gun control assault weapons ban protest sign
Previous Post
Next Post

It is also important to remember that the biggest threat from the dangerously mentally ill is not to the public, but to themselves. There are more suicides annually than murders.

Moreover, rifles, including the AR-15 assault-style rifles, are involved in only a few hundred cases of the tens of thousands of murders and suicides every year. Bloody year after blood-drenched year, handguns are many times the killers that rifles — of any type — are.

I know that AR-15s can kill more people at a time than other weapons, but once you go down the road of banning tools, there’s no good place to stop. There’s always another atrocity to start the cycle over again. Gun-control-happy New York has knife control, too. The United Kingdom, after banning nearly all guns, has turned to debating the kinds of knives people should be able to own.

The idea that the gun-banners of the Brady Campaign and Moms Demand Action will stop at assault-style rifles is preposterous. They know the toll of sorrow sowed by handguns as well as I do. 

With 18 dead and more wounded in Maine, we have to look for solutions while respecting civil rights. Red-flag laws are a reasonable step that all states should take to head off the next tragedy.

If someday, depression gets the upper hand on me and I am a threat to myself or others, I hope someone will speak up and have the power to remove my gun. I want to live — and I want you to live, too.

— David Mastio in I Am a Mentally Ill Gun Owner

Previous Post
Next Post


  1. States need stronger laws to force people into treatment when their families or police see them going off the rails.

    What’s old is new again. I can never tell if this happens because young people who never knew the past think they have great new ideas, because old people just forgot the past or because of a sort of mix of ignorant-of-history kids and Im-so-old-I-forgot old folks. Maybe both peppered with a little optimistic “this time it’ll be different.”

    So much of human civilization is just spinning wheels and trying to undo things that never should have been done.

    • It will never happen to me, we know more now we can do it without the same tragic predictable outcomes, it will work this time, real (whatever)ism has never been tried etc. I wish it was just young kids not knowing or old people forgetting but it is more typically retards trying to rationalize away fire being hot while playing with it.

    • “So much of human civilization is just spinning wheels and trying to undo things that never should have been done.”

      …and doing things that will be undone by a later generation.

      • That’s right Gun Control marching morons citizens should follow your History Confirmed insane Gun Control and jump in the defenseless victim pool. I suspect citizens in Maine are arming up like the happy go lucky Israelis who were recently reminded how well Gun Control works.

        Like its sidekick Slavery…Abolish Gun Control Now.

      • When people start remembering history, they will not be doomed to repeat it. The real objective of ALL these gun laws is to disarm the people so the government can make them subjects to be ordered around however THEY like.

    • but this Maine shooter HAD been committd to a psych facility for two weeks, thus rendering him PROHIBITED PERSON from having firarms. His own National Guard officers had requested local LE investigate this guy because of what he’d been saying. Local LE knew of his commitment, yet never bothered to search his home and take up his guns, as is REQUIRED BY LAW. And they now are stumping fir a “new law” to do exactly that? Idiots. They already HAVE this law yet did.. NOTHING. They knew or should have could have known he’d bought that rifle a few weeks before his stint in the nuthouse. Yet again DID NOTHING.

      Makes me wonder if this whole thing wasn’t a setup to “justify” some new gun restrictions in Maine.

      I hope some folks have the guts to stand up and bring these things to the legislature as they debate the newly proposed gun laws that are needless because such laws are already part of Maine’s laws.
      How about taking the local LE to task for their abject and utter failure to take action they were specifically requested to take, BEFORE it was too late? This is a rerun of Sandy Hook, SUtherland Springs, Aurora Colorado theatre, Parkland School, Nashville Christian School, Uvalde school, San Bernardino Christmas Party, DC Navy Yard, Fort Hood One and Two……. …………. EVERY ONE of thise killers violated multiple laws, the “safeguards” were alrady in place but jot used, and they were KNOWN and identified as dangerous people. Yet no one in a position to DO so ever took any approproate action.
      But they want all these new nasty anti-gun and unconstitutional laws…..

      It aint the arrow, its always the indian.

      • His commitment was voluntary, not an “adjudication” of mental illness. There is a difference, per Form 4473.

  2. About suicides: Not every suicide is mentally ill. People with terminal illnesses can make a rational decision that they would rather go out with minimal suffering, and minimal financial hardship, rather than face month or years of suffering. I lost someone dear to me, who was facing years and years of horrible suffering. It hurt when she left, but I know it didn’t hurt as much as she was hurting. Europe has assisted suicide programs. I don’t know why the US can’t get over it’s aversion to the idea. If we had sensible suicide laws, maybe these so-called sensible gun laws wouldn’t look so appealing to the gun control industry.

