The debate over gun control and the mentally ill

My reaction to Fox News Sunday: Captain Mark Kelly and Wayne LaPierre (February 3, 2013)

I like to keep the local Fox news on while I go about cleaning on Sunday mornings. And when the local news signs off, I typically change the channel to something mindless. This past Sunday, I was in the middle of laundry so I just left the channel where it was. Fox News Sunday came on, and the discussion of gun control was the main topic.

Captain Mark Kelly, husband of former Representative Gabby Giffords, spoke out about the Americans for Responsible Solutions group he and his wife has formed in an effort to lessen gun violence in our country. I agree with their group’s overall goal of lessening gun violence. However, I take issue with the ease in which Cpt. Kelly groups the mentally ill with terrorists and criminals.

Throughout his interview with Chris Wallace, Cpt. Kelly spoke about how stronger background checks and limits on ammunition would make it difficult for “criminals and the mentally ill to get assault weapons and high capacity magazines and guns in general”.

Cpt. Kelly added, “I personally don't believe that we should have, you know, the average person on the street, including criminals, mentally ill and terrorists should[n’t] have easy access to those weapons.”

I had hoped that the news of mental illness in relation to the recent tragedies around our country would finally bring mental illness awareness to light and provide for an open discussion. I had hoped that America would see that mental illness is real and that funding is a priority. It seems that my hope has turned into something much less desirable. Mental illness is being used as a scapegoat to take the focus off of guns.

The result is that many people—people like Cpt. Kelly—are now looking at those suffering with mental illness as potentially violent individuals. People we should scoop up off the streets and force them into mental institutions. It seems quite obvious that Cpt. Kelly knows next to nothing about the world of mental illness. Fact is, the percentage of mental ill who commit violence crimes is not disproportionate to the crimes committed by the general, “sane” public. Fact is, those with mental illness are much more likely to be the victims of crime rather than the instigators. Fact is, an average of one in four adults will suffer from a diagnosable mental disorder in any given year. Look around at your friends as you enjoy an evening dinner at your favorite restaurant. One of the four of you will or is suffering from a mental disorder. Does that mean they should be feared as being potentially violent?

In the same show, Wayne LaPierre, chief spokesman for the NRA, discussed the idea that mental records should be made available for background checks when purchasing guns. First, the NRA often points to the Constitution of the United States for their right to keep and bear arms. Did they happen to miss the part where we, as Americans, have the right to privacy? Does a person with glaucoma have to disclose that information when purchasing a gun? No? Doesn’t having an eye disorder make it dangerous to shoot a gun? Hmm.

Secondly, statistics show that nearly 50% of those with mental illness go undiagnosed. LaPierre points out in his interview that law-abiding people would essentially be the victims of background checks, getting “caught up in a bureaucratic nightmare” while the criminals bypass gun regulation by purchasing guns illegally. I would have to argue the same point applied to the access of mental health records. A law-abiding individual with a mental disorder on his or her record (whether under control or not) would become the victim of such regulations, while the undiagnosed pass the record check. I’m not suggesting that potential criminals lie only in the 50% of undiagnosed; I’m just pointing out that even if mental health records were made available, they would be largely ineffective.

Despite my own personal objection to guns, I don’t believe that more gun control is the answer to preventing the tragedies of late. Nor do I believe that the mentally ill are any more likely to commit these crimes than the average person. I honestly don’t know what would have prevented the innocent deaths from occurring.  Perhaps an article posted on the Facebook page for R.I.P. Sandy Hook Elementary School Children says it best:

The answer does not lie within changes to the state or government, it lies within ourselves. If we truly want to create a world of peace, it would require every single individual to have a change in their nature. A change in the way we view each other, and a change in the way we act. What is the solution? How would we do such a thing? I honestly wish I knew.

As this debate continues into the foreseeable future, I hope that we stop lumping those with mental illness in the same category as criminals and terrorists. They are not one and the same. There is already a stigma surrounding mental illness in our country, oftentimes preventing individuals from seeking the help they need. A stigma that causes individuals to suffer silently. Likening someone with a mental disorder to a criminal or terrorist will do nothing but perpetuate the problem.