Of Arms and the Law

Navigation
About Me
Contact Me
Archives
XML Feed
Home


Law Review Articles
Firearm Owner's Protection Act
Armed Citizens, Citizen Armies
2nd Amendment & Historiography
The Lecture Notes of St. George Tucker
Original Popular Understanding of the 14th Amendment
Originalism and its Tools


2nd Amendment Discussions

1982 Senate Judiciary Comm. Report
2004 Dept of Justice Report
US v. Emerson (5th Cir. 2001)

Click here to join the NRA (or renew your membership) online! Special discount: annual membership $25 (reg. $35) for a great magazine and benefits.

Recommended Websites
Ammo.com, deals on ammunition
Scopesfield: rifle scope guide
Ohioans for Concealed Carry
Clean Up ATF (heartburn for headquarters)
Concealed Carry Today
Knives Infinity, blades of all types
Buckeye Firearms Association
NFA Owners' Association
Leatherman Multi-tools And Knives
The Nuge Board
Dave Kopel
Steve Halbrook
Gunblog community
Dave Hardy
Bardwell's NFA Page
2nd Amendment Documentary
Clayton Cramer
Constitutional Classics
Law Reviews
NRA news online
Sporting Outdoors blog
Blogroll
Instapundit
Upland Feathers
Instapunk
Volokh Conspiracy
Alphecca
Gun Rights
Gun Trust Lawyer NFA blog
The Big Bore Chronicles
Good for the Country
Knife Rights.org
Geeks with Guns
Hugh Hewitt
How Appealing
Moorewatch
Moorelies
The Price of Liberty
Search
Email Subscription
Enter your email address:

Delivered by FeedBurner

 

Credits
Powered by Movable Type 6.6.2
Site Design by Sekimori

« TN panel gets it right | Main | Of Octopuses and NRA »

Clayton Cramer on mental disabilities

Posted by David Hardy · 19 April 2007 10:36 AM

Clayton Cramer has a post on the issue.

The ultimate question comes under "damned if you do and damned if you don't." Before 1970s or so (i.e., just before I went to law school) the committment laws allowed committment of just about anyone with any significant mental quirk. Arizona Law Review had an issue on that, and they tracked down the person who'd had the longest time in the state mental hospital ... a woman committed something like 50 years before because the doc said "she always felt like dancing."

The legal reforms that went in after that basically deinstitutionalized all but a handful of the mentally ill. As a general rule, unless a person could be proven an immediate danger to self or others (which is hard to determine unless maybe they were paranoid schitz and specifically said they were going to kill someone else) or so completely disabled as to be unable to function, they could not be held. A large part of those released, or not held, wound up on the streets, of course. Of course in the old days there was no real treatment for serious disorders. At best, you warehoused them, usually for their lives. Today you have enormous advances in psychiatric medications, but if the person won't take them, you're out of luck. And some take quite a while to kick in, weeks sometimes, so you can't just make the guy pop a pill and reach a state where he realizes he really is better off on the medication.

The bottom line was that there was no good solution -- at best, you can look for the "least bad" one.

· prohibitted persons

Leave a comment