SunFlower

I am an avid gun owner and shooter. Like many people I follow gun laws in this country very closely. Every state in America has laws that ban citizens from buying guns if they have basically been deemed "mentally unfit". Despite the fact that owning a firearm is a consitutional right, legislators and the much of the public think otherwise for "safety reasons". However, owning a car and driving a car on city streets is NOT protected by the consitution but yet I have never once heard of someone being prevented from driving due to mental health issues. Last week a women drove her car into a crowd of people injuring over 30 people. She had been admitted to various mental institutions in the past. Does the media cover these instances from the standpoint of "closing mental health loopholes" in state or federal laws for purchasing a car ?
How many people are killed by those deemed "mentally unfit" with firearms vs how many people have been killed by drivers who have been deemed "mentally unfit" ? Should a person who applied for a drivers license be forced to endure a waiting period for a background check on mental health grounds ? Should a person who wants to buy a car be forced to have a background check for mental health issues ?

linux_author

- in the mindset of the sheep-like constituencies today, a gun is evil while the automobile is revered...

- perhaps this will change if and when the auto is no longer a necessary part of one's life?

(i know that the auto is not necessary for many in today's society)

I-Like-To-Bike

Speaking of mindsets, why not post this instead where similar mindsets to yours reside - the car free list?

linux_author

- it's a shame... i've generally enjoyed reading your posts... but in this case:

-1 - lack of reading comprehension

-1 - off-topic response

-1 - bad attitude

= -3 - you're out of here!

PLONK!

(when you learn to act in a civil manner you may be allowed to return)

I-Like-To-Bike

Bad attitude? Baloney! Read what you write. I wasn't aware the topic was scenarios where some people don't find the use of motor vehicles necessary or your dreams about future societies where the use of privately owned vehicles was no longer necessary.

Bekologist

what the heck is mentally unfit?

stop stigmatizing those ten percent of americans with serious mental health issues. there are far more important fish to fry in the unsafe driver pool.

stiffening penalties, making liscensing tougher to keep for all americans would be more helpful to the general public.

old people crash their cars a lot; maybe we should stop people over retirement age from driving?

teenagers too. and people that drink. and people that have pets. and people that own cellphones.

I just renewed my drivers liscense last week; first time in 10 years, no written test, just an eye test. the state figures I'm still competant in all the aspects of driving because I can see with glasses.

East Hill

I don't think that's all there is to it. I remember when I first moved to Washington that Washington required a out-on-the-road driving test for those who had had a driver's license issued in another state. That practice was discontinued in great part because the state simply could not afford to keep requiring road tests of persons who were already licensed drivers.



Does this mean you're on the road in a vehicle now?

East Hill

Bekologist

absolutely no; I'm a transportational bicyclist, East Hill. Shop on bike, commute on bike, lots of cycling vacations on bike.

my car is averaging less than 1,000 miles a year now; just ski trips and those types of things.

This week, a two day bike ride From Seattle, to Port Angeles, over to Quilcene across the Eastern edge of the Olympic Mountains and back to Seattle, the 'Quilcene Crossover'- one of the best paved road descents in the state, hidden in the midst of forest service gravel roads.

looking at my old license, it was just a five year renewal, but no skills test or even a written test, no questions about driving, just an eye test.

I can see with glasses, WA state thinks I'm qualified to drive a car!

I-Like-To-Bike

Don't be misled. The OP didn't qualify his rant to only serious mental health issues or 10% of the population. No doubt the OP is looking to ground anyone that takes any medication that might have a possible mood altering consequence. Or anyone that sometimes take medication to maintain mental/emotional stability. Or probably anyone that doesn't match his own perfect profile. Or ground anyone that doesn't qualify as needing to drive. Of course OP and his ilk would like to have the authority to make that determination of "need".

It must be nice to be a mental and physical specimen like the OP with no empathy for those less fortunate. Makes it easy to advocate only for the welfare of similar studs and amazons who have no issues at all of their own.

I-Like-To-Bike

Nothing to apologize for. There is no need for bicyclists of any stripe to swear off owning and/or driving a motor vehicle for any reason, or swear at those who use motor vehicles for "unnecessary" use. Only the ideologues believe that a choice must be made between bicycling and the dark side of motor vehicle use.

East Hill

You had me worried there... . I think that Florida will license anyone who's still breathing, never mind being able to see.

East Hill

MillCreek

As part of my job, I am very familiar with the Washington state laws on medical clearance for driving. Washington, like every other state of which I am aware, has certain medical requirements in order to grant a drivers license. If you are concerned over the ability of someone to drive due to a medical or psychological condition, the state has a means of reporting that: https://www.dol.wa.gov/driverslicense/reportunsafe.html

The two most common areas of medical restriction for driving are visual problems and a seizure disorder. Washington can consider psychiatric issues in granting both drivers licenses and a firearms carry permit, and I have seen both of them denied from psychiatric reasons. The state Department of Licensing will either ask the person's personal physician for an opinion, or in rare cases, the state will send the person off for an exam by an indepedent physician.

East Hill

Any idea how often Washington denies drivers licenses due to medical conditions? How often does the reporting form get used? It's not confidential, so one would have to be very concerned about getting a driver off the road if one were to use this.

East Hill

SunFlower

wow, are you sure you read my post ? haha, you couldnt be more wrong on your characterzation of what i think. I posed hypothetical questions in an effort to compare the rights and laws of gun owners with the rights and laws of car owners in the context of mental health issues and how it effects the public safety. I made no assertions that could lead someone to reasonably conclude what you did. You couldnt be more wrong.

CommuterRun

Don't sweat it, SunFlower, to read into someone else's post is a common thing with him.

