CNN published an interesting article on Virginia's reporting guidelines to the National Instant Criminal Background Check System for mental illness: http://www.cnn.com/2007/US/04/25/guns.mentallyill/index.html
One of the tenants of liberalism is that all things are debatable. There are always shades of grey that help to complicate issues, creating innumerable arguments and counter-arguments. I want to indulge in an exploration of one of these complicated issues relating to gun rights.
An interesting issue that I've been grappling with over the past several weeks and months is the relationship of the right to self-defense (I'm going to write based on the assumption that we have the right to self defense, regardless of what the UN says) and mental illness. Mental illness is one instance (is it the only instance?) where we can block a person from buying a firearm through federally licensed firearms dealers in the United States prior to the person perpetrating harm.
According to the World Health Organization, mental illness attacks men and women equally, but women are more likely to seek treatment than men, and are therefore more likely to be added to the national database blocking them from purchasing a firearm.
World Health Organization copywriters state:
"Depression, anxiety, somatic symptoms and high rates of comorbidity are significantly related to interconnected and co occurrent risk factors such as gender based roles, stressors and negative life experiences and events.
"Gender specific risk factors for common mental disorders that disproportionately affect women include gender based violence, socioeconomic disadvantage, low income and income inequality, low or subordinate social status and rank and unremitting responsibility for the care of others.
"The high prevalence of sexual violence to which women are exposed and the correspondingly high rate of Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) following such violence, renders women the largest single group of people affected by this disorder."
http://www.who.int/mental_health/prevention/genderwomen/en/
In essence, women are more likely to be abused physically, resulting in PTSD, depression and other mental disorders. When these women seek treatment by mental health professionals for their reaction to harm from abuse they may be blocked from purchasing firearms that could be used to defend themselves against future attacks, resulting in further abuse.
I must preface this by saying I am not a lawyer, and the following analysis is from my basic understanding of the laws in my state and should not be taken as legal advice. In my understanding, our laws allow for the use of deadly force against greater force or deadly force- this could be a man defending himself with a gun against an assailant with a pipe, a knife, a gun or another type of deadly weapon, a man defending himself against an attack by a group of people who can easily overpower him, or a woman defending herself against a male attacker (here we assume that men have greater strength than women).
If acts of violence often result in psychological trauma that can cause a person to lose their right to bear arms, are our laws creating a sub-class of disarmed victims ready for revictimization? Isn’t empowerment a means to healing? Maybe a liberal response to victimization could include training in self-defense and responsible use of force as a means to head off disempowerment related mental illness.