Armed agents seize guns from citizens in California because of questionable "mental" problems as decided by the state. One person had their guns taken because they lived with a wife who had spent 48 hours in observation without any subsequent treatment. This can't be real. If this was real then this supports what I posted a couple of months ago. What's wrong WTF and Whatzup?
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-0...tml?cmpid=yhoo
- JD Barleycorn
- 03-13-2013, 12:55 AM
- Randy4Candy
- 03-13-2013, 05:18 AM
In reading the article I was struck by how little it had to do with the point you were trying to make. But, that's no surprise since you routinely post a link and proceed to draw a conclusion completely unrelated to the content. **yawn**
- Guest123018-4
- 03-13-2013, 06:05 AM
What I find interesting about the article is that they believe there are less than 20,000 convicted felons living in California.
My second thought is what court declared the individuals as mentally ill or what ever the ruling is.This is another pr9oblem we have in this nation where we are becoming required to prove our innocence rather than the courts proving guilt.
My second thought is what court declared the individuals as mentally ill or what ever the ruling is.This is another pr9oblem we have in this nation where we are becoming required to prove our innocence rather than the courts proving guilt.
- JD Barleycorn
- 03-13-2013, 08:25 AM
Let us remember that Candy has reading comprehension disabilites when we make fun of him. He is trying so harrrdddd.
My thought on the subject is why do they think a convicted felon is not going to go out and buy another gun that someone else stole. Now if they went after convicted felons with stolen weapons and then charged them with a crime they may get somewhere. It is criminals doing most of the shootings and with guns illegally purchased.
My thought on the subject is why do they think a convicted felon is not going to go out and buy another gun that someone else stole. Now if they went after convicted felons with stolen weapons and then charged them with a crime they may get somewhere. It is criminals doing most of the shootings and with guns illegally purchased.
- CJ7
- 03-13-2013, 01:03 PM
4000000 NRA members had "no comment" ...
aside form it being a state law, No Comment.
aside form it being a state law, No Comment.
- chefnerd
- 03-15-2013, 08:51 PM
Not only do some NOT consider this a mistake, but they look on it as a model for the country as a whole. The initial law banning assault weapons in California came as a result of a deranged person firing an AK-47 rifle into a school playground in 1989. OK, I don't see why someone would need a fully automatic weapon unless they are in the military and in a combat zone, but the list of weapons in the law went way beyond that, something in line with the current list in Feinstein's bill and in 1994 at the whim of the then AG of California, expanded a bit further. Consequently the legislature came up with "A Prohibited Armed Persons List". This was further expanded in 2008 and can include anyone who has a temporary restraining order against them requested by someone they dated.