REI places "HOLD" on brands owned by gun manufacturer Vista

[taz]

Oh, and I know you know this, but there is a limited guarantee of privacy whenever one visits a health professional. There is no absolute guarantee (hence informed consent), and I don't know that there has been a drastic reduction in mental health provision over the years. In fact, I think the trend is quite the opposite.

I was sloppy with the word 'guaranteed'. I think health care professionals are in tough position wrt reporting patients that are potential risks to the public. I don't think reporting child abuse and reporting "potentially dangerous" patients are completely equivalent since child abuse involves a prior bad act along with probable future behavior. The prior bad act justifies the beginning of an investigation (due process). If you diagnosed a patient that likely 'would' abuse a child in the future but hadn't yet (let's say that they don't have any children themselves), is that actionable? It's a tough question - the protection of the rights of an individual (the diagnosed person) should be as great as the protection of the public. Do you trust the govt (as represented by local police, child protective services, etc) to be as protective of confidentiality as you are? I don't have the answers but do view it from a different viewpoint that has to be considered. (Imagine, a doctor and a lawyer having differing opinions.)

Back to the gun issue - mental illness is a valid concern, but it shouldn't be used as blanket cover to avoid addressing the epidemic of gun casualties occurring where mental illness isn't a significant factor.

I have some thoughts on when people are dissuaded from seeking treatment, but that's even further afield than we've drifted already.

[taz]

Didn't mean to suck all of the air out of the room. I'm in listening mode from here on.

To those with opposing views, thanks for thoughtful responses and not going ad hominem.

[joosttx]

Didn't mean to suck all of the air out of the room. I'm in listening mode from here on.

To those with opposing views, thanks for thoughtful responses and not going ad hominem.

Thank you for
Your thoughtful input.

[Skenry]

Personally this saddens me to see so many question the Government/the Constitution and disparage the Military. Yes, you have the right, but I have the right to be saddened.

As for REI, there are plenty of other places (often cheaper) for me to spend my dollars.
You want to get to the foundation of these issues, I will point out that we didn't have many of these incidents when we had insane asylums, mental institutions and 'special' classrooms in their own hallways. "Inclusion" rarely works out except for those being included.

[dasein]

I would initiate an investigation of a person who expresses the intent to abuse a child, but not someone who I diagnosed with, say schizophrenia or borderline personality who cares for children. I would initiate an investigation of someone who is schizophrenic if they have command hallucinations to harm children, and they were not already heavily monitored. Agreed, there needs to be a previous act and/or intent, not just a diagnosis. I would never predict future dangerous behavior on diagnosis alone. I am suggesting that related dangerous behavior and possibly, but not necessarily certain diagnoses are great cause for concern. i think most school shooters of which I am aware have had solid evidence of both. And no, mental illness should never be used as a blanket to address this issue. Mental illness of most types are not highly correlated with external violence. The core of most mental illness is the inability or deficiency in regulating fear/anxiety and the violence is more often turned inward.

No, I don't trust the police to be as protective of confidentiality as me. I certainly don't trust them to be sensitive to others' rights in general, and my dad was a Chicago cop for 33 years. He's a good guy, but his job was different than mine. I want to believe that child protective services would do the right thing, but i know better. I absolutely respect your viewpoint, and it needs to be part of the broader conversation, because it represents the other pole of my struggle- I wish very much to preserve people's rights. Where the divergence likely exists is that I view gun ownership as a privilege, though I know we constitute it as a right. I understand that view, and definitely can live with it. I guess the way I would integrate those views is that one has the right to own a gun, and it's ones responsibility to preserve that privilege. Having a mental illness alone does not constitute a loss of that privilege in my opinion. Thanks for your viewpoint! I kind of figured this was a doctor/lawyer conversation. If you are not a lawyer, you should definitely play one on TV. What we have in common is we both want to protect people's rights and lives.

I was sloppy with the word 'guaranteed'. I think health care professionals are in tough position wrt reporting patients that are potential risks to the public. I don't think reporting child abuse and reporting "potentially dangerous" patients are completely equivalent since child abuse involves a prior bad act along with probable future behavior. The prior bad act justifies the beginning of an investigation (due process). If you diagnosed a patient that likely 'would' abuse a child in the future but hadn't yet (let's say that they don't have any children themselves), is that actionable? It's a tough question - the protection of the rights of an individual (the diagnosed person) should be as great as the protection of the public. Do you trust the govt (as represented by local police, child protective services, etc) to be as protective of confidentiality as you are? I don't have the answers but do view it from a different viewpoint that has to be considered. (Imagine, a doctor and a lawyer having differing opinions.)

Back to the gun issue - mental illness is a valid concern, but it shouldn't be used as blanket cover to avoid addressing the epidemic of gun casualties occurring where mental illness isn't a significant factor.

I have some thoughts on when people are dissuaded from seeking treatment, but that's even further afield that we've drifted already.

[ZenNMotion]

This thread inevitably takes tangents and hits issues that are much closer to home for some than others. Please just stop.

