Jump to content
wink-_-wink

Need some outside views...

Recommended Posts

Alright, this one is a little tough for me to post because I can't use names.  BUT, I am in the NJ Air National Guard.  I have friends in both the guard and active duty sides of the military.  Most people who know me, know I am a gun guy and many come to me for advice/opinions on pistols, rifles, or questions about NJ laws (not that I give legal advise, most those convo's end in, ask a lawyer or check out this cool forum I am on...)

 

That being said I hae been asked a question by several friends and I am in no position to answer this.  Several of us have deployed, many of us several times.  Some of these guys are having a few issues, nothing terribly serious but serious enough to consider some medical assistance from the VA or a private doctor.  The problem is if they are "Diagnosed" with PTSD they fear they will never be allowed to own guns.  If they are treated for PTSD/PTSD symptoms, they still will not be allowed to own guns.  So now they are caught between a rock and a hard place, do they seek help that some of them may need badly and risk giving up a right that they fought to protect, or continue to hide their pain and get their guns.

 

My big concern here is that if they do not seek help and get the guns, they are possibly more likely to do something crazy? I don't know if that is the right way to word this but I know people who refused medical help for fear of informal reprcutions from their work centers and on their careers who winded up committing suicide.  Then again I am not inclined to tell my guys to forget about their civil rights and go to the VA.  This was actually kind of rare (probably because no one wants to talk about having issues after a deployment) but recently (after that idiot said ALL military members have PTSD and should not be allowed to own guns...) the guys are coming out a little more for help and are more affraid now to seek help then before. 

 

I know no one will give legal advise here and I have advised that I personally and in an opinion based stance only that they should get whatever help they need, and talk to someone about their issues.  Then they can apply for their permits, they have to answer the questions honestly, and they may have to get a letter from the doctor and if they are still denied or denied right away then to seek actual legal advise.  BUT I am curious to the communities view on this?  I mean we lower the flag for celebrities.... why not have another kick in the teeth from PRNJ by saying we aren't afforded the same rights we fought to protect!! 

 

Opinions both supportive or arguementative are welcome!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Tough situation.

 

If someone really has PTSD to the point they may injure themselves or others, you must encourage them to get medical help.  Saving their life or othes is worth the loss of their gun rights.  It's a damn shame that the people who are supposed to represent us in government are actively looking at ways to harm us.

 

The other side of that coin is to make sure to that going the official route and risking a permanent stigma like that should be the last resort.   Even just talking to a shrink can result in all sorts of nastiness.  Avoid it like the plague.  Encourage them to seek out alternatives that cannot be written down.   I know there are PTSDanonymous groups and their entire reason for existence is just exactly this issue.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

PTSD can be devastating. From experience , start with a trusted, private Church councilor. Use in conjunction with cognitive therapy a book called " The new mood therapy" from doctor David T Burnes.

 

A dose of reading God's word along with what's listed above. Like I Said, speaking from experience on a "different level" this is a very good alternative. However, the final decision is the one you or your friends make.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not a lawyer, and may be competely wrong about this,but its my understanding that in the NJ Firearm Statute that disqualifies people that have had counciling for mental health issues, it also has a waiving provision if you get a statement from that counciler saying you are not a threat or danger.

Like Malsua said above tho (just my opinion here), If someone has real issues priority 1 is to get counciling. I servered and thank and respect anyone else who has. But some war related trama actually would make it unsafe for certain individuals to have a tool that could easily cause harm to themselves or others......... I'm not saying in all cases. But thats what profesional evaluation is for.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am not saying that these guys are suicidal or anything like that... Most of them are having simply nightmares, difficulty falling asleep, and sometimes when the base is doing practice the explosions cause anxiety... I have some of the same symptoms as them so I know where they are coming from.  Nothing terribly serious but then again I am not a doctor either!  They aren't all ready to get their permits and stuff but don't want this to hinder them down the road.  If they go to the VA and talk to someone they automatically have to check yes on the application... thats the biggest complaint. 

 

Sorry if I worded it to sound like these guys were gun toting crazy people off their meds lol but it was early in the AM when I wrote the post.  I appreciate all the feedback thus far! 

