would we have?
Thought so. Boehner is a New World Order traitor.
Your point could hardly be more wrong. Boehner is the only thing stopping Nancy from running the House.
Mental health is one thing I think we can at least give a partial pass to the MSM over, for the simple reason that most people don’t want to think about it at all, and will go to lengths to avoid thinking about it.
Even the courts have an extremely hard time dealing with it. For a brief time in the 1960s, criminals discovered that they could evade decades in prison by feigning mental illness. Then the courts clamped down on it, so many truly mentally ill people were instead sent to prison, though they were incapable of caring for themselves.
Finally, in the 1980s, some “half measures” were introduced, like sentences of “guilty but insane”, so that even if a doctor later said they were sane, they still remained behind bars.
Amusingly, some Islamist terrorists were not aware of this, and had used the ordinary insanity defense successfully in other countries to evade punishment, only to find out that trying that in the US was guaranteed to earn them the maximum sentence.
But the judges are for the most part rather good at divining is someone is indeed truly insane, and is going to be spending the rest of their lives in a mental hospital; or just faking it. The “temporary insanity” or “insanity due to severe duress” defense is now the gray area.
An odd example of this was in the assassination of San Francisco supervisor Harvey Milk and Mayor George Moscone, by a former supervisor Dan White. At his trial, White’s attorney used a temporary insanity defense, which is notoriously known as the “Twinkie” defense, claiming that White had eaten a Hostess Twinkie, and it had so destabilized his blood sugar that he had become temporarily insane.
Oddly enough, it halfway worked, with him not being convicted of two counts of murder, but of two counts of manslaughter, receiving only 7 years in prison, serving 5 before his release.
And yet, there is a good question as to whether White actually *did* have mental illness, because just two years after his release, utterly vilified in San Francisco, he committed suicide.
My point is exactly right, and your lack of response to the real question proves that. How much debate would there be, compared to how much debate there will be on this totally unconstitutional gun grabbing debate.
Answer ZERO.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.