[Matthew Strongin]

Personally this saddens me to see so many question the Government/the Constitution and disparage the Military. Yes, you have the right, but I have the right to be saddened.

Why does it sadden you? If our founding fathers didn't question their government we would be a British colony. This country has a long history of progress being made when people question the government. It's not just our right as Americans to question the government. It's our responsibility.

The same goes for the constitution, it's a document and framework that has evolved over time. The bill of rights wasn't a part of the original constitution and since their addition to the constitution there have been 17 other amendments that reflect necessary changes to our governing framework. We even have gems like the prohibition of alcohol (18) and then subsequent repeal of prohibition (21) that highlight the nature of the document's evolution.

As for REI, there are plenty of other places (often cheaper) for me to spend my dollars.
You want to get to the foundation of these issues, I will point out that we didn't have many of these incidents when we had insane asylums, mental institutions and 'special' classrooms in their own hallways. "Inclusion" rarely works out except for those being included.

Is this the typical "back in the good ol' days" argument for solving the problems of today? It's worth noting that crime, and violent crime in particular, is generally decreasing over the last 25-30 years. Here's some data: 5 facts about crime in the U.S. | Pew Research Center

While mass shootings tug at the heartstrings and create fervor with the sheer shocking nature of the crime, most people with a bone to pick with the NRA (back on topic to this thread) take issue with their power and agenda, which prioritizes firearm sales over the health and well being of the populace. They are a hyper-politicized "club" that whips its members into an angry fury over the second amendment (they're coming for your guns!!) while funding politicians so well that even people who get shot don't think anything needs to change (hi Rep. Scalise). No lobbying organization should have so much power over politicians that they cease to represent the will of their constituents (note how I didn't say their base, supporters, or voters).

Also, this isn't about what you call inclusion for those with mental illness. Here is an article (from an admittedly left leaning organization) that includes stats and links to sources and shows the role of mental illness in gun violence: Stop blaming mental illness for mass shootings - Vox. Hard as it may be to fathom, crimes aren't being overwhelmingly perpetrated by people who would be classified as mentally ill prior to the transgression (or even after).

[Matthew J]

Personally this saddens me to see so many question the Government/the Constitution and disparage the Military. Yes, you have the right, but I have the right to be saddened.

As for REI, there are plenty of other places (often cheaper) for me to spend my dollars.
You want to get to the foundation of these issues, I will point out that we didn't have many of these incidents when we had insane asylums, mental institutions and 'special' classrooms in their own hallways. "Inclusion" rarely works out except for those being included.

Sad for the Constitution when it comes to gun ownership - but arbitrary and capricious incarceration - hey, that’s cool!

[Matthew J]

Interesting but very unlikely to happen and the results might not be what you'd hope for (as a Canadian). The only people calling for a new constitutional convention in the U.S. are fairly extreme right politicians. By the current Constitution, 2/3rds of state legislatures would have to call for it or both 2/3rds of the Senate and House of Reps. I think (without researching further) that the representation at such a convention would be equal representation by each state without regards to population (not a good thing IMO).

Inclined to disagree. I think there are a growing number of us somewhat to the left of center who believe the only chance for the US to continue with its current demographic is to convert to a parliamentary system that more fairly provides for one person one vote.

Barring that it is hard to see the majority of the population living in urban areas with more likely than not progressive attitudes to continue with a union that is intentionally set up to allow for a government dominated by a rural and increasingly reactionary minority.

[sine]

Personally this saddens me to see so many question the Government/the Constitution and disparage the Military. Yes, you have the right, but I have the right to be saddened.

As for REI, there are plenty of other places (often cheaper) for me to spend my dollars.
You want to get to the foundation of these issues, I will point out that we didn't have many of these incidents when we had insane asylums, mental institutions and 'special' classrooms in their own hallways. "Inclusion" rarely works out except for those being included.

Oh wow.

Treatment (and export of idea's) of the mentally ill in the USA needs to be studied in order to prevent a repeat.

[sine]

The rest of the world has been ruled by hereditary rulers that absolutely did not want their populations armed. There's no tradition of pulling yourself up by your bootstraps. Unlike the US.

We literally fought our way out from under British rule. Fought our way west. Fought Mexico for the SW. etc The closest analogue is France, and they've gone back to tyrannical rule at least twice

M

Canada?

Fenian Raids - The Canadian Encyclopedia

Reportedly, the school I went to in southern Quebec turned back some invaders. The teenagers were the only armed militia in the area.

Interestingly, when I attended, our prep school had two full auto FN rifles in the armory.

Though very similar to the USA in the early years, Canada's attitudes towards pistols, rifles, revolvers, etc. changed.

[thollandpe]

Reportedly, the school I went to in southern Quebec turned back some invaders. The teenagers were the only armed militia in the area.

Interestingly, when I attended, our prep school had two full auto FN rifles in the armory.

Maybe it's not the video games.

