• sparkle@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    Cymraeg
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    2 months ago

    Sounds like a great way for conservatives to make sure their victims don’t get guns. They’ll go back to pretending to be concerned for trans people and stuff. Remember when women were forced into psych wards for being “disobedient”? I bet it’d basically be the same type of labelling anyone going against the fascist agenda as mental illness.

    I’m all for it in the progressive parts of the country (like Massachussetts) where minorities (including lgbt) probably wouldn’t be targetted like that by the government. But in the regressive states like Mississippi, or Louisiana, or West Virginia, or Florida, or Texas… no thanks, I don’t want to have my house raided when overlord Trump becomes supreme leader and the state decides I don’t deserve human rights unless I convert to Christianity (the right kind of Christianity though obviously, the wrong kind will get you dragged out into the street and shot)

    I think it just boils down to “gun control requires the government to enforce it especially fairly and in good faith” which I do NOT trust a conservative government to do. One shitty election, and suddenly leftists or minorities can’t get guns and all my gun data next to my address and SSN is conveniently accessible to fascists, along with the statistics bought from corporations saying I’m a filthy socialist

    • MehBlah@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      To me it sounds like a good way for malfunctioning republicans to get identified. Its what they fear most. The idea that everyone will know they are sociopaths, psychopaths or have plain old NPD. When you hear someone say they don’t believe in therapy you know they are afraid of being exposed.

      • sparkle@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        Cymraeg
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        2 months ago

        Are you suggesting that we do it to expose peoples’ medical information to the public…? Or am I misinterpreting this

        I think them being openly Republican lets everyone know well enough that they lack empathy/humanity. It’s on people (well, more like our education system to teach people) to recognize that, WITHOUT violating basic privacy rights. Plus, knowing the publics’ ableism and perception of mental disorders, people will probably start suggesting that ASD, ADHD, etc. should disqualify you from having a gun if the laws aren’t just listing out arbitrary diagnoses.

        Personally, I currently live in a very red part of Georgia (not for much longer though) and I’m pretty queer and have ADHD and stuff, so I’d rather not let the government even know what guns I own. When the state or federal government becomes social democratic, I’ll be completely fine with it

        • MehBlah@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          2 months ago

          No I’m not suggesting that. Way to reason in advance of your data. I’m suggesting though experience that people who are against mental health are usually against it to hide their problems. I worked in mental health for a decade. Most cluster B’s, people with APD, NPD or BPD can’t stand the thought of getting help. All of them feel that its never their fault. They play the victim but are always the victimizer. None of them need a gun.
          Why would I think people with ASD or ADHD would be a threat? I have ADHD and I also get treatment.
          Seems like you are picking a outrageous example in an attempt to fluff up your position. but some types are dangerous and those are the ones who avoid therapy. Who fear it.

          • RedAggroBest@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            2 months ago

            No they’re saying nobody gets exposed because health info is held to high privacy standards and your comment didn’t make sense unless those mental health evals were public info, so they assumed that’s what you were arguing for.

            • MehBlah@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              2 months ago

              You don’t have to make them public. Why is that a requirement? Its crazy that that is the only way people see it.