The Gun debate sandbox


Discussion Topic

Return to Forum List
Post a Reply
Messages 2981 - 3000 of total 5785 in this topic << First  |  < Previous  |  Show All  |  Next >  |  Last >>
Bruce Kay

Gym climber
Feb 7, 2013 - 07:27am PT

NRA Pushes Bill To Outlaw Anti-Smoking Programs
—By Josh Harkinson| Thu Feb. 7, 2013 3:16 AM PST

The National Rifle Association is worried that Kansas might try to discourage gun ownership. So it is throwing its weight behind a bill that would prevent the state from spending money lobbying against "any legal consumer product"—a category that includes, among other things, tobacco and junk food.

Although State Bill 45, debated yesterday by a state Senate committee, focuses on lobbying efforts at the state and local level, a broad interpretation of the language could prevent Kansas from spending anything on programs that discourage the use of harmful products. The bill could "scuttle public health campaigns and other proven public health programs," the Topeka Capital-Journal reported yesterday, citing testimony from a Democratic senator and a representative from the American Cancer Society.

The NRA appears to favor this broad interpretation. "Other states allow taxpayer funds to finance expensive advertisement campaigns that demonize perfectly legal products—from everyday consumer products to firearms and ammunition," reads the gun group's website. "SB 45 would prohibit this practice in Kansas and make sure that public money is not used to put law-abiding gun owners in the crosshairs of an agency with a political agenda."

State money could still be used to discourage underage drinking and smoking because those activities are illegal, an NRA spokesman told state senators yesterday. He added that the group's "major concern" was the Kansas Department of Health and Environment, which has "put forth pamphlets and booklets providing for one-size-fits-all gun control measures."

The NRA's approach to science, politics, and public health has often drawn comparisons with the tobacco industry. In Kansas, at least, it's a relationship that the gun lobby now appears to embrace.


Trad climber
Is that light the end of the tunnel or a train?
Feb 7, 2013 - 08:13am PT
Smoke em if ya got em.
frank wyman

Mountain climber
Feb 7, 2013 - 09:22am PT
The first amendment applies to Emails, blogs, online news. The fourth amendment applies to your cell phone, computer, and your car. But the Second amendment only applies to muskets??...What the F..K??

Gym climber
South of Heaven
Feb 7, 2013 - 09:28am PT
uh oh, constitutional scholar alert!
frank wyman

Mountain climber
Feb 7, 2013 - 11:35am PT
uh oh, cuckold alert!
Toker Villain

Big Wall climber
Toquerville, Utah
Feb 7, 2013 - 02:04pm PT
Well, the founding fathers could easily imagine computers and cell phones but semi-auto rifles?

No way.

Gym climber
South of Heaven
Feb 7, 2013 - 02:29pm PT
Love that constitution, well, at least 3/5th of it.

How many people have died in recent mass speechings?


Social climber
Feb 7, 2013 - 02:31pm PT
Or mass searchings? Or mass quarterings of soldiers with out compensation?

Social climber
Feb 7, 2013 - 02:36pm PT
“Smoke em if ya got em.”

Smoking rates higher among the mentally ill

The government's identified one of the tobacco industry's key demographics -- and cigarette makers would be wise to nod, say "that's nice" and walk away.

According to a report issued Tuesday by both the Centers of Disease Control and the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, people with mental illness are 70% more likely to smoke than those without. The report shows that 36% of adults with mental illness smoke, compared to just 21% of people without mental illness.

There are about 46 million adults with mental illness in the United States. According to the report, those same adults are less likely to quit smoking once they've started and consume nearly a third of the cigarettes sold in the U.S.

While 34% of women with mental illness smoke, the problem is a bit more acute for the 40% of men with mental illness who do the same. The report links poverty to increased smoking among all demographics, but it's a far greater issue for those with mental illness. While 33% of those without mental illness living below the poverty line smoke, that percentage jumps to 48% once mental illness is a factor.

So what's the key difference? Though the report didn't include patients in psychiatric hospitals, it noted that smoking is far more normalized at mental health facilities than in other establishments. Patients there are also more likely to know people who smoke and to receive cigarettes as a reward for good behavior. Once people with mental illness start smoking, they find that it takes the edge off their medication's negative side effects and they continue to use cigarettes to keep symptoms under control.

Unfortunately, the doctors behind the report found that mental illness also makes smokers a lot less capable of handling withdrawal symptoms and reduces their desire to quit. This contributes to corresponding rates of mental illness and overall smoking in certain states. Utah, for example, had the lowest rate of smoking among people with mental illness at 18.1%. Meanwhile, West Virginia had the highest rate at 48.7%.