    • “Sensible suicide laws.” That’s just plain an oxymoron.
      You sound just like all the Democraps with their “common sense” gun laws.
      Democraps love death more than Republicans love life.
      You sound just like one of the “D”s.

      • That’s nonsense. If faced with the reality, you might decide to spend 20 years bed ridden in pain, while the professionals bankrupt you and your family. Some will, some won’t. Perhaps you should be less judgmental.

        • Thanks for that. Comment such as his and the one above it are irresponsible and vicious. Sad state of affairs when otherwise intelligent people have to respond in that manner.

        • And when they know you won’t be able to pay, they’ll suggest assisted suicide. When they know they’ll be better off financially by killing you off instead of treating you, they’ll suggest that you hurry up and die. When you express your wish of ending your life, your doctor might grant you that wish without discussing your options. Don’t believe me? Read below:

          A doctor accused of failing to verify consent before performing euthanasia on a dementia patient has been cleared of any wrongdoing by a Dutch court.

          Hey, she said she wanted to die. She wasn’t allowed to reconsider.

        • What judgement? Just stating facts.
          If someone wants to commit suicide, there is nothing preventing them from doing that. The problem is when you get the government involved. We know that the gun banners don’t want to ban just the scary guns, they want to ban all of them. “Assault weapons” are just the start. Same with assisted suicide. How long before that becomes “we think you are no longer of value to society, so we’ve decided to end your life?” There are numbers of people who think that there are too many people on the planet, and have no problem reducing the numbers by whatever means necessary. Of course, they won’t admit it outright. They’ve already tried to decrease population with the covid jab. Do you really think they wouldn’t eventually tell people that they just plain need to be removed from the planet?

    • It’s always difficult to respond to these posts. I am sorry that you lost your friend. The primary reason why we don’t have nationwide assisted suicide is because the majority of us believe that God has a plan for each of us. You will never know what He had in mind for your friend. Her suffering might have been meant for some greater purpose in her life. And that’s hard to imagine since we all ask the same question, if God is all good and all loving, why does He allow the suffering? It’s unanswerable for we mortal beings. Grieve her death and pray that God has mercy on her soul. May you also be at peace.

      • Michael A Crognale,

        Thank you for your thoughtful comment. (Please note that my reply is not snarky or sarcastic.)

        You are touching upon a difficult subject to parse and ponder. Here are a couple more points to consider:

        Large swaths of society are absolutely terrified of dying. That has driven incredible medical technology developments which can prolong life almost beyond belief. And that has also driven many people to use those developments and delay their inevitable demise as long as possible.

        At some point we have to ask ourselves whether delaying the inevitable is actually God’s will. Here I am talking about the situations where a person is absolutely terminal and will die–the only question is whether he/she dies in minutes, hours, days, or weeks (or possibly months). For example there are patients who we can sustain on a ventilator and I.V. fluids and nutrition for several days or even a few weeks. But should we? At what point do we cross the line from respecting the immense value of human life to resisting God’s will that our time is up?

        This also brings up the concept of pain management which is another entire can of worms.

        • I get that. I did not mean to imply that your comments was snarky or sarcastic. Please accept my apology for that. I don’t have the answers since I am a mere mortal. God bless you.

        • When God has decided your days are now over,there is othing that can stand in His way. Eiterh He is soverign or He is not. Once that is settledm things can setle down.

          Have you looked into the very scary record of “assisted suicide” in Canada? I have.. I used to live there )permanent resident) before those laws were passed. There are too many loopholes that allow persins other than the subject to take action, at times contrary to the wishes of the subject.
          I watched my much loved Father slowly fall apart due to Parkinsons.. almost certainly the result of his truct in the medical profession and their multiple “wonderful” vaccines they convinced him to take every year… several o fthem, every year. Every one of them includes a significant dose of aluminium and/or mercury to stretch the active ingredients. Anyone who wants to know can study the significantly very HIGH correlation between mercury and aluminium in one’s system, and the set of “prion” diseases which includes Parkinsons. Dad’s ignorant desire to stay healthy ended up killing him early. But, his rust was in our Saviour, and his long decline was taken with much grace. He never feared, he KNEW his days were numbered but did not know what that number was. His last months were very peaceful, surronded by family and dear friends. Sme had suggested something be done to “end his suffering”. Others of us insisted on letting his God decide when he would go Home. That was HIS wish as well, discussed and settled early on in his long decline.

