Military suicide policy would try to remove personal firearms

Military suicide policy would try to remove personal firearms

This is a discussion on Military suicide policy would try to remove personal firearms within the Law Enforcement, Military & Homeland Security Discussion forums, part of the Related Topics category; Military suicide policy would try to remove personal firearms - U.S. - Stripes http://www.nytimes.com/2012/10/08/us...nted=all&_r=1& Discuss....

Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 35
Like Tree27Likes

Thread: Military suicide policy would try to remove personal firearms

  1. #1
    Senior Member Array Herknav's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Waypoint 0
    Posts
    986
    I would rather wake up in the middle of nowhere than in any city on Earth.--Steve McQueen


  2. #2
    VIP Member Array SIGguy229's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Kommie-fornia-stan
    Posts
    7,094
    I do not agree with this policy. I can tell you a majority of commanders have "CYA" syndrome--and have already attempted to unlawfully infringe on rights of their Soldiers, Sailors, Airmen and Marines.

    Are they also going to take away rope, household chemicals, keys to their vehicles?

    Not to mention commanders are not mental health professionals....and the mental health community (in my experience) already abhors gun ownership (because we "all know" guns cause bad things to happen).

    Additionally, I know many senior officers wince when the subject of private gun ownership come up and object to concealed carry -- off-base (on base is obviously never going to happen).

    I think it can be recommended or suggested....but not mandated. Everyone's case is different.
    Sig 210 and nerdyvirgin like this.
    Magazine <> clip - know the difference

    martyr is a fancy name for crappy fighter
    You have never lived until you have almost died. For those that have fought for it, life has a special flavor the protected will never know

  3. #3
    VIP Member Array goldshellback's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    OKC; by way of St. Mayberry, GA
    Posts
    4,750
    This is going to be a VERY slippery and dangerous slope to maneuver through...... The potential to outright conviscate/remove firearms from 'at-risk' service members IS what this is leading to. Right now, the wording simply equates to giving commanders and military (mental) health officers premission to ask any service members what/how many weapons they have at home.

    (This) suicide prevention campaign will encourage friends and families of potentially suicidal service members to safely store or voluntarily remove personal firearms from their homes. “This is not about authoritarian regulation,” said Dr. Jonathan Woodson
    Unfortunatly, this can lead in that direction. Commanders CAN take actions that in the civilian world would be considered unconstitional.... service members already surrender many 'rights' when in uniform.

    the campaign would also include measures to encourage service members, their friends and their relatives to remove possibly dangerous prescription drugs from the homes of potentially suicidal troops.
    Again, all voulntary at this point, but what else could 'removed' if deemed 'necessary' ? My thinking on this includes violent games, be it online and/or gaming systems, computers, the removal of family members from the home....?!? (Consider on-base housing where the base commanders have the final say....?!?)

    But the issue remains difficult, with concerns that some veterans avoid mental health care because they fear their firearms will be confiscated.
    This is a HUGE concern. Seen as 'punishment', or being 'weak', many (most I'll guesstimate) 'at risk' members just put on a 'happy face' and avoid any kind treatment. Very dangerous in and of itself. The stigma and ostrosision of being seen as 'weak' is reason enough to NOT seek treatment. VERY bad attitudes to have (for every member up and down the chain of command).

    “We don’t in any way want to imply that we would want to take people’s right to bear firearms away.”
    Well, that's exactly what's being implied.....


    Bottom line, these 'at risk' service members need to be helped. This can't be seen, or used, as punishment, or abused, by commanders to 'get their way' with the troops. This is a real threat to gun rights, but this is an action seem by many to be necessary to help our troops as well. Suicide by our returning service members IS occuring at an alarming rate AND they're using their own priviatly-owned weapond to kill themselves. This has touched many people, including me, and it's a VERY REAL problem.

    I personally believe that an entire top-to-bottom change in the way the ENTIRE DoD handels the 'at risk' members HAS to be in order. It's way too easy to ignore, or to tell 'em to 'suck it up and get tough', or to (actually) discard the member outright...... it happenes. For every failure there has been successes as well, but this particular action will have FAR reaching consequences not only within the services, but in the civilian world as well. I see this as just a band-aid..... treating the 'symptoms and not the disease'. It extreemly easy and fianiancly cheaper to go THIS route than to admit the 'system' in place (to help our 'at risk' members) is bad and dosn't work.

    Ultimatly, I believe, this will be a step for our goverment to use for a outright gun-grab in the future.
    "Just getting a concealed carry permit means you haven't commited a crime yet. CCP holders commit crimes." Daniel Vice, senior attorney for the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence, quoted on Fox & Friends, 8 Jul, 2008

    (Sometimes) "a fight avioded is a fight won." ... claude clay

  4. #4
    VIP Member Array suntzu's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    TX/NH
    Posts
    5,968
    Just to be clear on this:the commanders are not the one determining if a servicemember is a suicide risk. That is done by a mental health professional.
    Cook74 and Hopyard like this.
    Then I heard the voice of the Lord saying, “Whom shall I send? And who will go for us?”
    And I said, “Here am I. Send me!”

