“OK, so we keep people ajudicated mentally defective...”
So, who gets to define “mentally defective”? While I agree it may be a desirable outcome, to keep firearms (and knives, swords, axes, hammers, nail guns, etc.) out of the hands of people ill equipped to comprehend their lethality and their appropriate use, I am not willing to allow the government to define the parameters of “mentally defective”.
I am equally opposed to any form of ‘universal background check’ that might be arranged. It is but a short step from that to confiscation.
The truth of the matter is that the overwhelming majority of gun owners in this nation have NO criminal background, NO criminal intent, and NO reason for the government to be meddling in their private lives, in any scope. The ridiculous non-solutions being offered up to assuage the unending guilt of the left wing purists only serve to extend the total-control agenda of the elitist political class (both sides of the aisle), and the socialist plans of their masters.
One of the key questions that most 2A proponents forget to ask.
Indeed, we should always ask the general question" Who gets to to decide the criteria?" and all the specific questions of definitions or criteria.
A consistent primary tactic of a statist tyranny is to make ALL citizens, except the ruling elite (aristocracy), criminals, by making the "law" so complex and extensive that normal activity is not possible without breaking some obscure trick of law or even secret law.
We are now well past that point, and, of course, possession of a firearm while committing a crime will finish a citizen for life.
The ONLY weapons control that is necessary in America is strict controls on the possession of weapons by public employees.