Are Gun Laws Harming Mental Health Support?

on July 6, 2025

Red flag laws may silence those who need help most. Explore how gun control impacts mental health, police suicides, and Second Amendment rights.

Police Suicides on Long Island Raise Troubling Questions

In April 2025, a headline from the New York Post made waves across law enforcement and public safety circles: “Three Long Island cops committed suicide already this year”.

That’s not a typo. In just the first quarter of the year, three police officers in Nassau and Suffolk counties took their own lives. These weren’t isolated incidents—they represented more than half of all police suicides in New York State so far in 2025.

These tragedies strike at the heart of a growing national crisis. They also reveal something that gun policy debates often ignore: the chilling effect that gun laws have on mental health support.

Gun Laws and Mental Health: A Dangerous Intersection

Let’s talk about a side of gun control most politicians won’t touch.

In New York—and other states with aggressive gun laws—officers, veterans, and civilians are often afraid to seek mental health care. Why? Because doing so can trigger Extreme Risk Protection Orders (ERPOs) or even result in permanent loss of firearm rights.

For a civilian, that might mean losing the right to defend yourself. For a cop or soldier, it could mean losing your job, your badge, or your identity.

This isn’t theoretical. A 2025 state mental health assessment revealed that:

94% of New York first responders experience serious stress or burnout.
59% reported symptoms of depression, and 38% showed signs of PTSD.
Yet 56% said they avoid mental health services—mainly out of fear it will harm their careers.

That’s the real impact of red flag laws and mental health stigma: silence, suffering, and ultimately, suicide.

What Are Extreme Risk Protection Orders?

Extreme Risk Protection Orders—often called “red flag laws”—allow courts to temporarily remove firearms from individuals deemed a risk to themselves or others.

In theory, they sound reasonable. In practice, they often cast a much wider net.

In New York State, red flag laws allow police officers, family members, school administrators, or even coworkers to petition a judge to have someone’s guns taken away.

But here’s the problem: “risk” isn’t clearly defined, and in many cases, the evidence threshold is low. People can lose their Second Amendment rights based on a therapy session, a concerned comment, or a disagreement with a spouse or boss.

That’s especially problematic for:

Police officers, who are subject to internal review.
Veterans, who may be flagged by VA clinicians.
Licensed gun owners, who are expected to stay off the radar at all costs.

These are the very people we want to support in getting help—but instead, they’re punished for it.

Gun Control Laws That Penalize Mental Health

While gun control advocates often argue that these policies are about safety, the reality is more complicated.

Gun laws and mental health policies are increasingly entangled in ways that create unintended harm:

In many states, seeking mental health treatment—voluntarily—can be flagged in firearms licensing databases.
Some jurisdictions automatically notify licensing authorities when someone is placed under psychiatric care, regardless of the reason.
Officers diagnosed with PTSD or depression risk being placed on modified duty, stripped of service weapons, or forced into early retirement.

So what happens?

People stop talking.

They bottle it up.

They suffer in silence—until it’s too late.

When Red Flag Laws Discourage Help-Seeking

Let’s be honest: red flag laws, for all their good intentions, may be creating exactly the opposite of what we need.

Instead of encouraging mental wellness, they incentivize secrecy.

Instead of destigmatizing therapy, they make it look like a fast track to losing everything—your guns, your freedom, your job.

According to RAND Corporation, the data on ERPO effectiveness is mixed at best. Some states show small reductions in suicide, while others show no significant impact.

Meanwhile, a Giffords study suggests that around 1 suicide is prevented for every 10–20 ERPOs issued.

But here’s the catch: those numbers don’t count the people who never sought help—the ones who might have reached out but were too afraid.

That’s the data we’re not collecting.

Mental Health Support vs. Firearm Rights: A False Choice?

Here’s the question at the heart of it all:

Why should seeking therapy mean giving up your rights?

This isn’t a zero-sum game. We can believe in responsible gun ownership and advocate for mental health support. But current laws force people to choose between the two.

For law enforcement especially, this creates a devastating paradox: protect the public, but don’t protect yourself.

This culture of silence is one of the biggest factors behind the rising suicide rates among first responders, veterans, and gun owners.

We don’t need more fear. We need freedom, community, and compassion.

The Suicide Crisis Among Police, Veterans, and Gun Owners

If we really want to talk about gun violence and mental health, let’s talk about the leading cause of gun deaths in America:

🔫 Suicide accounts for over 60% of all firearm-related deaths in the U.S.
📊 In 2023 alone, over 27,300 Americans died by suicide using a gun—the highest number in 40 years (Giffords Law Center).

And while that statistic is staggering on its own, the tragedy runs even deeper for law enforcement, veterans, and lawful gun owners.

🚔 Police Suicide Statistics: A Silent Epidemic

Law enforcement officers face unique pressures: the constant exposure to trauma, the inability to “clock out” mentally, the pressure to appear unshakable. It’s no surprise that the suicide rate among police officers is nearly 60% higher than the general population.