    Isaiah 6:8

  5. #5
    VIP Member Array ccw9mm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    27,859
    I can understand not having non-issue firearms in combat, simply from an interchangeability/training perspective. But I have a problem with a policy of disarmament, if that's what it is.

    At best, it'll only switch suicides to other means. After all, there are still bridges, buildings, roadways (with heavy trucks), knives, bodies of water, slitting the veins, and a host of other methods. Reducing access to firearms isn't going to eliminate it, not by a long shot.

    In a sense, the old aphorism rings true here: Those who would sacrifice liberty for security deserve neither. - B. Franklin
    Your best weapon is your brain. Don't leave home without it.
    Thoughts: Justifiable self defense (A.O.J.).
    Explain: How does disarming victims reduce the number of victims?
    Reason over Force: The Gun is Civilization (Marko Kloos).
    NRA, SAF, GOA, OFF, ACLDN.

  6. #6
    Member Array troutkiller's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Ohio
    Posts
    175
    This was bound to happen. Almost 60% of firearms deaths every year in the U.S. are suicides. Look for this to take place more and more.
    "Go to Heaven for the climate, Hell for the company." ~ Mark Twain

  7. #7
    VIP Member
    Array OldVet's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Hiding inside a bottle of Jim Beam Black.
    Posts
    17,308
    I simply can't understand the reason behind all the suicides. I only knew of one during my "tour" and that was a guy going through a divorce, not extended, repeditive tours of combat. Was it like this during other wars and we just weren't aware of it?
    Retired USAF E-8. Lighten up and enjoy life because:
    Paranoia strikes deep, into your heart it will creep. It starts when you're always afraid... "For What It's Worth" Buffalo Springfield

  8. #8
    Member Array marinevet1994's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    Ortonville Mi
    Posts
    141
    My own opinion and I expect to take some flak for it but I think the increased suicides may be because of the forced changes to basic training. Drill instructors are no longer allowed to train recruits the way they need to. Stress cards and training breaks are allowing those who aren't mentally tough enough to make it through and this is the result. I could be wrong, but that is the way I see it.
    BigStick likes this.
    Disarming innocent people does not protect innocent people.


    Don't ever think that the reason I'm peaceful is because I'm afraid to be violent!

  9. #9
    VIP Member
    Array WHEC724's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    SC
    Posts
    6,685
    Quote Originally Posted by marinevet1994 View Post
    My own opinion and I expect to take some flak for it but I think the increased suicides may be because of the forced changes to basic training. Drill instructors are no longer allowed to train recruits the way they need to. Stress cards and training breaks are allowing those who aren't mentally tough enough to make it through and this is the result. I could be wrong, but that is the way I see it.
    I wonder. I've never heard of a stress card or training break, but that sounds laughable. Over one third of my company was either reverted or discharged when I enlisted in '83. I remember that in order to be discharged, you were required to stand in front of the entire company and "beg to go home to mommy". More than one recruit did so while bawling. Anybody that was gonna crack, cracked.

    But I think there's more to this. I got out when things went politically correct and the commands put more emphasis on CYA than getting the job done. If someone is determined to be mentally unstable, well then send their loopy butt home. If they're too unstable to be trusted with their own firearm, what makes them think that the individual is competent to preserve the lives of their fellow soldiers/sailors?
    Ksgunner likes this.
    __________________________________
    'Clinging to my guns and religion

  10. #10
    Member Array Cook74's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Olalla, WA
    Posts
    448
    Military has always been the laboratory for new social adjustments... Zero drugs, no smoking inside any military installation and naval vessel, etc. Once this policy has been shown to reduce suicides in the military (even if it is only one or cooked to show it does) would justify the civilian policy to look at gun control to control suicide.

    This policy is ridiculous when one considers all the firearms already in the public domain. What is to prevent someone from buying a weapon from a private individual? This is an incredibly stupid focus on the suicide. Better take away a military members kitchen knives and box cutters too.
    Doug;}
    RSO, WA. XDMc 9mm, S&W 642CT & 442 38 sp, 1947 Savage 99 300,
    1972 Marlin 336 RC .35, 1922 Walther Model 4, 1933 Walther DSM 34, High Standard 1954 22LR

    I prefer to be judged by 12 then carried by 6

  11. #11
    VIP Member
    Array Echo_Four's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Land of the mostly free
    Posts
    2,839
    Stress cards... what a wonderful myth. I'm confident that if those things existed my Drill Instructors would have punished us more for attempting to use them, and I'm confident that today's DI's are cut from the same mold.