          Either the God who made each of us is sovereign or He is not. He uses many things to effect His plan, Taking a bullet to your own head is not in keeping with that concept.
          I read lately that Canada are in process of adding “drug addiction” to the list of conditions where ine can decide to take the lethal injection and end your life. From the givernment standpoint, urlely selfish, it is far cheaper to give the guy the shot and bury him than to take the trouble and expense of weaning him off the drugs and making something of his life beyond a senseless druggie. Publically funded medical care in Canada has driven many policies the wrong way over the past fifty years or so. They tend to take the cheapest way out every time. that would be fine if the issue ws rasising livestock for profit. Central gvernment rarely have any real respect for the individual.
          I have known a few in that situation that were able to tur their lives around and become contributing members of society again. THAT is the far better route. God is a redemptive God, not a destructive one.

    • We refuse assisted suicide for the same reason we refuse “assault rifle” bans. Just like the article says, as soon as they ban ARs, they’ll be working on banning the next thing. As soon as they approve assisted suicide for those who suffer, we’ll be killing off 20 somethings for “depression.” It’s already happening in other countries. Recall that the immoral commies/libs believe a child can consent to having their breasts removed and go on cross-sex hormones before they’re even fully developed. If children know what they want, then why shouldn’t they be able to go to a doctor for assisted suicide?

      • For the record, I don’t think fully developed adults should go on cross-sex hormones either. I was making a point about their perception of child consent.

        • If you are going to create a feminine sex partner from a biological male, you have to start early – otherwise, they tend to be ‘not very attractive’. Hence the pressure on the children. The goal is a new class of courtesan, and sex without reproduction.

          Further – the activists of the 60s were not very concerned with rifles – and they were quite certain that legal handgun ownership would be over “by 1985, at the latest”. And they would have gotten it done, if not for the NRA.

          Arguments against banning rifles because “handguns kill way more people” actually sound kind of familiar

    • While it’s true some people suicide because they face debilitating illnesses I doubt these are a majority. I believe the majority of suicidal ideation is from depression, anxiety, ptsd/cPTSD and other mental illnesses that are mostly (60%) successfully treated by ketamine. But our War on Drugs makes ketamine a taboo.

      We will embrace our taboos until enough citizens rebel at the irrationality. We gun owners don’t even care enough about our own fellows suicides by gun to consider doing anything to help ourselves. We leave the gun controllers to exploit gun suicides to keep the gunshot statistics high.

      Observe, few if anyone will come to on this response. We don’t care

    • Anytime, anyone puts the term sensible before any proposed legislation. It’s a sure sign that it needs to be voted against. Sensible as it pertains to laws is nothing more than dog whistle politics. To satisfy a groups emotions.

    • Yup.

      There are diseases that are incurable and kill slowly- Alzheimer’s, for one. A friend of mine worked at an assisted-care home for a few months, there was one guy there who repeatedly asked her to kill him. For him, every day was just a little bit worse, and he knew it.

  3. Josh Sugarmann founded Handgun Control Inc. He stated, “all we are asking, right now, is controlling handguns”. Note the phrasing. Then when Jim Brady was shot they became the Brady campaign and now they are Bloomberg’s group. They are traitors. Period.

    • Sugarmann is the one who invented that ‘assault rifle’ term as applied to semi-auto rifles. He even said in his writing about it he invented that term as applied to be applied to, basically, deceive the public into thinking they were military machine guns.

      • correction: ‘assault rifle’

        should have been … “… ‘assault rifle’ or ‘assault weapon’ …”

        • .40 -actually that bogus term was invented by Art Agnos, little josh appropriated it and ran with it using it to intentionally confuse uneducated sheeple.

    • Similarly, the original (1974) name of the group now known as the Johns Hopkins Center for Gun Violence Solutions was the National Coalition to Ban Handguns.

      They rebranded a number of times over the years, as it’s kinda hard to argue “no one is after your guns” when it right there in the name. But only a fool believes that’s not exactly what they want to do.

  4. Shall not be Infringed.

    Give not a single -ing inch to these power-mad tyrants. Give generously to the organizations like FPC, GOA & SAF that are suing the holes off of the folks pressing these unconstitutional laws and statutes.

    We can’t stop the fight until we have overturned every single unconstitutional infringement of our right to keep and bear arms. Not until the NFA is gone and we can exercise our rights to own full-autos, SBRs, suppressors and rocket launchers can we even begin to think about letting up even in the slightest bit. Not until we can bear arms in public anywhere we want and need to can we begin to breathe free again.