 

Mikelets- I will pass on that info

 

 

 thanks for the info!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the mental health and state of mind of the person comes first.

 

We rail against the ineffective laws foisted upon us in the name of keeping us safe, and to me, keeping guns out of the hands of the mentally ill or mentally injured is something we all agree on, or at least we should.  I don't mean to sound insensitive to you or your friends service and to what now may be their sacrifice.  I thank you and them for doing it. 

 

I would encourage them to get the help they need as a priority and the firearms should be secondary.  I'd also encourage them to do it as quietly as possible so as not to draw unnecessary attention to themselves or their current "problems" for lack of a better term.

 

I hope it works our for them. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In NJ, it sounds like we need a list of trusted Pro-Second Amendment mental health officials who know the laws and that aren't going to over-react and that value the right to keep and bear arms but that will assess and treat someone with mental illness.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not a psychiatrist, but I can't see any of them being 2a friendly. Lets say they sign off on a vet suffering from PTSD, saying he is no danger. A year later he snaps, hurts someone, the paper trail goes back to the shrink. Now he's in trouble and may be open to a lawsuit. They are going to cover their a$$es and fail everyone that comes to them for a psych evaluation for any reason. This whole thing is a mess and totally unfair.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ah... the world we live in today... I feel for these guys. They need the help to move on...

 

This may not bring anything "solution-wise" to the topic, (certainly doesn't actually) but I kind of think that in order to be healthy and thrive as a person I'd take the chance to lose the gun right in order to be whole and healthy in all other aspects in life.  The gun hobby is just one aspect of life and I know I'd rather give that up then risk losing other more important aspects whether that be relationships, occupation or additional leisure pursuits. 

 

I guess I'm saying if I had a failing heart and was a passionate long distance runner.... I''d give up running and take the heart transplant.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is the exact scenario that the new gun laws create. Keeping those that need help from getting it for fear they may lose rights or be branded forever as a mental health risk

 

yup. 

 

and then the next "common sense" step would be mandatory mental health exams for all soldiers and then all citizens... to keep us safe.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They have to make a decision which is more important. There is no doubt that any history of psycological issues will prohibit firearms ownership in the near future. Retroactively.

 

Surprise, surprise. Federal regulations now require all medical records to be provided to the federal government.

 

When they passed statutes to make all medical records digital, it was because "It makes them more secure and will lower your health insurance costs. No, it's not because the government wants them. That's silly. And, besides, they are protected by law."

 

Guess what? they are not more secure, your health insurance costs have not gone down, and the government will have all of them.

 

Lessons Learned (I hope finally): As I have told you since Day 1, you never have an enforceable contract against the Federal Government. Any agreement you ever make with them can be changed at their whim without notice or cause. Every piece of information you ever give them, for any reason, can and will be used against you eventually.

 

Information is abused the moment it is given. It is a foregone conclusion. Not at some later time when you look all surprised sitting handcuffed in a pool of urine saying, "You can't do that! I have rights!"

 

Those are the facts. Make a rational decision from an informed position. It's not easy to make these decisions in a country that does not respect the rights of its subjects. I have no solution for that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It seems to me that the VA told New York that they wouldn't share mental health records with them after the SAFE Act was rammed through.  Here it is:

 

http://www.thenewyorkworld.com/2013/03/11/veterans-safe-act/

 

I don't know enough about the VA to be sure, but why would they tell one state and not another.  Tell your friends to get the help they need, and hope it holds true in NJ too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I know someone who was denied because they had attended court ordered counseling at 15 when their parents were fighting over custody.  I don't know why it showed up on the background check.   The local PD denied the application and told him he could appeal in court if he wanted.  He didn't bother.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why the heck would you have asked the question in the first place if you were ultimately going to post on the internet a lot of detailed information that will eventually be used under Obamacare to deny your Right to Keep and Bear Arms forever?

 

The internet is not your mommy and the government is not your daddy.

 

I did you the favor of not quoting you since I care about these things. Good luck. You're going to need it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.



×
×
  • Create New...