New York’s new gun law requires that mental health professionals report any person they consider “likely to engage in conduct that would result in serious harm to self or others.” If they don’t report this concern, and if something happens involving this person such as a shooting, the mental health professional could face charges for not reporting the person’s behavior to law enforcement.
Obviously, this will lead to over-reporting, which is fine by state officials, because that means that’s more people they get to bar from ever owning a gun. The other effect however is that gun-owners will be refusing to ever set foot in a mental health professional’s office for fear that the doctor will misinterpret something they said or didn’t say as evidence of a tendency to commit a crime. And you know the doctor would report anything, even if it wasn’t true, because not reporting something puts them at risk of criminal charges should “something happen” involving one of their patients.
Gun controllers love hearing themselves talk about the need to do something about mental illness as it relates to gun ownership, and their talk all stems from the recent mass shooters. But I’m not sure Adam Lanza was truly mentally ill. I’m not sure anybody’s sure, as so little is known about him, and what is known is kept secret. Was Lanza on psychotropic drugs as the Aurora theater shooter was? Drugs that could have been prescribed by a mental health professional and which side effects include suicidal and homicidal tendencies?
But these gun grabbers don’t really care about those issues. They want to be able to label anyone as mentally ill so that that person will be barred from owning a gun. If you’re on psychotropic drugs, that means you’re mentally ill. If you refuse to take psychotropic drugs when prescribed, that means you’re mentally ill. But at the same time in the liberal do-gooder’s mind, the drugs are completely irrelevant.
Merely having a history of a mental illness, real or fabricated, is enough to bar you from owning a firearm in New York. So, if you saw a therapist as a young teen, and you were diagnosed with some made up mental illness, that would prevent you from ever owning a gun even 10 or 20 years later, because of a “history of mental illness.”
The law doesn’t restrict mental health professionals from reporting only their patients. Does this mean that if someone’s on the subway talking with a friend about the history of gun control and the true context of the 2nd Amendment, and a psychiatrist overhears their conversation, he is required to say something to law enforcement about his concerns for the mental health of the person talking about the 2nd Amendment? (If you see something, say something.) This would then spur an investigation into this “suspicious” person to make sure he doesn’t own any guns, and if he does, force him to submit to a psych evaluation to see if there is any evidence whatsoever that he might cause harm to himself or others. If he has an unacceptable opinion of government, they’ll take his guns away.
Number 16 of the 23 executive actions that Obama signed off on sought to “Clarify that the Affordable Care Act does not prohibit doctors asking their patients about guns in their homes.” I would assume that’s talking about any kind of doctor, including mental health doctors, and probably especially them.
A person is mentally ill if he doesn’t put his faith in the State, and if he puts his faith in the State, he has no need for a gun.