Rational argument in support of suspending the ownership of firearms by suicidal individuals

Such is what is being attempted, to provide a demonstration of how to engage in a discussion devoid of emotional rhetoric.

It is being attempted, but it cannot actually be done. The matter has been examined in depth, and for quite some time now, in an effort to construct a position in support of the proposal that is based on rationality, and is grounded in logic to explain why such an endeavor is worthwhile engaging in.

Despite such efforts, however, such cannot actually be done. Every argument that has been considered, every point that has been proposed, is based entirely on emotional rhetoric rather than logic. There is nothing that can be found or presented, to explain why temporarily suspending firearms ownership and possession by those who are contemplating the decision to end their own existence, is a sound and worthwhile policy to engage in.

Everything ultimately boils down to emotional rhetoric, and the premise that the life of the individual does not actually belong to the individual in question, but rather society itself that has the authority to determine that someone must continue existing for as long as possible even if the affected individual has no such desire.

If there is a reason for suspending firearms ownership and possession by those who wish to end their own existence, a reason that is based on sound logic devoid of emotional rhetoric, it cannot be found on the part of myself.

 

They could always do suicide by cop. Of course, that makes the cop feel guilt and opens him/her up to law suits and trial by media. Let them do it by themselves.

 

It would depend upon the person; a rational person can make a rational decision to end their life and should be allowed to do so with dignity. A mentally ill person who is irrational, but definition, can't make a rational decision. We deprive such people of their other rights, but it should be a strictly controlled process with a process that allows both review and restoration of rights.

 

Can an individual suffering from mental illness, who might end their own existence, truly be considered as being suicidal, rather than insane?

 

My uncle(by marriage) committed suicide by pistol. He was terminally ill and suffering. He didn't want to be a burden on his family. It sucked, but I can see his reasoning. At least he didn't hurt anyone and he made sure that his step-son found him first. (County sheriff's deputy and part time BATFE agent) He even only had 1 bullet in the gun to prevent an accident by whoever found him first.

 

In Florida a person who is found to be a danger to themselves and or others can be Baker acted, at that point the person is taken into custody and transported to a mental health facility where they will be held for no more than seven days to be evaluated, in parallel to that, the person who initiated the Baker act can demand a hearing before a judge, which shall be granted within 24 hours, and if that person can clearly demonstrate to the judge with evidence (not hearsay), that allowing the person who was acted to possess firearms presents a clear danger to that person or others, the court can issue an order to have that persons firearms removed from his residence or business and stored by law enforcement for a period not exceeding ninety days, that time can be extended, but that procedure must be repeated.

The order issued requires law enforcement to safely store the firearms and they are forbidden from disposing or tampering with them in any way, and at the expiration of the order law enforcement must return the firearms to the rightful owner or a responsible family member, if the owner has been committed by the courts to a mental health facility.

They are not seized and law enforcement must literally return them the owner is not required to go somewhere and pick them up.

This procedure can also be used if a person has been arrested for a violent felony or domestic abuse involving the use of a firearm, the idea being if a person used a firearm in such a crime and has more firearms those firearms present a clear danger to the public.

Again they are not seized and must be returned upon the expiration of the order.

The ability to issue such orders came about after the Parkland shooting as a result of Cruz threatening his family and neighbors with his firearm and posting notices and photos on-line stating he was going to "shoot up a school."

Information ignored by both the BSO and the FBI.

 

We can do a lot more in this country for people who are temporairily irrational and seek a permanent solution to a temporary problem

 

If someone would relay the following message to the member Vegas Giants for consideration:

Two questions must be asked regarding the above statement of permanent solutions to temporary problems.

First and foremost, what can be done for an individual who has come to view their existence as so devoid of meaning and value, even to themselves, that they consider themselves to hold no more value to society than any commercially available public commodity, and can easily be replaced after only a minor inconvenience to society at large?

Second, if an individual wishes to end their own existence, is it not better for society overall if they choose to do such in the privacy and convenience of their own home, than through more dramatic methods such as stepping into traffic during rush hour, where their death will negatively impact a great many individuals through multiple motor vehicle collisions, ensuing traffic jams, the psychological damage inflicted upon those that struck the individual in question, and the potential deaths that will occur from said collisions?

 

People with no mental health training who act as if they know everything there is to know about suicide have little credibility commenting on this topic

 

They can’t be considered as making a rational decision about suicide because they are irrational.

For example, if I have terminal pancreatic cancer and the only thing in front of me is 3-6 months of pain while draining my family’s life savings, I can make a rational decision on what to do. OTOH, if a chronically depressed bipolar person were constantly thinking suicide for no other reason than they are bipolar and depressed, then that isn’t a rational thought process since there is treatment for both those conditions.

 

Common ground. Agreed. The same goes for those seek to harm themselves or others. There’s no reason to treat every American like they are mentally ill and suicidal simply because a few are that way.

 

If someone is clinically depressed and what's to die in order to end the suffering it causes that isn't being insane. Removing access to a firearm temporarily so that help in the form of medication, therapy, etc., can work well enough to give the person a reason to live, only makes sense. Someone wanting to die because of a painful terminal illness is another issue altogether.

 

Disagreed. First, clinical depression is treatable. Second, asking a mentally ill person to make a rational decision is like asking a drunk to sober up "now!" It doesn't work that way.

https://www.webmd.com/depression/guide/major-depression

 

Such was considered prior to presenting the topic for consideration. But during the consideration process, every point relating to the above could be dismissed as based on emotional rhetoric rather than sound logic. With so many other methods available to an individual looking to end their own existence, it could not be proposed with any degree of certainty that firearms being temporarily unavailable would amount to anything of substance. Too many firearms are unregistered and unknown about, even to family members that reside within the same residence, meaning a sufficient number of both the afflicted and firearms would slip through the cracks.

Even if firearms were rendered unavailable to the afflicted individual, what degree of depression would be sufficient enough to drive the afflicted individual to seek alternatives that are just as effective, and just as permanent as the use of a firearm?

 

I don't see how anything you said disagrees with what I said.

 

Maybe I misunderstood your first sentence.

 

I still don't see how what you said would follow, "If someone is clinically depressed and what's to die in order to end the suffering it causes that isn't being insane".

I pointed out that clinical depression was treatable. And again, being clinically depressed isn't usually being insane. They can still think. Sometimes irrationally, but not always. They aren't schizophrenic.

 

Which is why the access to the weapon may need to be removed by others

 

Doctors need to be able to report suicidal individuals to local police who can remove access to weapons. The individual may appeal to a judge if he so desires

 

Yeah that worked out real well in Broward county.

They had dozens of chances to stop that guy, but didn't want the arrest to make their school look bad.

 

Let's not forget, wanting to end extreme suffering isn't irrational. It can be shortsighted, but not necessarily irrational. And that's the problem.

 

There are examples where suicide is the rational and sane choice. But they are pretty rare

 

Human beings are the only creatures on the earth that are required to suffer by law.

 

In the moment it can make total sense, and that's why many do it.

 

I meant to agree with you that extreme physical suffering in certain cases (rare) may be a rational and appropriate reason for suicide