I see where you're coming from. Should the same conditions that may preclude someone from buying a firearm, also preclude them from holding a valid Driver License?

I think it should, but how to enforce it? One way would be to require written and practical driving tests for everyone across the board, with the exception of active duty military and civilian government employees stationed out of state, every three years. How to pay for increased testing? Jack up the price of the DL. Let everyone who wants to drive or wants to continue driving pay for the priviledge.

KnhoJ

I think there are some differences here, but definitely some similarities. Bearing arms being a constitutional right may make controlling the use of firearms easier to control in some aspects; you can be specifically deprived of that right under certain conditions. Driving isn't so well defined, it's just something people do, like walking. Maybe it sounds backwards, but canonizing driving a personal automobile as a Right might make the act easier to define and control. Maybe not, who knows. Assault car legislation, anyone? (I'm JOKING!)

The US government stepped in a long time ago to mandate locks and registration for automobiles to reduce the public dangers of auto theft and joyrides. Similar to what's happening with firearms more recently. It would be nice to start paying attention to the users of cars. Cars present a danger to others, and approving someone who has demonstrated a disregard for the safety of others, or is demonstrably unable to operate a car safely, is irresponsible on the part of the approver.

One of the interesting similarities is how the opposing perspectives line up. Gun owners speak up about the benefits of owning a gun. People who don't own guns speak up about what people with guns might do to them; not just any gun owner, but maybe some deranged crackhead, or a road rager throwing a temper tantrum. Sounds just like the two sides on the car argument! The big difference is the balance between car users/non users.

I-Like-To-Bike

OK. So what is the point of your hypothetical question? We need more rights for gun owners; less for motorists; the opposite? Both? Neither? Or just passing gas?

And while you are at it, why not define the mental issues that should disqualify an individual from getting a driver's license that don't already disqualify people. Maybe even better, relate your opinion on who is going to make that mental issues determination?

KnhoJ

+1. Show more posts by I-Like-To-Bike

He used to be a harmless curmudgeon, kinda grouchy but not in an overtly offensive way. Now he's trying to pick fights! What happened?

donnamb 

I don't have much to say about the hypothetical issues, but I do have an observation about driving when taking powerful medication for psychiatric conditions. One of my dear friends has struggled with psychotic symptoms since she was a teenager. Because of how horrid antipsychotics were until just about 10 years ago, she never told anyone about them. (Obviously not severe enough to not be able to hide it.) She finally sought help upon learning about the new meds and the results have been just short of miraculous for her. Even these new drugs are not without their negative side effects, however, and they can affect one's driving skills, judgments, perceptions. They also seem to have an effect on balance and spatial awarenes in general. She does not drive much anymore, and never at night or on freeways. My friend is a responsible human being who does not wish to deliberately put anyone in danger of being harmed, and so she restricts herself.

In theory, I do believe there should be licensing restrictions for people who take medication with certain side effects, no matter what medical condition is being treated. I don't think it's going to happen. There would be so much complication involved because of medical privacy, no DMV is going to touch it and the courts would most likely strike down any such rule or piece of state legislation. The United States doesn't have a public health system that can override privacy rights in any systemic way. It doesn't matter what we think should or shouldn't be, the fact is we don't have it here.

bhtooefr

Of course, with the mandatory testing for out-of-state license holders moving to WA... why not charge more?

Actually, why not simply charge more for ALL license tests? If it costs $3000 for a license, and $5/gal for fuel, people will think twice about driving. Of course, there'll be people that die of starvation that way, but... I think less people will die that way.

trackhub

The question of requiring some sort of special testing for a driver's license, for persons with psychological problems has been brought up a few times in the Massacusetts legislature. It has never gone anywhere though, no surprises.

The OP has a very good point / observation.

tomg

sorry if this is a repeat, but this point needs to be heard!

the report of the person with a "mental illness" who crashed into a group of 30 is a high-light reporters seem to love! much more frequently, but less tabloided (true word?) are the stories of people who are driving under the influence of drugs and/or alcohol and the magnitude of victums (other car drivers, pedestrians, and bicyclists) they present.

are people with road rage mentally ill? your point opens a lot of "confounding variables"...

FlyingAnchor

Who can make the determination that a particular person can't own a gun, doctor, lawyer, indian chief?
Why would it be different for a car driver?
I personally think kids shouldn't be allowed to drive, and I teach drivers ed.

MillCreek

Actually, medical privacy rights are overridden all the time for issues that are deemed to be of overriding societal or public health significance. I can assure you that Oregon also has drivers license restrictions related to medical issues. I don't know if this pertains to Oregon carry permits, however.

The Federal privacy laws such as HIPAA and state privacy laws have a host of exemptions related to such things as reporting child abuse, reporting certain communicable diseases, reporting substance abuse issues, allowing access to law enforcement agencies and the like. A case I recently dealt with involved a nurse who expressed homicidal ideation towards her patients. This would be an example of what is commonly known as the 'Tarasoff' doctrine after the California case that established the obligation to notify in such situations.

Federal and state regulatory agencies make administrative decisions all the time predicated on medical issues. As an example, you may find it very hard to get a license to practice a certain profession, say as a physician or attorney, if you have a history of substance abuse. The FAA will pull your pilot's license if you have a history of narcolepsy.

Anyone who works in the business of healthcare (I work in the medical-legal end of it) can tell you just how many holes there are in medical privacy.

I-Like-To-Bike

Nice to know you care enuff to reread my gems, Jack.

The problem/issue:
A few ideologues with an anti-car/anti-motorist/new age agenda keep passing off their sociological, economic and political rhetoric/rants/whining as bicycling/bicyclist advocacy or cycling tips.