The Ruderman Family Foundation reports that police officers are more likely to die by suicide than in the line of duty.
According to Blue H.E.L.P., over 100 officers die by suicide each year—a number that far exceeds firearm-related deaths in the line of duty.

And in 2025, New York’s own data reinforced this trend:

A statewide survey of first responders revealed:
- 16% had seriously considered suicide.
- A staggering 80% cited stigma and career harm as major barriers to care.

These aren’t just statistics. These are fathers, mothers, veterans, sons and daughters—people who felt trapped between duty and survival.

Firearms and Suicide Risk: What the Data Actually Says

The link between firearms access and suicide is undeniable—but so is the need for honest interpretation.

🔍 The Facts:

Firearms are the most lethal suicide method: Over 85% of firearm suicide attempts are fatal, compared to just 3% for drugs or cutting (Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health).
Veterans are at much higher risk: In 2019, nearly 70% of veteran suicides involved a firearm (U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs).

But here’s where policy often overreaches.

While it’s true that restricting access can prevent impulsive suicide attempts, blanket firearm removals or punitive ERPOs can backfire:

They create mistrust in mental health systems.
They discourage voluntary intervention.
And they often don’t include any treatment or follow-up care—just removal and silence.

In fact, a RAND analysis found limited or uncertain evidence that red flag laws reduce overall suicide rates, largely due to gaps in mental health integration and inconsistent application.

Red Flag Laws: Effective Safety Tool or Easy Political Fix?

Extreme Risk Protection Orders are often touted as a balanced compromise between safety and rights. But let’s be honest:

In many states, red flag laws have become the government’s go-to shortcut to “look like” they’re addressing mental health—without actually doing the hard work.

⚖️ Key problems with current red flag laws:

Lack of mental health infrastructure: Most ERPOs don’t mandate or even recommend mental health care.
Low due process standards: Guns can be removed based on subjective interpretation, sometimes without notifying the subject until after the order is signed.
Broad third-party eligibility: In NY, teachers, coworkers, and even school administrators can file petitions—often with no psychological qualifications.

According to a 2024 report from the New York Senate, ERPO filings in the state surged to 14,000 cases in less than a year—12× the annual average before the Buffalo shooting.

But who’s checking if those 14,000 people were offered help?
Who’s following up to make sure they’re safe, not just disarmed?

We don’t know. Because the system isn’t built for care.
It’s built for optics.

Gun Control and the Criminalization of Vulnerability

Let’s call this what it is: we’re punishing people for being vulnerable.

If a police officer quietly sees a therapist for trauma, and someone reports it? That officer might lose their weapon and be taken off the street.

If a law-abiding gun owner admits in a custody battle that they’re feeling overwhelmed? Their guns may be seized via ERPO—even if there’s no actual threat.

When did mental health become a disqualifier for constitutional rights?

We’re not protecting people—we’re pushing them deeper into isolation.

A Smarter Path: Freedom, Community, and Compassion

What if we stopped trying to legislate away human emotion and started investing in real solutions?

What if we:

Built confidential peer-support networks for officers, veterans, and gun owners.
Removed punitive triggers from mental health care, so seeking help didn’t equal losing rights.
Reframed therapy and trauma care as a sign of strength, not weakness.
Focused on actual suicide prevention, not just public relations.

As Americans, we pride ourselves on resilience, freedom, and standing by our neighbors.
But freedom isn’t just the right to own a firearm—it’s the right to heal without fear.

There Has to Be a Better Way: Alternatives to Red Flag Laws

So far, we’ve explored how red flag laws, ERPOs, and punitive mental health policies can actually increase risk by silencing the very people who need help. Now let’s flip the script.

What would a smarter, more compassionate, and freedom-centered policy look like?

It starts by shifting from punishment to partnership—from control to community.

1. Confidential Peer-Support Programs

One of the most promising alternatives to traditional red flag interventions is building peer-based mental health support networks, especially for law enforcement and veterans.

Instead of reporting someone to be disarmed, what if you could refer them to a confidential peer counselor trained in trauma, suicide prevention, and firearm safety?

This is already happening in some places:

The Lt. Joseph Banish Mental Health Act, pending in New York, aims to create a voluntary, confidential network of peer officers to help struggling law enforcement get help without risking their careers (source).
Organizations like Blue H.E.L.P. support officers after suicide attempts and connect departments with survivor resources.
Veterans Crisis Line programs have increased their use of anonymous check-ins, allowing veterans to speak freely without triggering VA flags.

These are the kinds of models we should be funding—not ERPO databases, but people-first outreach programs.

2. Mental Health Without the Gun Grab

A critical policy change that would save lives without undermining trust: Decouple mental health treatment from automatic firearm disqualification.

Right now, many states—including New York—have policies where even voluntary mental health treatment can lead to a review of a person’s gun license or disarmament under ERPO guidelines.

That’s backward.

If we want people to get help, we need to treat mental health like any other medical condition. Imagine if someone with high blood pressure had their driver’s license revoked. Or if a soldier with back pain was forced into retirement.