I am puffing on a Partagas Black-Label Madura cigar; nice one hour draw. So how is the government going to tell if I am one of the above? Study does not say anything about cigars.

I can also recall well before we had small Bluetooth devices plugged into the ear for our cell phones we thought for sure when we walked down the streets people talking to themselves were ill. Now it is the norm.

And as for the mentally ill how about all those Christian’s that hear voices from god especially Pat Robertson when is that study going to be out?


Social climber
Feb 7, 2013 - 02:51pm PT
Report from NIMI [National Institute of Mental Health] web site

Expert Panel Addresses High Rates of Smoking in People with Psychiatric Disorders

Recommendations Urge Exploration of Causal Links, Treatment Research

Numerous biological, psychological, and social factors are likely to play a role in the high rates of smoking in people with psychiatric disorders, according to the report of an expert panel convened by the National Institute of Mental Health. The report reviews current literature and identifies research needed to clarify these factors and their interactions, and to improve treatment aimed at reducing the rates of illness and mortality from smoking in this population.

An analysis of data from the National Comorbidity Study (NCS), a nationally representative survey of psychiatric disorders in the United States, found that 41 percent of people with a psychiatric disorder smoke, about twice the rate (22.5 percent) seen in those without psychiatric diagnoses. People with psychiatric disorders consume 44.3 percent of all cigarettes smoked in this country. The high rate of smoking is an important factor in increased rates of physical illness and mortality in this group.

Despite the high smoking rates, studies of outpatient and hospital care of psychiatric patients reported that less than a quarter of outpatients with psychiatric diagnoses received counseling from their physicians aimed at smoking cessation, and in hospitals, only 1 percent of psychiatric inpatient smokers were assessed for smoking; none of the treatment plans for these patients addressed tobacco use.

The panel report suggests that the reasons for these low rates of assessment and treatment may include health professionals' acceptance of smoking by psychiatric patients as a matter of individual rights and as a means of self-medication aimed at relieving symptoms. The report goes on to note, however, that research on smoking in this population needs to explore other potential explanations for tobacco use besides self-medication.

In its review of current findings on co-occurring mental health disorders and smoking, the panel identified some provocative areas for continued research including the following:

Alterations in the hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal (HPA) axis, a system in the body involved in the response to stress, have been reported in post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). The HPA axis is also involved in the development of nicotine tolerance. The interplay of the HPA axis with stress and nicotine may help explain the increased smoking in those with PTSD and other anxiety disorders.

Research suggests that the relationship between depression and smoking may be bidirectional: depression increases the risk of smoking, and chronic smoking increases a person's susceptibility to depression. The same genes may contribute to both. Decreased activity of dopamine, for example—a neurotransmitter that is central to the brain's reward system—is thought to be associated with depression; studies cited by the panel suggest that variants of genes that affect the level of dopamine function can influence the likelihood that someone with depression will smoke.

As many as 70 to 85 percent of people with schizophrenia use tobacco. According to the panel, psychosocial factors are important in understanding the high rates of smoking people with schizophrenia. Limited education, poverty, unemployment, and peer influence increase smoking risk; the mental health treatment system, in which smoking is not only acceptable but sometimes condoned, is also a contributor.

Nicotine has effects on some cognitive processes in people with schizophrenia and research has found that variants in the genes for nicotine receptors have been linked to deficits in these processes. The relationships between genes, environment, and smoking in this population are not fully understood.

The panel concluded by identifying issues that will be important for future research across these disorders:

Better precision is needed in defining the specific psychiatric disorders of interest in a given study. "Depression," for example, is used in reference to a number of different conditions. Similarly, clearer definitions of smoking behavior and patterns and progression of use are needed.

Longitudinal studies can provide more complete information on the relative risk, incidence, and course of smoking and various mental disorders.
More focus is needed on exploring the potential causal links between tobacco use and psychiatric disorders, including possible genetic, neurobiological, psychological, or social factors. The extent to which smoking is used as a form of self-regulation needs to be explored.

More information is needed on how smoking and other health related factors such as stress, obesity, and limited physical activity contribute to the illness and mortality seen in people with mental disorders.

The report had a number of recommendations related to smoking cessation in this population. The report noted the need for adequate sample sizes in cessation trials; greater emphasis on adapting cessation treatment to various psychiatric populations and in different treatment settings; and research on how tobacco control polices affect psychiatric populations.
The report concludes by noting that research on smoking in this population can provide insights into the mechanisms that contribute to both tobacco dependence and psychiatric disorders.

