I'm not certain that the bill it negated was good or even constitutional in the first place.
2A is a right. To say a group of people not given any due process, and who have not committed any felonious crimes should be stripped of that right, is wrong.
It must be with due process on a case by case basis.
Why is it everyone sees the need for every other ammendment except this one?
1A doesn't do much good if an army comes to town and says you can't have it anymore.
Originally Posted by grean
Cause "WAA, guns are evil"!! WHAA... That's why libtards are ok with every damn law out there to restrict gun ownership.. but rail against any form of trying to ensure voting is done only by legally authorised personnel..
First of all how do you define Mentally Ill, and who determines someone is Mentally Ill and can't purchase a Fire Arm? Do you think a Firearms Dealer is qualified to make such a diagnoses?
Jim
Originally Posted by Mr MojoRisin
Add to that, iirc on CNN last night (was scrolling through all the news channels), a doctor there, said CURRENTLY by the 5A book on mental illnesses, a large chunk of society (almost 70%) would qualify as being mental in some manner, way shape or form.. CAUSE OF HOW broad and easily it is to get someone 'considered mental'. That jumps to almost 85% for military..
So if we do make it 'if you are mental, no guns for you' that is in essence making it NO ONE can own a gun, cause most of society would be seen as mental and RULED as mental thus not allowed to own a gun...
In essence its an END-Run way, to remove everyone's guns.
I was quoting what numbnuts was posting!
Another "hair brain" idea was prohibiting folks receiving social security benefits from possessing a firearm. I don't recall if it ever got on paper or not, but it was humorous.
If I recall that "age issue" came up in the original Texas Senate debates over the concealed handgun license legislation ... although most of what I heard was over some badge or pin that would let others know you were "packing"!
Originally Posted by LexusLover
Well, seeing the # of accidents caused by old folk, who are too brain addled to know where tehy are going (or have too porr eyesight to realize, HEY I am driving the wrong way!" i can see why some might say if one is too old, one shouldn't own a gun.
BUT Where i balk, is "OK, who then gets to decide who is too old?"?