- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: No one is coming to take your guns: States thinking of passing gun seizure laws
Posted on 7/6/14 at 8:47 pm to weagle99
Posted on 7/6/14 at 8:47 pm to weagle99
I'm very pro 2A and I'll probably catch a lot of hell over this, but I don't see too much harm in something like this if there is very credible and sufficient evidence that the person is very clearly mentally disturbed.
10
Posted on 7/6/14 at 8:55 pm to upgrayedd
quote:
but I don't see too much harm in something like this if there is very credible and sufficient evidence that the person is very clearly mentally disturbed.
The question is, where if the line... Who decides. Some would say that the owning of guns is enough to qualify someone as a "nut" and should have their guns taken...
Posted on 7/6/14 at 8:55 pm to upgrayedd
quote:
I'm very pro 2A and I'll probably catch a lot of hell over this, but I don't see too much harm in something like this if there is very credible and sufficient evidence that the person is very clearly mentally disturbed.
I would normally agree, but the current administrations and makeup of our federal and state governments in the past few years have led me to believe that we shouldn't give an inch because they are dishonest people. They aren't to be trusted and they will abuse the power. I'd rather deal with the consequences of a mass murder here and there than take a huge gamble on what will inevitably lead to losing our rights.
Posted on 7/6/14 at 8:56 pm to upgrayedd
quote:
there is very credible and sufficient evidence that the person is very clearly mentally disturbed.
Now define credible and sufficient evidence that the person is VERY CLEARLY mentally disturbed.
That's the rub. Supporters ALWAYS say it won't be abused and used only in EXTREME circumstances. Next thing you know, everybody on an anti-depressant or mood stabilizer is VERY CLEARLY mentally disturbed or else their doctor wouldn't have them on it right?
Posted on 7/6/14 at 8:56 pm to upgrayedd
You do not see the seizure of private property (forget that we are talking about guns) without due process? These are ex parte hearings. In other words the individual having their property seized has no say until after the seizure occurs.
Since we are talking about guns, This WILL NOT STOP MASS SHOOTINGS.
Since we are talking about guns, This WILL NOT STOP MASS SHOOTINGS.
Posted on 7/6/14 at 8:57 pm to upgrayedd
I never thought the Feds would Audit you business, you personally, have FBI raids to your house/Business, and then have your name given to the Justice Dept for Prosecution, just because of your Politics......
Posted on 7/6/14 at 9:06 pm to upgrayedd
Judging by the mental makeup of these mass gun killers, we can deem anyone with leftist tendencies to be clearly mentally disturbed.
Santa Barbara? Check
Newtown? Check
Giffords? Check
Aurora, CO? Check
Santa Barbara? Check
Newtown? Check
Giffords? Check
Aurora, CO? Check
Posted on 7/6/14 at 9:14 pm to upgrayedd
quote:
I'm very pro 2A and I'll probably catch a lot of hell over this, but I don't see too much harm in something like this if there is very credible and sufficient evidence that the person is very clearly mentally disturbed.
Give them an inch and they'll take a mile.
Posted on 7/6/14 at 9:58 pm to upgrayedd
I think people with mental illness should lose the ability to speech, read newspapers and vote as well.
Posted on 7/7/14 at 7:34 am to upgrayedd
quote:
I'm very pro 2A and I'll probably catch a lot of hell over this, but I don't see too much harm in something like this if there is very credible and sufficient evidence that the person is very clearly mentally disturbed.
Extrapolation...required, UG.
Think.........I-R-S!
"Mentally disturbed", can be highly subjective, viewed through a political lens.
Posted on 7/7/14 at 11:57 am to upgrayedd
My issue is this - in the small state of Connecticut, the police found 183 people last year alone that they deemed a threat to others. That number sounds high to me and I wonder what criteria they use to make that determination.
Page 1 of 1
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News