William T. Riley, Ph.D., deputy director of NIMH's Division of AIDS and Health and Behavior Research, was a member of the group preparing this review, which included experts from university medical centers across the country.


Ziedonis, D., et al. Tobacco Use and Cessation in Psychiatric Disorders: National Institute of Mental Health Report. Nicotine & Tobacco Research, 2008;10:1-25.


Trad climber
Cheyenne, Wyoming and Marshall Islands atoll.
Feb 8, 2013 - 05:37am PT
The battle for gun control rages on. Nowhere is this more heated than in the state of New York right now. The back-room deals and meetings continue in Albany with little to no input from the law-abiding firearms owners, businesses, and manufacturers that proudly call New York home. Instead of focusing on the criminal misuse of firearms, Governor Cuomo is exploiting tragedies to strip our Second Amendment Rights. Both sides say the deal is imminent and could come as quickly as Monday.
And this is something that can easily carry over to the national level. A few days ago, Vice President Biden openly stated that the President is considering using an executive order to push his agenda without involving our elected officials. In short, the President is considering ignoring the voice of the people in order to force his "plan” on us.
These "policy makers" do not have a clue about firearms, and they are ignorant about shooting and violent crime facts. Combined with a complete lack of common sense, they are a danger to our nation's future. Put the "gun-free" areas of the US on a map, and you'll see violent crime is highest in these "safe zones". Let's not blame firearms, or specifically "assault rifles" or high-capacity magazines for criminals actions. We know criminals (by definition!) will not follow these laws. It’s a GUN GRAB! And the President is playing KING. Thinking he knows best for his kingdom. His former kingdom Chicago has the highest gun crime in the nation with the toughest laws. But he ignores these facts. They should be focused on the nut boxes and criminals and the gangs that poison our inter cities if anything, and leave the rest of us alone.

Ed Hartouni

Trad climber
Livermore, CA
Feb 8, 2013 - 08:55am PT
These "policy makers" do not have a clue about firearms, and they are ignorant about shooting and violent crime facts.

actually have to disagree here... as was pointed out up-thread, research into the "shooting" aspect of violent crimes was disallowed by legislation lobbied for by the NRA and the gun lobby. What a "fact" is, at this point, apparently has little to do with any empirical study, at least not any with rigor.

To disallow funding research in this area has created a discussion pretty much void of any supportable evidence as to the consequence of gun ownership. The quoted studies are old, and many are of questionable value, many state the limitations of those particular studies, and followup studies weren't done.

On top of that, the data required for those studies has also been withdrawn or its collection has been inhibited, also by legislation.

It is difficult to avoid the cynical conclusion that state of affairs in research wasn't exactly what the NRA and the gun lobby desired in pushing such an agenda. By avoiding the inconvenience of having to respond to research results, the debate is moved to an almost purely emotional level pitting one group's "common sense" against another's.

Often in these types of emotional arguments the loudest and most invested side has an enormous advantage, and we see that played out here.

I have no idea what the research results would find, but I am sure it would cut through a lot of the rather overwrought discussions on this topic and probably lead to some practical solutions.

As it stands now, the apparent solution by the gun advocates, in this lacuna of knowledge, is that we must allow access to all types of guns, and prepare to use those guns in any situation where we sense ourselves in jeopardy. The predictable calamity of the consequences of such a society, and the tragedy engendered by its unfettered gun use, is just the price that society pays for liberty, so lectures the gun advocates.

How does constitutional fetishism arise? it seems to be a somewhat modern creation.
Ron Anderson

Trad climber
Soon to be Nipple suckling Liberal
Feb 8, 2013 - 09:06am PT
Modern Ed??? Hardly- its the same as it ever was..
Dr. F.

Big Wall climber
Feb 8, 2013 - 09:07am PT

means that guns and gun owners are regulated, trained and governed by the Federal Government
Dave Kos

Social climber
Feb 8, 2013 - 09:25am PT
I believe that the well regulated militia referenced in the Constitution does not require training and/or control by the federal government. In fact, it most-likely refers to military units that are not under control of the federal government.

At the time the 2nd Amendment was written, militias were controlled by the states and even local authorities. One of George Washington's biggest challenges during the Revolutionary war was to convince the many state militias to work under his unified command. After the war, his concerns about the inability to raise funds for a federal army were one of the driving forces behind the creation of the Constitution.

