- 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: Concerning guns and the mentally ill: a look into the recent political past
Posted on 2/22/18 at 9:55 am to Rex
Posted on 2/22/18 at 9:55 am to Rex
Consider this scenario: An Iraq war vet who has transitioned to civilian life well but does not do well in crowds. No signs of violence or outbursts, just general anxiety so this person avoids large crowds as a result. Sees VA psychologist about it. The psychologist decides to say veteran suffers from PTSD, which one can argue is a mental illness.
Here we have a law-abiding citizen who had once taken an oath to protect and defend the constitution, you would have their constitutional rights denied.
This is why people have a problem with generalized blanket restrictions like this. The term can be thrown around easily enough that it covers a large group of people who would otherwise not apply to.
If you don't get that, you're nothing more than a useful idiot of a tyrannical elite that use weasel methods like this to further push an agenda.
Here we have a law-abiding citizen who had once taken an oath to protect and defend the constitution, you would have their constitutional rights denied.
This is why people have a problem with generalized blanket restrictions like this. The term can be thrown around easily enough that it covers a large group of people who would otherwise not apply to.
If you don't get that, you're nothing more than a useful idiot of a tyrannical elite that use weasel methods like this to further push an agenda.
Posted on 2/22/18 at 9:57 am to Rex
quote:It's not like the kid dressed up like a dog or anything crazy like that....
Why did you ignore that we said he should have been visited by the FBI when they warned twice about him?
On what grounds?
Posted on 2/22/18 at 9:59 am to Rex
Yet prior to Obama's feel good legislation it was still happening, wonder why?
Posted on 2/22/18 at 10:01 am to BamaFan365
Lmao. This is awesome
This post was edited on 2/22/18 at 10:02 am
Posted on 2/22/18 at 10:16 am to Rex
Local police were contacted numerous times about Cruz’s behavior. Several people have come out saying he threatened them. The FBI spokesman even said there was a failure on their part to follow up on tips that Cruz was dangerous. He even posted on a YouTube video that he was going to be “a professional school shooter.” All the signs were there for someone who was incredibly dangerous and the police did nothing.
He is absolutely mentally ill, but the reasons he needed to be brought in by the police have to do with his words and actions.
He is absolutely mentally ill, but the reasons he needed to be brought in by the police have to do with his words and actions.
This post was edited on 2/22/18 at 10:18 am
Posted on 2/22/18 at 10:19 am to Rex
quote:
Before. But under Trump's repeal his ownership status couldn't even be questioned.
You are embarrassing yourself
Posted on 2/22/18 at 10:19 am to Wild Thang
quote:
You are embarrassing yourself
Might as well pack this thread up. Rex isn't coming back.
Posted on 2/22/18 at 10:28 am to Bourre
I believe CA originally posted it. I just got it from here.
TD: Your gatewaypundit has reached a new low
TD: Your gatewaypundit has reached a new low
Posted on 2/22/18 at 11:15 am to Pechon
quote:
Here we have a law-abiding citizen who had once taken an oath to protect and defend the constitution, you would have their constitutional rights denied.
You obviously can't read. Obama's regulation would not have automatically denied him gun ownership.
How many of you dullards are going to raise the same stupid point?
Posted on 2/22/18 at 11:16 am to Rex
quote:Says the tool yammering shitgibbon.
How many of you dullards are going to raise the same stupid point?
Posted on 2/22/18 at 11:16 am to TexasTiger86
quote:
He is absolutely mentally ill, but the reasons he needed to be brought in by the police have to do with his words and actions.
Really? Had he previously killed anybody?
Posted on 2/22/18 at 11:17 am to BamaFan365
Those red heads are a firey bunch
(Sleeps next to one every night)
(Sleeps next to one every night)
Posted on 2/22/18 at 11:18 am to Rex
quote:
You obviously can't read. Obama's regulation would not have automatically denied him gun ownership.
How many of you dullards are going to raise the same stupid point?
So what did the regulations say and how would it have prevented this?
Posted on 2/22/18 at 12:24 pm to Rex
Funny how the only official text I can find is this fact sheet from the Obama white house and does not specifically mention veterans. LINK
Yet the VA has taken into account for itself to do so under Obama's administration prior to the EO. The EO did nothing to protect veterans. So looks like you can't read either.
The point I was trying to make is that there was an effort to deny someone their 2nd amendment right through a government agency. Someone can determine you mentally incompetent for any number of reasons, say wearing a fur suit, and without due process deny someone their rights. The EO does the same thing.
Yet the VA has taken into account for itself to do so under Obama's administration prior to the EO. The EO did nothing to protect veterans. So looks like you can't read either.
The point I was trying to make is that there was an effort to deny someone their 2nd amendment right through a government agency. Someone can determine you mentally incompetent for any number of reasons, say wearing a fur suit, and without due process deny someone their rights. The EO does the same thing.
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News