Mental health isn’t a character flaw. It’s not a crime. It shouldn’t be a disqualifier for rights.

We need to build laws that say:
“Thank you for getting help—we’re here for you”,
not “Thanks for coming forward—now hand over your property.”

3. Real Suicide Prevention, Not Optics

Let’s be blunt: most red flag laws are more about public relations than prevention.

What works better?

Access to care: States with higher mental health funding per capita see lower suicide rates (NIMH Data).
Means safety education: Teaching people how to store guns safely, use voluntary holds, and spot warning signs is more effective long-term than mandatory confiscation.
Veteran and law enforcement community reintegration: Programs that focus on connection, purpose, and dignity have shown promising results in lowering suicidal ideation.

Want to save lives? Invest in mental health clinics, safe gun storage education, and first responder resiliency training.

Not just databases and court orders.

Case Studies: States Getting It Right (Or Trying)

Let’s look at how different states are approaching the issue:

🔵 Connecticut & Indiana: The ERPO Pioneers

Connecticut has one of the oldest red flag laws (since 1999). Research from Duke University found that for every 10–20 gun removals, 1 suicide was prevented (source).
But critics argue the program lacked follow-up care, and most individuals received no mental health treatment after firearm removal.

🔴 Utah: Firearm Rights with Crisis Response

Utah passed legislation creating Gun Violence Protective Orders, but paired it with mandatory outreach and mental health referral services, not just confiscation.
The state also promotes voluntary do-not-sell lists, where gun owners can temporarily restrict their own purchases if they’re struggling—without court involvement and their Safe Haven law allow temporary storage by police without fear.

🟢 Texas: Police Wellness Reforms

After several high-profile officer suicides, Texas funded department-level resiliency units focused on PTSD, peer support, and non-punitive wellness checks.
Result? Department suicide rates declined in pilot areas within two years.

Freedom and Responsibility Can Coexist

The common thread across these successful efforts isn’t just policy. It’s philosophy.

These states recognize that:

Gun ownership and mental health are not mutually exclusive.
Trust is more effective than fear.
And most importantly, rights don’t need to be sacrificed in the name of safety.

That’s the kind of Second Amendment conversation we should be having.
Not how many people we can disarm—but how many people we can save.

Freedom Is Suicide Prevention

There’s a saying in the firearms community: “An armed society is a polite society.” But maybe it’s time we add something to that:

An empowered society is a healthier society.

When people feel supported—not watched—they’re more likely to speak up.

When officers, veterans, and lawful gun owners feel safe seeking help, they do.
And when help isn’t a trapdoor to losing your rights, careers, or self-worth, it actually helps.

That’s not just common sense—it’s suicide prevention.

What the Founding Fathers Understood

Let’s take a moment to zoom out.

The Second Amendment was written not just as a safeguard against tyranny, but as a guarantee of personal sovereignty.

“The right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”

Not unless you see a therapist.

Not unless a coworker thinks you’re unstable.

Not unless the state decides you’re too emotional to trust with your rights.

The Founders weren’t blind to violence or human frailty. But they believed in a system that gave people responsibility and the tools to protect their own lives—and their liberty.

Modern red flag laws flip that principle on its head.

They assume guilt before action.

They treat sadness as suspicion.

They codify fear of vulnerability into law.

That’s not progress. That’s cowardice wrapped in bureaucracy.

Building a Culture of Support, Not Suspicion

What we need isn’t more control. It’s more connection.

A nation that values:

Support over surveillance
Conversation over coercion
Empowerment over disarmament

This isn’t about being anti-government or anti-law enforcement. It’s about building systems that keep the good guys alive—and whole.

Because here’s what’s really at stake:

That officer on Long Island who didn’t speak up before he took his life.
That veteran in upstate New York who avoided therapy because he didn’t want to lose his permit.
That single mom in Brooklyn who thought counseling might mean CPS would get involved—and her guns taken.

These people aren’t edge cases. They’re everywhere.
And the systems we’ve built are letting them down.

A Call to Action: Let’s Do Better

This is bigger than gun control. It’s about how we treat each other.

So let’s call on lawmakers, mental health advocates, and gun owners alike:

Reform red flag laws to require real due process, mental health referral, and temporary, appealable measures.
Protect confidentiality for those seeking voluntary counseling—especially first responders and veterans.
Educate the public that mental health treatment is strength, not a reason for suspicion.
Build peer-support models that operate independently of courts or licensing agencies.
Stop using gun ownership as leverage to force compliance with vague or broad “mental health” definitions.

Final Thought: Liberty Is a Lifeline

If we truly care about saving lives, we need to stop using fear as a policy tool.

We need to stop trading rights for optics.

And we need to start trusting Americans again—especially the ones who serve, sacrifice, and carry responsibly.

Because when we support liberty, we support life.
When we protect rights, we protect people.
And when we foster freedom—not fear—we create a culture that saves lives before the crisis ever begins.

NY Safe

See Full Bio

Categories:

Tags:

No Tag