Page 5 of 5 FirstFirst ... 345
Results 41 to 45 of 45

Thread: These rights shall not be infringed.

  1. #41
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Oxford, Ohio
    Posts
    185

    Default Re: These rights shall not be infringed.

    If only Romney had got in since he did so much for the 2nd Amendment all his life.

  2. #42
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Rhode Island
    Posts
    10,076

    Default Re: These rights shall not be infringed.

    I think Romney is more convincable than Obama and his cronies will ever be. There are a lot of legal, historical and practical arguments favoring the armed citizen.

  3. #43
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    560

    Default Re: These rights shall not be infringed.

    Quote Originally Posted by Ralph View Post
    "an "ammunition eligibility certificate" that requires a mental health check (not sure what that entails),"

    Well, now, that's interesting.That seems to presume you are mentally unstable unless you prove otherwise. I doubt that is a valid presumption and it is a rather dangerous one, given the vague and vrtually impossible to prove definitions rife in that particular area of medicine.

    I'm not sure why but was thinking yesterday that there are probably a large number of city folks who think that taking a toddler on an overnight camping trip or teaching a 6-year-old to handle and shoot guns is abberant to the point of child abuse and could probably find a bunch of shrinks who would agree with them.

    The more I think about it as I write this the scarier that provision becomes. What happens if you don't pass this test? Would you be ruled unsuitable to own a gun? What is this test, how is it administered and interpreted and by whom? What provisions are made for challenging the results? Who can challenge the results and how? Is there any penalty for falsely reporting the results (some clerk just rubberstamps "REJECTED" and then what?) I strongly suspect this law does not even begin to answer those questions, all of which are quite valid. Woods, has anyone looked into this?
    And WHO will be allowed to know you were rejected? Will this become public? Will employers and insurance companies be able to access this now or in the future for pre-employment background checks? Will it comply with HIPPA laws?

  4. #44
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Rhode Island
    Posts
    10,076

    Default Re: These rights shall not be infringed.

    Welcome to thee world of unintended consequence. This whole mental thing is a very difficult area. No one likes the idea of dangerous madmen running loose and killing people. They also kill with rocks, clubs and shoving people off high places. Sorting them out, though is a lengthy and expensive process and is subject to a lot of misconception and false premises. You can NOT assume that everyone is crazy until they prove otherwise. Homicidal maniacs are not on every street corner.

    You also cannot come up with some random notion of what constitutes "normal". A fair number of folks have the idea that hunters and soldier like to go around killing things. In this increasingly urban society many think that anyone who goes alone and spends nights in the woods is as Horace Kephart once observed, "some moonstruck fellow the authorities would do well to follow up and watch".

    In the '70s psychological testing became popular with large companies who began using the tests for hiring and promotion decisions. The tests did have some accuracy of sorts and many companies declined to hire or promote people who tested as having deep insecurities. Many of these companies began not doing so well and eventually it was discovered that most of the great leaders in business, in the military and everywhere else had deep insecurities. Eventually the testing fad fell out of popularity as the companies realized they were spending a lot of time and money and getting results they almost always misinterpreted.

    In the current issue virtually all of the people doing mass murder were known as being a it "off". Many were practically sending up flares but their behavior was ignored for any number of reasons. No one wakes up one morning and decides, out of the blue, to go kill a bunch of people today.

  5. #45
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    The Unconstitutional State of Connecticut
    Posts
    213

    Default Re: These rights shall not be infringed.

    Mass murder is always premeditated to some degree. History has taught us that. This is the reason that the "insanity plea" is a bloody joke.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •