Mental Health And Its Effects On Society

Even if a mentally ill person is banned from buying a gun, there is still another means for them to obtain one. The Times Editorial Board (2016) backed themselves by typing, “The gunman who shot and killed five people in Santa Monica three years ago was banned from owning a gun, so he bought the parts and made his own.” (p. 2). Marcotte (2015) brought up the fact that, “There are as many guns as people in this country, and fully a third of people are armed. Even when shootings happen in gun-happy places, where armed people are sure to be nearby, this vigilante scenario simply doesn't work.” (p. 2). Although there are so many guns in America, mass shootings still happen and are not easily preventable because not everyone arms themselves. Marcotte (2015) also later reports, “A lot of Americans who struggle with mental health are undiagnosed, though, and putting them on a government list that restricts their rights is not a great inducement to get a diagnosis.” (p.

“Guns don’t kill people, people do.” This is a well known statement that is oftentimes considered true. However, it is not completely true. Someone who is mentally ill may be unable to make logical decisions and the perception they receive of reality may be tainted by the illness. Gun laws pertaining to those suffering mental illnesses should be more restrictive. Weapons such as guns make committing an act of violence, especially when there are multiple victims, much easier. It is difficult to assess the probability of a person to commit a violent act that harms anyone including himself/herself. Therefore, gun laws need be monitored very closely and made more consistent throughout each state in order to prevent violence that could

a law repealed by Congress in February that would have required the registration of Social Security recipients with mental disabilities to prevent gun ownership. They state that because the mentally disabled are more likely to be victims than perpetrators of violence, fear about them owning guns is prejudiced and as a result, obstructs their civil rights. In my rebuttal, I counter their statistic about mentally disabled victims, arguing its irrelevance in mass shooter situations and the subsequent unsoundness of their argument. Finally, I explain how unhealthy mental conditions can lead to unsafe consequences in day-to-day situations

The guilty party from the Virginia Tech University shooting in 2007 was found out to have a mental illness (“Gun Control”). This mass shooting was an incident that inspired more discussion on this topic, for it was one of the most deadly ones in American history. “His history of mental illness had not prevented him from purchasing the semiautomatic pistols used in the shooting” (“Gun Control”). If this man could gain access to these weapons, then other mentally ill people could as well. Consequently, the Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting in 2012 was carried out by another person suffering from mental illnesses (“Gun Control”). Even more awareness was drawn to this shooting since it was yet another incident of a mentally ill person carrying out these acts of violence. After this shooting, Barack Obama tried to pass a bill that would ban assault weapons from the public and make the background checks more extensive to include history of mental illness, yet despite his efforts, this bail failed to pass the Senate (“Gun Control”). If mentally ill people were restricted access to guns, these shootings would not have

While the citizens of the United States of America should be allowed to own and make use of their firearms, in the case of protecting themselves against harm, there should be a better system in place to ensure that a person does not have a mental illness that could endanger another person if they have access to firearms. This is also the same in the case of a person having a criminal record, such as having a prior conviction as a result of illegally owning a firearm or

With approximately 30,000 men, women and children dying each year at the barrel of a gun in elementary schools, movie theaters, workplaces, houses of worship and on live television, the United States faces a public health crisis of gun violence. With stricter gun rights we can put a stop to terrorism and shootings. If the government puts the guns in the hands of people with mental illnesses, then they are allowing the violence to continue. Also it is undoubtedly true that people who are a danger to self and/or others because of mental illness should be prohibited from owning firearms. It is less clear, however, how to tailor new policies to better protect the American civilization while at the same time avoiding the stigmatization of Americans with mental illness. People that have mental issues cannot control themselves, it is undeniable if that person has shown violent tendencies they shouldn't have access to weapons that could be used to harm themselves or others. Mental illness is one of the main reasons that can cause gun violence. Massive shootings by people with mental illnesses represents the most significant relationship between gun violence and mental issues. Gun laws focusing on people with illness or a psychiatric diagnosis are reasonable, even if they add to the stigma already associated with mental illness. “Mass shootings by people with serious mental illness represent less than 1% of all yearly gun-related homicides. In contrast, deaths by suicide using firearms account for the majority of yearly gun-related deaths” (James, L.Knoll). People that have serious mental illness issues should be considered dangerous and should not be allowed to hold a gun. There should be stricter legislation on gun rights. The 2nd Amendment rights means “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and

People with apparent psychological disorders have committed a number of serious gun crimes in the United States over the past several years resulting in numerous deaths and injuries. Children have been murdered by gunfire in their classrooms in Connecticut, moviegoers have been shot to death while watching a film in Colorado, and a member of Congress, her constituents, and bystanders have been gunned down in Arizona. And of course, Columbine is a word, the name of a town, now etched into the consciousness of virtually every U.S. citizen and resident. We immediately then begin to think of places such as Virginia Tech after hearing and reflecting on the massacre at Columbine. These are just a few examples of shootings by individuals who appear to have been in the grips of psychological disturbances. These shootings made national headlines; nevertheless, gun shootings claim lives every day in this country. The U.S. Supreme Court has upheld an individual’s Constitutional right to bear arms based on Second Amendment court cases emanating from Washington D.C. and Chicago; thus the proliferation of guns appears to be with us indefinitely. Inevitably, individuals with psychological disorders will commit gun crimes, yet there is currently no direct way to prevent such individuals from purchasing guns. In order to decrease the likelihood of further shootings by people with apparent psychological disorders, it should be required by the government that prospective gun buyers be given

“Mental illness afflicts hundreds of millions of people around the world. Recent surveys in the United States reveal that mental illness in all its varieties is quite prevalent and that more serious, debilitating forms are experienced by about 6% of the population” (Hinshaw, Cicchetti, Dante, and Toth 6). Humanity is able to manipulate anything that comes at hand and guns are no different from any other tool. When guns reach to individual who are in an unstable can cause serious damage to other as well as themselves. The brain is an organ that is part of the human anatomy as if any other organ fails, there has to be procedures to help bring restoration. The mental stability of an individual must be considered in order for them to be allow to own guns. The current system only provides a criminal background check and a brief class about guns. Accountability has to be in place for all those who own or are in pursue of owning a gun. In “Guns, Schools, and Mental Illness: Potential Concerns for Physicians and Mental Health Professionals,” Ryan Chaloner Winton Hall, MD, and Susan Hatters Friedman, MD emphasis the seriousness how mental health effects the issue of gun control. The lack of education on communities in regards to the seriousness of mental illness have led unfortunate cases where they could have been prevented. The current laws contain many inconsistencies and no follow-up in accountability. Chaloner and Hatters continue to explain how, “…not all gun sales are required to be submitted to the NICS(National Instant Criminal Background Check System)…private gun sales/transfers (from one private owner to another) are not regulated by federal restrictions and include up to 40% of sales.” The lack of regiments that the current system failed to place has clearly led to many gruesome events in the past

Out of the 1,289 adults polled, merely 8% voted that the laws should be less strict. That means about 100 people in that group believe that the laws are currently too strict. From Columbine in 1999 to one of the more recent tragedies at Sandy Hook in 2012 the anti-gun activists have been trying to protect the citizens of America by changing gun laws. On the other side of the debate, pro-gun activists argue four main points: mental illness causes gun violence, psychiatric diagnosis can predict gun crime before it happens, US mass shootings teach us to fear mentally ill loners, and due to of the complex psychiatric histories of mass shooters, gun control “won’t prevent” another mass slaughter. What this group of people is arguing is that whenever you see a person with mental disabilities, you must automatically stereotype them as a mass murderer. These pro-gun activists believe that by providing an entire nation with psychiatric help will completely eliminate gun violence. Instead of curing the problem, they are attempting to cure the people. What needs to happen is the laws regarding who is eligible to carry firearms must

Gun control is a very highly debated topic in today’s day and age. With all the recent mass shootings, supporters call for more gun control and even for the government to ban "assault weapons". Supporters of a ban say that assault weapons are classified as weapons with one or more military features such as a high capacity clip or a folding stock (Lott 1). Opponents argue that this will take defense weapons out of the hands of law abiding but it will do little for stopping criminals. Mental health also plays a large role in the debate as almost 60% of mass shootings are conducted by someone who has history of being mentally ill (Lott 1). In this paper I will go further into the gun debate topic to try and further your knowledge on assault weapons.

