[ SECRET POST #2716 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #2716 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.

01.


__________________________________________________



02.


__________________________________________________



03.


__________________________________________________



04.


__________________________________________________



05.


__________________________________________________



06.


__________________________________________________



07.


__________________________________________________



08.


__________________________________________________



09.


__________________________________________________



10.


__________________________________________________



11.


__________________________________________________



12.


__________________________________________________



13.












Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 02 pages, 044 secrets from Secret Submission Post #388.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ], [ 1 - this is getting too obvious now, anon ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Comments

Re: Respectfully, No.

[(Anonymous)]

ayrt

Some states have stricter regulations than others, but there is a national background check that is required in all states. Where I live, for example, the ownership of guns is very regulated. In addition to the background check, you either must undergo an online safety training course (and provide proof by turning in a certificate that you can only get once the course has been completed) or provide proof that you have other firearms training, you must take a written test about firearms safety and my state's firearms laws, and be fingerprinted. Your registration must also be renewed every three years. Other states are a lot more lax.

Honestly, (and I say this as someone who has a mental illness and is being treated for it), I have no problems with the police having access to that information. There are perfectly valid reasons for them to want to know about something like that outside of just gun safety - for instance, if they arrest someone who is behaving in a violent and erratic manner, it would be in the best interests of that person if the police had a way of knowing that they were mentally ill rather than just a belligerent drunk or high or whatever, as something like that would completely change (or at least SHOULD change) how that person was treated. It could do a lot to help patients rather than harm them.

Re: Respectfully, No.

[(Anonymous)]

Good to know!

As someone who has been diagnosed with a mental illness and was medicated for it, I don't particularly mind the idea of the police having access to that information either. However, I personally am more on the side of restricting access to guns rather than more extensive background checks (you might have noticed, lol), since I think the problem of gun violence extends beyond mass shootings carried by people who are mentally ill. But, you know, each to his own.

But your idea - maybe in the form of a notification you could opt to have, like the ID that diabetics or epileptics have - is interesting.