Severity: Warning
Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests
Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line Number: 176
Backtrace:
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3122
Function: getPubMedXML
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword
File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once
In the preceding article, we reviewed the current state of federal and state regulation of restoration of firearms rights, termed "relief from disability (RFD)," for those who have had those rights suspended due to mental health prohibitors. This review demonstrated that these laws vary widely and at times create situations in which firearms rights may be effectively banned indefinitely. In this article, we review due process and psychiatric evidentiary requirements in RFD hearings. The legal procedures and evidentiary standards in RFD judicial or administrative hearings also vary widely and typically do not include a current psychiatric violence or suicide risk assessment. The psychiatric and policy implications of RFD practices are also discussed in regard to mental health firearm prohibitors, restoration of gun rights, and implications for future policy regarding firearms regulations affecting those with serious mental illness.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://dx.doi.org/10.29158/JAAPL.003768-18 | DOI Listing |
Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!