What would be the spark?

[stevo]

Nope all I see are chicken littles on both sides of the debate. Absolutely nothing will happen that hasn't happened before.

New York State would like to have a word with you.

Stevo

[4eyedwillie]

Are you in a vacuum?

Nope all I see are chicken littles on both sides of the debate. Absolutely nothing will happen that hasn't happened before.

[stevo]

There are already standards in place for who can be a danger to society. They just have to follow those. And a psychologist would be making the decision.

Thank you for fully justifying what I have been saying lately.

There ARE standards, and they are being changed THIS year, being tailored to fit a new definition of the phrase "danger to society". Due to your ilk, people who have a different opinion than the current regime, people who are labeled out of the social norm, will be labeled as mentally ill, as a "danger to society". And yes, a psychologist, a single person, a person who is NOT held to a higher court, will be using an OPINION, he will be the one to determine if you should lose MANY of your rights, permanently. No court, no Constitution, no jury, just one man with an opinion.

Again, thanks for proving my point, and now if you don't mind, go DIAF.

Stevo

[stevo]

Lol, bitching on an Internet forum, you might as well be watching American Idol too.

Yeah, you are right, I am 'just bitching'. Just like everyone else is 'just bitching'. I guess that is why gun store shelves are bare, new NRA memberships have increased ten-fold, people are "losing" weapons left and right, we are all 'just bitching'.

Move along, nothing but people 'bitching' here.

Stevo

[Sean88gt]

Are you in a vacuum?

[4eyedwillie]

ALL have been on similar drugs as well. My point, completely missed by you, was that you're trusting the government, that clearly wants to disarm the population, to work with doctors to define what is unstable. It would be far too broad.

I'm not seeing it. You can chicken little all you want. If THE GOVERNMENT really wanted to disarm the population it would already have happened. It hasn't. In 1994 when the first "assault" weapon ban happened all the loonies were screaming the same stuff that you guys are saying. REVOLT!!! GOVERNMENT IS GONNA COME TAKE OUR GUNS!! Guess what it didn't happen and it's not gonna happen.

[Sean88gt]

Pretty much, just get people that need mental health care the care they need. Both the aurora and newtown shooters were known by their family to need help. In fact I would GUESS that all the people that have committed these type assaults were known by their families to need help. If they had gotten the help then who knows.

ALL have been on similar drugs as well. My point, completely missed by you, was that you're trusting the government, that clearly wants to disarm the population, to work with doctors to define what is unstable. It would be far too broad.

[4eyedwillie]

Oh, kind of like following existing gun and drug laws? Solid plan.........

Pretty much, just get people that need mental health care the care they need. Both the aurora and newtown shooters were known by their family to need help. In fact I would GUESS that all the people that have committed these type assaults were known by their families to need help. If they had gotten the help then who knows.

[Sean88gt]

There are already standards in place for who can be a danger to society. They just have to follow those.

Oh, kind of like following existing gun and drug laws? Solid plan.........

[4eyedwillie]

See, unstable by WHOSE guidelines?

<---------sitting back watching for the spark. Not a matter of "if" but more of "when" we see it in our lifetimes.

There are already standards in place for who can be a danger to society. They just have to follow those. And a psychologist would be making the decision.

[Sean88gt]

Brother??

[KBScobravert]

But who determines that? Politicians? Riiiight!


An overhaul is coming, I'm just not sure which direction.

[KBScobravert]

Every Democrat I know is pro-gun. We just believe there needs to be a real overhaul of the mental health system and if your deemed unstable then you should be restricted from having access to a gun.

See, unstable by WHOSE guidelines?

<---------sitting back watching for the spark. Not a matter of "if" but more of "when" we see it in our lifetimes.

[Sean88gt]

Every Democrat I know is pro-gun. We just believe there needs to be a real overhaul of the mental health system and if your deemed unstable then you should be restricted from having access to a gun.

But who determines that? Politicians? Riiiight!


An overhaul is coming, I'm just not sure which direction.

[4eyedwillie]

Then they need to speak up. I don't know a single democrat that is pro gun, personally. I'm not saying they don't exist, but if they don't speak up, how are their officials to know?

Every Democrat I know is pro-gun. We just believe there needs to be a real overhaul of the mental health system and if your deemed unstable then you should be restricted from having access to a gun.