    If we fail to win with the first three boxes we will be forced to fall back on the fourth so keep up the heat on the first three lest things need to get really ugly.

  5. Their end goal is more aligned with single party rule, i.e.: PRC, complain about and your disappeared. Here is a trailer for a new Dinesh D’Souza film ‘Police State’.

  6. The banners will never go away; the best we can do is to diminish their influence to inconsequential levels. But they will always be there.

    • You can do it PRC style when someone in China is ‘critical’ of their government, like this: gun-banner from an anti-gun organization says something about banning guns, they vanish.


  7. It’s interesting that the author is pushing for more laws without having a discussion of the failure to use their existing laws. This sounds like someone we shouldn’t be following, even if he throws in a few truths for good measure. He looks like a snake in the grass.

    • Some in the Lame stream media were identifying the rifle used as a sniper rifle. Simply because it was a .308 caliber.

    • Oh yeah. If they ever succeed in banning “assault weapons” they are suddenly going to “realize” that what we have been saying about most hunting rifles being more powerful weapons is actually true. Then they are gonna say, “Well, we banned ARs and etc. so, now, we have to ban anything that fires a more powerful round than 5.56.”

  8. This is the standard propaganda and paranoia spread by the Gangsters in the NRA. In reality many nations do permit gun ownership but not weapons of mass destruction capable of spitting out 100 rounds in seconds. Now that is insanity. No civilized nation permits its citizens to own weapons of war. What is next with the Lunatics of the Far Right, the right to own your own atomic bomb, poison gas, or rocket launcher?????

    Most nations have tough gun laws that do indeed keep many criminals and lunatics from acquiring guns.

    Several years ago Britain’s excellent gun laws prevented a gang of terrorist luntics from acquiring weapons so they resorted to knives and they got the shit beat out of them in a local bar by the patrons who beat their brains out with chairs and broken beer bottles. In Capitalvania U.S. the terrorists would have bought weapons of mass destructions and wiped out everyone in the bar in seconds.


    The sickness and paranoia of the Far Right have made Foreign Countries wonder if the U.S. is now governed by a bunch of people who escaped from a lunatic asylum and sadly they are correct as the Republican Party has become the prostitute of the gangster criminals of the NRA.

  9. “If someday, depression gets the upper hand on me and I am a threat to myself”


    “or others”


  10. the quality of life outweighs the quantity of years.
    more time does not equal much if your stuck in a bed or trapped in a broken body.
    your moral or religious views on suicide are yours, just like gun control you do not get to force it upon others.

  11. “I know that AR-15s can kill more people at a time than other weapons,”

    Really, you *know* this? Interesting that you know something that is not true. What else that you say has no basis in reality?

    • There are several cheaper to similar priced firearm types that could easily achieve similar results with a bit of practice of basic skills with the advantage of being “normal” not scary “assault weapons”. Most are also readily available even in ban states so…………yeah the drama will not end on the ban objects crowd.

      • On a handful of occasions I have had the opportunity to show such people, who harp on the extra lethality of AR-15s, an AR and my Remington 742 (semi-auto, shiny, wood and blue steel, not scary looking, hunting rifle in 30-06) and my M1 Garand. I then ask them to tell me which one is most powerful, which one is a military rifle and which they think I shouldn’t be allowed to own. Almost everyone points at the AR. When I tell them that the AR is the *least* powerful and has never been used by the military, (I know that the AF did use some and a handful of others have been used in special settings but, not the one I have) the big wooden stocked one is an *actual* military arm and the shiny one fires the same cartridge as the M1 and is also semi-auto, I can see their brains cramp.

        • That is one area the one I have seen with some representation ranging from devastating to almost ineffective based on ammo choice was a manual action.

    • My – it is self evident to most of us that he is wrong – there is not a single gun of any type that “can kill more people at a time” – guns Do Not Fire By Themselves – it is the trigger puller that uses that gun and decides who to kill.

  12. “I know that AR-15s can kill more people at a time than other weapons,”

    Yeah, that’s not true.

    “It is also important to remember that the biggest threat from the dangerously mentally ill is not to the public, but to themselves. There are more suicides annually than murders.”

