It’s difficult to access mental health care but not guns

facebooktwittergoogle_pluslinkedinmailfacebooktwittergoogle_pluslinkedinmail

It seems the values of the loudest and/or the values of who has the most money is what gets legislated in Congress.
Such as, Congress allowing the ban on assault weapons to expire in 2004, due in part from the loud voices of gun advocates and the money loaded National Rifle Association. Mental health funding is not a priority in our culture or in Congress.

The fact that Jared Loughner, a mentally ill person, did not, would not, or could not receive help with his mental illness but could buy an assault weapon–that fires 30 rounds without reloading and kills innocent people–is the price society pays, and will continue to pay, for what we as a country choose to value, prioritize, and fund.
It is evident a national health care program, especially mental health care, is not important to the loudest and most extreme voices which are amplified by the media in the US today.

If words have meaning, I would like to hear a national discussion on “Health Care for All” not “Guns for All.”

As long as we continue to value the right to buy as many assault weapons as an individual wants, that will shot 30, 60, 100 rounds without reloading; and not value the funding of mental health programs, we will continue to pay the price of random killings of innocents in our schools, streets, and political meetings.

I personally do not feel safer if everyone carries an assault weapon to school, church, or to a political meeting. I’m not ready to go back to the days of the wild, wild west with Annie Oakley and Jessie James.

I prefer Congress fund a national health care program which includes mental health care which expresses our humanitarian values as a country and as a people.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


9 + eight =