    Anyway, the only people that this policy could really have an impact on would be the married military members. Everyone living in the barracks has been disarmed already. I thought that was stupid as a PFC in 1995 and I think it is stupid now. We trust men with rifles, grenades, bombs, missiles, knives, mines, drones, planes, mortars, and artillery at times when the safety and security of our nation and our hard earned and fought for foreign policy agenda is on the line, but we cannot trust them to have a pistol, hunting rifle, or knife with them where they live? Something is wrong with the logic there.
    "The only people I like besides my wife and children are Marines."
    - Lt. Col. Oliver North

  12. #12
    VIP Member Array suntzu's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    TX/NH
    Posts
    5,968
    Quote Originally Posted by Cook74 View Post
    Military has always been the laboratory for new social adjustments... Zero drugs, no smoking inside any military installation and naval vessel, etc. Once this policy has been shown to reduce suicides in the military (even if it is only one or cooked to show it does) would justify the civilian policy to look at gun control to control suicide.

    This policy is ridiculous when one considers all the firearms already in the public domain. What is to prevent someone from buying a weapon from a private individual? This is an incredibly stupid focus on the suicide. Better take away a military members kitchen knives and box cutters too.
    In Bold: I would word that differently, that is the opening the Brady Bunch woould love in a debate:

    Person 1: What is to prevent someone from buying a weapon from a private individual?
    Brady Bunch: That is why we need background investigations for private purchases.
    Then I heard the voice of the Lord saying, “Whom shall I send? And who will go for us?”
    And I said, “Here am I. Send me!”

    Isaiah 6:8

  13. #13
    VIP Member Array goldshellback's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    OKC; by way of St. Mayberry, GA
    Posts
    4,750
    Quote Originally Posted by Echo_Four View Post
    Stress cards... what a wonderful myth. I'm confident that if those things existed my Drill Instructors would have punished us more for attempting to use them, and I'm confident that today's DI's are cut from the same mold.
    Quote Originally Posted by WHEC724 View Post
    I wonder. I've never heard of a stress card or training break, but that sounds laughable.
    Lemme break the 'myth'..... the stress cards thing was implemented back in the mid-nineties sometime. These cute little lamanted blue cards that any given recruit could 'pull' when the going got too tough...... think 'time-out' or 'stress-reliever'. The DI's were COMPLETLY helpless and HAD to cease all yelling and screaming to accomidate the poor, stressed out 'Rickey Recruit'. Worse yet, the DI's were held directly responsable for recruits DOR'ing..... they obiviously wern't good enough to mold them into fighting men and women...... yep, their fault.

    When I was recommended and asked to become a DI, I said NO. I'd rather get out than deal with that mess..... and I nearly did and it 'hampered my career for a bit as well. I didn't care, I wanted no part of the politically-correct Navy. I actually had a nub on a submarine pull one on me and our Chief A-Ganger........ after I removed that card from his possession I went up one side and down his other side. I put him in tears (and I did it to save his butt from the Chief going absolutly ape-crazy on him). That nonsense had NO PLACE in the fleet and NO PLACE in ANY kind of combat situation.

    It's my understanding the 'stress-card' stuff went away after commanders and senior NCO's pushed it's removal completly.

    Washing out the 'weak-sisters' is no longer an option. It has been made to 'look bad' on the service if any individual can't be 'made' into what's needed. It's all BS and we knew it back then. That program alone lowered the bar and the compentancy of our fighting men and women who 'measured-up' and did the job necessary to succeed, and I believe it is one (of many) indirect reasons for alot of the 'stuff' going on today.
    "Just getting a concealed carry permit means you haven't commited a crime yet. CCP holders commit crimes." Daniel Vice, senior attorney for the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence, quoted on Fox & Friends, 8 Jul, 2008

    (Sometimes) "a fight avioded is a fight won." ... claude clay

  14. #14
    Distinguished Member Array Ghettokracker71's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Under a rock.
    Posts
    1,763
    Better take away any type of ropes that they could hang themselves from. OH, and how about that pesky thing called electricity? Wouldn't want them to jump in a bathtub with a toaster and hairdryer plugged in! Don't allow them to go to the grocery store either, they could buy arsenic or harsh chemicals and poison themselves! Wait, water is bad too, afterall they could drown themselves in their bathtub, wait,...they can't have acces to a lake or ocean either for that matter! How about taking away their licenses to drive a motor vehicle so they can't drive off a cliff or bridge,...


    "To blame a gun for a mans decision is to foolishly attribute free will to an inanimate object"- Colion Noir.

  15. #15
    VIP Member Array BigJon10125's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    California
    Posts
    3,191
    These idiots do realize its the person and not the item doing the killing right???
    BigJon


    "Better to keep your mouth shut and be thought a fool than to open it and remove all doubt" ~ Mark Twain

Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast

Sponsored Links

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Search tags for this page

#1 suicide handgun

,

8th army personal firearms

,

housing military and firearm policy 2012

,

is the dod doing an enough to reduce military suicides

,

law enforcement and military training for taking away firearms

,

laws for removal of weapons from a suicidal person in alaska

,

legislation to get rid of personal weapons for soldiers

,

military members to have personal guns removed

,

military suicide firearms

,

military training remove guns homes

,

removing personal guns from suicidal military members

,

suicide gun rights military

Click on a term to search for related topics.