[colker]

You want to get to the foundation of these issues, I will point out that we didn't have many of these incidents when we had insane asylums, mental institutions and 'special' classrooms in their own hallways. "Inclusion" rarely works out except for those being included.

Every society is including and turning citizens who interact as much as possible. This isn´t even a matter of compassion or right x wrong: it´s a matter of power and rulling. The more you include, the more powerfull society becomes so it is how it is.
The model is the roman empire: it would include every being inside it´s frontiers. They were religiously tolerant even.. As long as hierarchy was preserved all inclusion is wellcome and necessary.
If you compare the 60s w/ our circumstance you will notice how every group of outsiders has been included under some kind of ideology of tolerance. In the end it´s about control and power, only.
The only way out of this conundrum is our spirituality which is completely devoid of any submission to political powers. That´s why i disagree w/ atheists: there is nothing left w/ atheism to go against society and polical control.

[colker]

Maybe it's not the video games.

I guss netflix won´t screen this one. I am sure facebook would have a boycott page

[thollandpe]

I guss netflix won´t screen this one. I am sure facebook would have a boycott page

I'd guess that Netflix's aversion to Red Dawn is its crappiness (13% on Rotten Tomatoes) and not its political content.

I put it here to show the absurdity of the argument that unfettered access to military-style weapons is necessary to repel foreign invaders. Because it's obvious that what we need is more Swayze.

[Gummee]

I would initiate an investigation of a person who expresses the intent to abuse a child, but not someone who I diagnosed with, say schizophrenia or borderline personality who cares for children. I would initiate an investigation of someone who is schizophrenic if they have command hallucinations to harm children, and they were not already heavily monitored. Agreed, there needs to be a previous act and/or intent, not just a diagnosis. I would never predict future dangerous behavior on diagnosis alone. I am suggesting that related dangerous behavior and possibly, but not necessarily certain diagnoses are great cause for concern. i think most school shooters of which I am aware have had solid evidence of both. And no, mental illness should never be used as a blanket to address this issue. Mental illness of most types are not highly correlated with external violence. The core of most mental illness is the inability or deficiency in regulating fear/anxiety and the violence is more often turned inward.

No, I don't trust the police to be as protective of confidentiality as me. I certainly don't trust them to be sensitive to others' rights in general, and my dad was a Chicago cop for 33 years. He's a good guy, but his job was different than mine. I want to believe that child protective services would do the right thing, but i know better. I absolutely respect your viewpoint, and it needs to be part of the broader conversation, because it represents the other pole of my struggle- I wish very much to preserve people's rights. Where the divergence likely exists is that I view gun ownership as a privilege, though I know we constitute it as a right. I understand that view, and definitely can live with it. I guess the way I would integrate those views is that one has the right to own a gun, and it's ones responsibility to preserve that privilege. Having a mental illness alone does not constitute a loss of that privilege in my opinion. Thanks for your viewpoint! I kind of figured this was a doctor/lawyer conversation. If you are not a lawyer, you should definitely play one on TV. What we have in common is we both want to protect people's rights and lives.

That doesn't seem to happen... (<-that's a link)

I'm in no way surprised that REI has pulled this publicity stunt with stopping selling stuff from the Vista companies. IDK if the founders were granola-crunchers, but the company has certainly been that way for ages now.

M

[bigbill]

I'd guess that Netflix's aversion to Red Dawn is its crappiness (13% on Rotten Tomatoes) and not its political content.

I put it here to show the absurdity of the argument that unfettered access to military-style weapons is necessary to repel foreign invaders. Because it's obvious that what we need is more Swayze.

I thought it was more about gun safety, 2 of the 7 actors have their fingers inside the trigger guard, one with his weapon pointed at another person. But yeah, if we could clone Swayze, we'd have an invincible military with mad dance skills.

[Gummee]

Inclined to disagree. I think there are a growing number of us somewhat to the left of center who believe the only chance for the US to continue with its current demographic is to convert to a parliamentary system that more fairly provides for one person one vote.

Barring that it is hard to see the majority of the population living in urban areas with more likely than not progressive attitudes to continue with a union that is intentionally set up to allow for a government dominated by a rural and increasingly reactionary minority.

Flip that the other way: the rural and less populated areas would be controlled by the urban areas. The urban areas are woefully out of touch with the rural lifestyle and look down on them as being 'backward.' AMHIK

I can't see the same gun control measures for Fairfax Co and Smyth Co. Completely different demographics and population densities. ...but it seems that urbanites (and suburbanites) are willing to ride roughshod over their rural counterparts in the name of 'safety.'

M

[colker]

But yeah, if we could clone Swayze, we'd have an invincible military with mad dance skills.

Yeah! Bodhy... but bring Keannu and Gary Busey too.

[ides1056]

I just finished reading a history of the Thirty Years War, Wedgwood, and moved on to the Franco-Prussian War 1870, Wawro. What impresses me is how feckless and incompetent the vast majority of the prime movers are at the top of the pyramid, and how much those below suffer as a consequence. History blunders along.