for mental health illness, particularity with returning soldiers traumatized from their tour of duty. but here's the flaw in your logic:
"Having effective mental health care helps them and protects gun rights by providing an alternative of relief without violence."
There cannot be any effective health care under the auspices of the government. For example, the VA has a terrible record of proving consistent care. If mental health services were supported under a government mandate, like Obamacare, Medicare, or a economic stimulus, it still would not meet the needs of mental health patients. Most likely, it would do worse.
I'm not saying we shouldn't improve and provide better resources. Too many unfortunates are merely handed a prescription of the latest guinea pig wonder-drug from big pharma and then left to fend for themselves. We need more volunteer and non-profit organizations to step in, not more government involvement with tax dollars wasted.
The government would use any excuse to exclude returning vets or anyone displaying milder, temporary forms of mental stress or depression from owning firearms. Go to a counselor for a couple of sessions to work out your grief over the death of a friend, or vent anger over a bad experience, and bang, you are labeled mentally compromised to own a firearm based on criteria set by the government, not the profession.
Government backed and sponsored mental health care would
come with a political agenda to remove any and all gun rights from a patient for the most trivial of reasons, back by a court order and men with uniforms and badges.
Conscience does not exist if not exercised
"No matter how cynical you get, it's impossible to keep up!
Want DP delivered to your inbox daily? Subscribe here:
Content of posts and comments on the Daily Paul represent the opinions of the original posters, and are not endorsed, approved, or otherwise representative of the opinions of the Daily Paul, its owner