Columns

Necessarily, a person who perpetrates a mass shooting is mentally disturbed. Those with a known history of psychiatric issues are not permitted into law enforcement jobs. 

Dan White, in the 1978, was the assassin of Mayor George Moscone and Supervisor Harvey Milk, and when brought to trial used a bogus "Twinkie Defense." (This argument entailed that eating sugary foods had impacted White's mental capacity.) The actions of murder perpetrated by Mr. White had no defense, psychiatric or other. 

However, the scenario of the Dan White murders completely differs from what we've been seeing in the news in modern times. Dan White was latently mentally ill and was disgruntled at not being rehired by the Mayor of San Francisco. However, what we see today, across the U.S., are individuals without the same stature, and who appear to be - I'll say it: sick. In the modern-day mass shootings, it seems that perpetrators have lost the capacity for rational thought, except being able to carry out those actions. 

Mentally ill people should not be allowed to obtain guns. I'm mentally ill and I don't want one. 

I've been threatened at gunpoint by others. I'm not kidding. I was in one of the supermarkets where I worked as a janitor (the location was East Oakland, and the year was 1983) the store was robbed by two gunmen and I was the only one in the store with them overnight (while they waited for the morning crew to arrive so they could access the safe). 

It was the most terrifying thing I have ever experienced. I would never subject another person to that. 

People may think everyone should have access to weapons to defend ourselves. Is dying in a shootout defending yourself? There are other ways to preserve life. NRA people argue that more people should have guns so that the mass murderers could be shot by someone present. Has this ever happened? I know of no instance in which someone present with a weapon has saved everyone by shooting a gunman. What about people who are disturbed, in the first place, not having those weapons? That would prevent many of these tragedies. 

We currently already have an environment in the U.S. in which surveillance is commonplace and it is accepted. What about utilizing some of this to screen for disturbed people inclined to do violence? What about making it illegal for a person with a history of being mentally compromised to own a weapon? This might necessitate a Constitutional Amendment, a modification of the right to bear arms. Or perhaps a legal patch could be created that accomplishes this objective. You could reclassify persons with mental conditions unfit to exercise their Second Amendment rights. And, while you're at it, reclassify sociopaths unfit to serve in politics. 

The above, admittedly, are slippery slopes because you begin to take rights away from people who haven't necessarily done anything wrong. This goes against the U.S. Constitution, and it could put more power into the hands of mental health authorities, and this power could be misused. Additionally, with the current Supreme Court, anything of this kind would be struck down without hesitation. 

Yet, mentally ill people don't need guns and shouldn't have weapons. Other methods can be learned for self-defense. At one time, the NRA president was Charlton Heston, and the NRA was about responsible gun ownership and gun safety, and it was an organization run with rational thought. Now, we have extremists. Heston said something to the effect that assault rifles made him nervous, and he received some flak for that. 

Let's find consensus. Don't change the Constitution and don't send all the mentally ill people back to state hospitals. Take smaller, achievable measures that meet with less vehement opposition, such as background checks and restricting the weapons that are suited for these horrible shootings we're seeing. 

If someone walked into a Kentucky Fried Chicken establishment and carried a longsword in a scabbard, you'd have police and SWAT teams all over the place. Thus, right to bear arms is not absolute. It is partly a matter of perception. 

A final idea is to reclassify assault firearms as weapons of mass destruction. I am pessimistic about any of this because the Trump Administration has installed an enormous number of conservative and reactionary judges. For now, the American people must focus on the midterm elections (and a pushback on the horrible voter suppression laws) so that Biden and Harris can get more legislation and executive orders enacted. 

******************************************************************************** 

People on Antipsychotics Should Avoid Outdoor Activities in Hot Weather

Antipsychotic medications affect the cooling of the human body and make those taking these drugs more susceptible to heat caused illness. This poses a danger. While we may be urged by friends, family, and ourselves to participate in fun barbeques and picnics now that we've made some progress with the coronavirus, people who take antipsychotics, including young, fit individuals, are better off remaining indoors. I believe air conditioning should be considered a basic need for mentally ill people. If you don't have that, putting a damp washcloth around your neck, taking cold or lukewarm showers, or going to a cooling center, are ways that mentally ill people can be safe in high temperature weather.