    Yeah, well that’s false but seems true in an emotional way because he mixed a little ‘true’ in there to make it seem like its all true. In his context of ‘dangerously mentally ill’ it is true there are more “suicides annually than murders” but its not because the ‘dangerously mentally ill’ choose suicide over murder – its because they are driven to kill ‘someone’ and that someone happens to be them at the time that impulse becomes so strong or is thwarted, that someone just happens to be them because they are alone at the time. We see this behavior in the mentally ill mass shooters who end up committing suicide after they realize they have been thwarted or will be during their mass shootings … they withdraw or stop and either commit suicide their selves or use the suicide-by-cop method. Its happened in the past many times when the shooter was confronted by an ordinary law abiding armed citizen or by police. We more recently saw it with the Nashville shooter who went to the upstairs room when she couldn’t find more victims quickly enough before the cops arrived so she watched them arrive and stayed there until they came in to put her down even though she had time to flee, 10 minutes almost after she shot her last victim, and had already expressed she wanted to die so she was waiting for suicide-by-cop and that in its self was a danger ‘to the public’ if the cops are also considered ‘the public’.

    The biggest threat from the dangerously mentally ill is to the public, but because of the way its carried out when the impulse becomes so strong to kill they just happen to be alone at that moment … if that impulse becomes so strong at the wrong time and others are around there is a great danger to that ‘public’ and this is what we see with mass shooters, a dangerously mentally ill person driven by an impulse to kill and attracted to the ‘soft target’ (e.g. gun free zones) so as to carry out that impulse until they can’t any more for some reason (e.g. cops arriving, an armed citizen engaging them, can’t find any more targets quickly enough before cops arrive or they think they will be thwarted, etc…)

    Its greatly hypocritical and wrong and misleading and false to say “the biggest threat from the dangerously mentally ill is not to the public” because we see it with mass shooters, we see it with common murderers, we see it with rapists, we see it with child abusers, we see it in serial killers, we see it in hate filled and terrorism driven people, we even see it in common alcoholics and drug addicts and domestic abusers, we even see it in chronic road rage’rs and in people who have no anger control, the prisons are full of these dangerously mentally ill people. Its all over the place, every day in public in just about any large city a person will encounter at least 32 of these dangerously mentally ill people who have committed an act of violence against another in the last 48 hours – it could be someone in the store while you shop, or someone in traffic in the car next to you, or someone walking down the street, but you will encounter in some way these dangerously mentally ill people and its only chance their desire to harm doesn’t kick in right then to become so strong as to drive them to violence right then.

  13. “If someday, depression gets the upper hand on me and I am a threat to myself or others, I hope someone will speak up and have the power to remove my gun.”

    They already do. ALL 50 states have laws that can do that already, empowers a person or the legal system to do it.

    Now the question is: If you know you are mentally ill, then why have you not surrendered your own gun? I mean here you are saying “I hope someone will speak up and have the power to remove my gun”, and in your missive you have expressed a warped sense of reality (see my post here > … you are already ‘dangerously mentally ill’ by not having a firm grasp on reality, so why have you not exercised the power all people have and that is call the police and have them come get your gun in a voluntary surrender or go turn it in your self?

  14. “Red Flag” laws don’t work ESPECIALLY if the one who is “stopping” some so called “dangerous” individual is simply ANGRY that other individual. There IS DUE process that needs to be INVOLVED. This RED FLAG law devolves into CONFISCATION, then to MARXIST Communism.

    • So-called “red flag laws” ARE already on their face, CONFISCATION- by an over-reaching, over-powerful government, WITHOUT DUE PROCESS. This government claims to “know better than you do” and is empowered to take away our rights to pursuit of happiness, liberty, and ultimately, LIFE itself. In the good name of “The People”, of course.

  15. This article just about covers the subject suscinctly. Once these radical anti-gun nuts start to ban certain guns by “classification” there will be no end to it.

    • Walt – yep – was waiting for another commenter to state the obvious 😉
      The reality is that the antis have been trying to infringe since at least1934.

  16. ‘Give up your guns. The Great White Father in Washington will feed you, take care of you and protect you’ — language in numerous treaties with American Indians (1820-1890). How did that work out for them?

  17. With a little practice in reloading at speed/on the move, a Winchester from the late 1800’s is just as effective under 100 yards as a killing tool as any modern semi auto rifle. As is the average pump shotgun.
    Next is the simple fact semi auto rifles are not a recent development. They’ve been on the market for around a century now.
    Then there is the idiotic claim on how civilians armed with rifles are no match for government forces. The same government and military that hasn’t won a war since 1945. The same government that lost to people in pajamas armed with rifles, and lost to goat herds armed with rifles.
    Gun control has very little to do with guns, public safety or preventing harm. And everything to do with control.

Comments are closed.