Big pharma would suddenly become instant nra clones wouldn't they if people weren't allowed to own guns while taking their extremely dangerous drugs. People would dump their drugs to keep their rights, and big pharma's stock would drop as a result.
Obviously the entire 4473 is unconstitutional, because the feds have zero authority to regulate possession of ANYTHING by citizens, under the constitution, but how about a state ban on gun possession for anyone on any psychotropic drug (these doctors generally play god with people and "adjust" their meds for months, mixing and matching, and making a "cocktail," not knowing how the drugs will interact with the particular person, putting them and their families through HELL on earth)? To say these drugs are dangerous is an understatement and every mass killer has been on them or recently stopped. It's already illegal to possess a gun while drunk (in all states?), and this would merely be part of that.
Yes I know, many people stabilize on these drugs, but GETTING to that point is worse than a drunk with an AR15, and takes months or years of hell. I have an older relative who took years of hell to get the right combination of these dangerous drugs, and put us all through hell in the process. PLUS, all it takes is someone to stop taking these awful SSRI drugs and all hell breaks loose (we watched a female friend go absolutely nutso after stopping her meds). OR, their "doctor" monkeys with their meds and the combinations, as if you're a lab rat. The "doctor" doesn't have to live with the subject so he/she doesn't care.
This isn't gun control it's an extension of "no guns while drunk." Sheesh I've known a few people on these drugs and I'd rather have ten guys with a 12 pack of Pabst in them than one person who recently stopped taking their experimental cocktail of paxil/prosac/zoloft, or whose "doctor" recently monkeyed with the dosage.
Option 4 was supposed to read "...that big pharma makes millions from"