Originally posted by ImplosionOfDoom:
“Isn’t NCLB a wonderful initiative we can thank the previous administraton for? (sarcasm, in case you’re unaware)”
Actually the reason public school is obligated to educate mentally ill / mentally disabled kids probably falls under the Americans with Disabilities Act or something similar, NCLB is relatively recent and public schools have been obligated to teach the mentally ill / disabled since long before NCLB was enacted.
Again, depends on the nature of the disability. A person with spina bifida cannot walk (or walks with extreme difficulty) but there’s nothing wrong with their mind, so why not teach them? A person with cerebral palsey has a badly malformed cerebellum, but it doesn’t affect their conscious mind at all, so why not teach them? I’m curious as to where your aversion to teaching the physically disabled is coming from.
As to mental issues, again it depends on the nature of the mental disability. A child with depression is no less able than a child without. A child with dyslexia is going to struggle with words, but their intellect is usually above average because of the nature of the disability. Tourette’s syndrome isn’t going to affect the child’s mental capabilities. I could go on for a while here…
In regards to the NRA throwing a fit over having a registry of those qualified to own fire arms, we could simply make a "no fly list’ of people who aren’t allowed to own fire arms so dealers know who they shouldn’t sell to. (Come to think of it that might actually be easier, since violent mental illnesses are fairly uncommon)
That would probably be a good way to handle it, yes. They do something similar in the country where I currently work (UK). If medical problem crops up which is liable to affect the individual’s ability to concentrate or stay focussed, then we are legally obliged to notify the DVLA immediately (national driver registrar), and have their driving lisence revoked. It stays revoked until or unless the condition improves with treatment to the point they are deemed safe again. The patient has no say in this at all. As cars are lethal weapons comprable to guns in some ways, it serves as a good example that such can be done.
However, in order for it to work, a socialised healthcare system is essential, so that there is no good reason a person wouldn’t seek a diagnosis if something appears to be wrong with them. Most of the time, the ban is less than a year in length, and if they had not sought treatment, had an accident, and the compulsory healthcheck demanded by the insurance company found evidence of an underlying condition they hadn’t bothered to have checked upon… Well, “up shit creek without a paddle” fits very well in describing their situation.
Besides a list doesn’t need to be completely public, it just needs to be available to any establishment with a permit to sell firearms. (We may have to make some new regulation in regards to gun shows to make sure they are able to check this database as well, but I suppose the issue of regulating gun show sales might be a topic for another thread)
Yea, I was going to point out that a lot of trading doesn’t go through established businesses. An unknown amount is through one mate selling another, their gun. Currently there is no way to track this. A national ballistics database would be a good start, so a gun can always be identified with an owner, and if they didn’t notify the authorities they’d sold the gun, why hello shit creek, how nice to see you again. :)
But of course, the NRA would adamantly block any such database for the same reason they’d block any other listing of guns or owners.
So our options are fairly limited, and a complete solution will not be possible.