One of the key reforms in gun control calls for thorough background checks, which would be critical in stopping mentally ill people from simply purchasing firearms. Although Lanza did not purchase the weapons he used in the shooting, it shows that anyone has the ability to get their hands on a gun if their desire is strong enough. It also is not proven what prompted Lanza to shoot 26 innocent people, but for those who suffer from such mental disorders is still able to obtain guns without hardly any setbacks. Thus, mental illness is a significant topic in relation to gun

In the United States, our society is increasingly faced with situations that further enhance the idea that guns, particularly in the hands of the wrong people, are responsible for a great deal of harm. Aside from the problem of criminals obtaining guns we now are dealing with gun control and how it applies to the mentally ill. Many Americans pose an argument against gun control, claiming that their rights override the constant danger and threats posed by weapons. There has been an on going debate about gun control, but it is no longer valid especially as more violent deaths occur. Whether or not the guns are legal or illegal is irrelevant; the main

Federal law also states that anyone who has a court order of restraint for harassing, stalking, or threatening an intimate partner or their child or has been convicted of domestic violence must not possess a gun. Gun control activist state that waiting until after a crime has been committed is too late, and laws should be made to confiscate weapons upon report of an incident or threat, not waiting until after judgment has been made. The opposing side argues that a person is innocent until proven guilty and should keep their weapons until proven guilty. The most public of the controversies over who should be allowed gun ownership is the issue of mentally ill persons. The law prohibits gun ownership for persons who have been legally found to be mentally defective or persons committed to any mental institution. Supporters of tougher gun control regulation push for a broader definition of mental illness, citing the recent Tuscon, Arizona shooting as an example of a mentally ill person who should not be permitted to own a gun. Federal regulations on gun ownership are clear, but both sides will continue to push their arguments on who they believe should be able to own guns.

In 2015 alone, there were over 350 mass shootings (Zahriyeh). Many of these shooters are mentally ill. About 60% of people committing mass shootings in the US since 1970 displayed symptoms of mental illness (Follman). In addition to mass shootings, suicides are a very serious issue. If a suicidal person has a gun, they are likely to die, considering that 85% of suicide attempts with firearms are successful (Drexler). A gun in the hands of someone who is mentally ill can cause extremely negative outcomes. Unfortunately, mental illness is not being treated as well as it needs to be to prevent this and not all mentally ill people seek help. The mentally ill usually end up in prison rather than a hospital which causes more psychological damage

It is also vital to consider mental health as an issue when discussing about behaviours that are described poor, negative or challenging. According to BeyondBlue (2017), mental health is ‘a state of wellbeing in which every individual, realises their potential, can cope with stress, can work productively and is able to make a contribution to their community’. Poor mental health can therefore lead to certain disorders such as depression and anxiety. If students are continually labelled or put down for their ‘challenging’ behaviour it can lead to low self-esteem which is then effects students’ social and emotional wellbeing (Donnellan et al, 2005). There is therefore a significant overlap between disability, mental health and kids who are described as having negative behaviours. Due to an increased rate of exposure to psychological disadvantage, there is also an increased risk of mental illness amongst children who have an intellectual disability (Emerson & Hatton, 2007). When a child has both a disability and a mental health issue, it can be described as co-occurrence and can expand the emotional and academic challenges that child faces (Armstrong, 2016). According to research conducted by Emerson & Hatton (2007), children with an intellectual disability have a 28% higher chance of developing a psychiatric disorder. The nature of the disability can increase the chances of a more severe mental health issue (Reference). Two examples of intellectual disabilities are ADHD