It was not until the early 20th Century that our military forces were fully integrated under a central federal command, and even today state governors have some degree of autonomous control over their National Guard units, which have their roots in the traditional militias.

IMO, the proper way to be true to the intent of the 2nd Amendment would be to allow states and cities to form military units that would constitute militias. These would be separate from the federal government, funded by state and local money, and not under the command of the POTUS (although they could choose to work with the federal military in a time of national emergency.) This is the way things were when the 2nd Amendment was written, and it accomplishes the goals of providing a balance of military power between states and the federal government without having the gun proliferation free-for-all that we have today. Of course these militias must be well regulated - they must have standards of conduct, a well-defined chain of command, and a means of accountability for their weapons (i.e. if the militia's machine-gun, is used in a mass killing spree the unit commander is accountable.)

I doubt many states and cities would actually fund these militias today, because they really serve little purpose in the 21st century (ok, maybe Texas would), but they should be allowed because they represent the right that the 2nd Amendment ensures.

I think the recent Supreme Court decisions supporting the idea that a well regulated militia is defined by a general population of individuals that can have any gun they please was not in the intent of the 2nd Amendment, and I'd like to see these interpretations overturned in the future.

If George Washington saw what the Supreme Court called a militia today, I'm pretty sure his reaction would be a hearty "WTF?!?"

Ed Hartouni

Trad climber
Livermore, CA
Feb 8, 2013 - 01:25pm PT
yea, it is pretty much recent... constitutional fetishism is the concept that those specific words have some power and value that is greater than they have. To see the constitution as a document like "The Bible" invites a certain level of fundamentalism in the discussion that is probably foreign to the intent of those who wrote it, thinking it would be changeable to a larger degree than has turned out. In some of their thinking, re-writing the constitution every 10 years was sort of expected... as things came up that were unanticipated... instead, we have this 200+ year old document which we torture to find meaning in where there was none... it is a very brief and non-prescriptive document... constituting the US Gov... we take it to have some greater meaning than it was ever intended to possess.

As for the 2nd amendment, I think the Supremes (this is throughout the rather slim number of cases) have ruled that the "right to bare arms" precedes the Constitution, it is not a right given by the amendment, but rather the amendment is a prohibition on the Federal govt's ability to curtail that right by legislation.

Ron Anderson

Trad climber
Soon to be Nipple suckling Liberal
Feb 8, 2013 - 09:37pm PT
call it what you will,, the design and intent was always the same. They warned us of the flushing the system would need, and we ignored that at the critical time, and corruption has since ruled and flourished. We were all too caught up in enjoying the good times to think such squeezes would ever take place, but here we are. A whole banter of gun prohibitions that in reality change the over all time of a sandy hook- or aurora shooting by about 1.58 seconds per 10 round mag change. LITERALLY- and thats gonna solve all our problems ROFLMAO! It is estimated there are over six hundred million 30 round clips already in circulation. But these laws,, these brilliant new bold - we -are- gonna- save- society moves do zippo and nada about any of that. We shouldnt be for any of this, nor should we accept our govt wasting valuable tax payer monies on it. Its one big farce, and just another reason for the total gun control nuts to get up and squawk. Which they were the day after the Conn shooting.

Ed Hartouni

Trad climber
Livermore, CA
Feb 8, 2013 - 11:41pm PT
like I said above, in the vacuum of any real research, comments like Ron's above seem even plausible.

Feb 8, 2013 - 11:59pm PT
"like I said above, in the vacuum of any real research, comments like Ron's above seem even plausible. "

Lack of research aside, we do know that outlawing firearms has virtually eliminated gun deaths in the countries where it's been applied. The gun nut culture was, unfortunately, allowed to spread much further in the US than in other nations, but that doesn't mean it's impossible to eliminate - it'll just involve more societal upheaval than it should have, but it'll happen eventually.

It's a social issue, and liberals always win on social issues, over time.

Trad climber
Is that light the end of the tunnel or a train?
Feb 9, 2013 - 04:45am PT
They warned us of the flushing the system would need, and we ignored that at the critical time
So if you are so concerned with "flushing" the system, why do you repub keep voting for turds?
Messages 2981 - 3000 of total 5785 in this topic << First  |  < Previous  |  Show All  |  Next >  |  Last >>
Return to Forum List
Post a Reply
Our Guidebooks
Check 'em out!
SuperTopo Guidebooks

Try a free sample topo!

SuperTopo on the Web

Review Categories
Recent Route Beta
Recent Gear Reviews