6 thoughts on “Vote No on #I1639

  1. A very good point. I also make these additional points. There is no such thing as psychological screening. In actual clinical practice, psychiatrists have a very poor rate of agreement just on diagnosis. I have seen studies that suggest two different psychiatrists will agree on diagnosis roughly 40% of the time.

    Secondly, there are a couple million NICS checks each month. How many qualified psych personnel would you have to find to run two million screenings a month?

  2. Pingback: Vote No on #I1639 | The View From North Central Idaho

  3. Another point: psych screen or not, a person who is sane now (for certain definitions of sane–probably everyone could be described as a bit “off” somewhere or another) could still snap at some later date. Or a less-than-sane person could be sufficiently functional & intelligent to keep it together long enough to get past that particular hurdle anyway. I can see a plethora of “how to pass the psych test” articles flying around. Or they could go black market like the criminals do. Sure, it isn’t legal–but neither is going on a shooting rampage, and people have been known to do that anyway.

    Like any of the other proposals that keep getting thrown around, psychological screening isn’t likely to be very effective against the people it’s ostensibly supposed to protect us from, and it just adds expense, paperwork, and possibly another excuse to deny the rest of us our rights.

  4. Another consideration is that plenty of gun haters classify gun ownership as a psychiatric disorder — they say so loudly and often. So if being crazy disqualifies you from owning guns, and wanting a gun means you’re crazy, then obviously no one can own guns. “Problem solved”.

Comments are closed.