Skip to comments.Aides mulling tactic on gun control
Posted on 01/25/2011 12:45:01 PM PST by ColdOne
President Obamas advisers were still discussing late Monday how to deal with calls by Democrats for him to embrace some kind of gun control legislation.
There was at least some possibility that Obama would express support for something concrete in his State of the Union address, perhaps safeguards for keeping weapons out of the hands of the mentally ill.
(Excerpt) Read more at politico.com ...
Gun control for the mentally ill....hmmmmm....that lets Democrats out of the 2A thing, huh?
DemoncRAT doublespeak for: "those of you who oppose me".
Joe Blow has twenty two guns; all registered (his mistake) and is categorized with compulsive behavior and is mentally ill?
Or the great white hunter with a couple thousand rounds and some (gasp) black powder? That black powder MUST mean they are pyro-maniacs; mentally ill! Confiscate their warez...
What do they call the BATF? Shirley?
A Clinton administration policy made it possible for the very troubled Jared Loughner to buy a gun. Instituted by Janet Reno (not enacted by Congress), the policy prohibited the military from reporting drug abusers to the FBI, which manages the national list of prohibited gun-buyers. Loughner attempted to enlist in the Army in December 2008 but was rejected because he failed a drug test. Within a year, he was allowed to buy a shotgun in Tucson. So theoretically, all Obama has to do is order Holder to reverse the Reno rule.
I can sum up my feelings like this:
I mistrust Democrats so much, as it regards 2A Rights, that even if they told me they were writing legislation to specifically keep Charles Manson from buying/owning a pistol, I wouldn’t sign on to it.
I don’t believe that they are informed, competent, reasonable, nor trustworthy enough to craft gun legislation of any kind. Period.
This is a suicide idea. Liberals love gun control but it always comes back and bites them big time. I guess this proves that they are the ones who are mentally ill. After all isn’t it proof of insanity when you keep doing something over and over and over expecting a different outcome?
That is Democrats and gun control.
If they touch this “third rail” issue I am sure it will help make them the minority after 2012.
Minor edit ...
"Have you ever been adjudicated mentally defective (which includes a determination by a court board, commission, or other lawful authority that you are a danger to yourself or others or are incompetent to manage your own affairs) OR have you ever been committed to a mental institution?"
Interesting in that it sounds so familiar...
1st, Establishment Clause, Free Exercise Clause; freedom of speech, of the press, and of assembly; right to petition
2nd, Right to keep and bear arms.
3rd, Protection from quartering of troops.
4th, Protection from unreasonable search and seizure.
5th, Due process, double jeopardy, self-incrimination, eminent domain.
6th, Trial by jury and rights of the accused; Confrontation Clause, speedy trial, public trial, right to counsel
7th, Civil trial by jury.
8th, Prohibition of excessive bail and cruel and unusual punishment.
9th, Protection of rights not specifically enumerated in the Constitution.
10th, Powers of States and people.
If memory serves correctly, they floated a trial balloon some time ago about this.
Wanted to classify vets with PTSD or any other neurological disorder in the category of “mentally defective” or something to that effect.
Is Obama trying to regain his title as “Gun Salesman of the Year”?
Yes, I think so ala the old Soviet tactic of hustling dissenters off to the nutty farm. The dems have gotten pretty good at deeming lately....
That would be a trick. Mason would have no chance owning a piece if he is in prison for life.
The “mentally ill?” That is Hussein’s definition of Republicans/conservatives/whites, isn’t it!!!
AFAIK there has only been one reasonable gun control legislation and even that has been manipulated to say things it doesn't.
A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the People to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.
BATF should be a convenience store.
I believe that anyone who uses a firearm in the commission of a crime should be punished for the crime they commit.
The presence or absence of a gun should have no bearing on the punishment, mind you - the actual offense that is committed should define the punishment.
Effin morons. No federal law is required. I don't know about any other state but here in MA, it's all part of the process. Question 8 on the MA LTC Application would seem to cover it. Plus, the form that you fill out at time of purchase reiterates that question.
My problem with your solution is that there is no judicial review before a constitutional right is denied a citizen, most likely for life. What standard is used by the military for recruit testing, if any? Or do they refuse applicants on a verbal confession of drug use? There must be a very high bar set in order to remove a constitutional right from anyone.
There were so many indicators that Laughner was about to go off it shouldn’t have been necessary to obtain input from a recruiter, everybody around the guy predicted he would do what he actually did.
Why You Need A Gun
Well, there is this one...
"6th, Trial by jury and rights of the accused; Confrontation Clause, speedy trial, public trial, right to counsel"
A person that is deemed mentally unfit to stand trial can still be deprived of their liberty, although technically, I believe the evaluation is considered part of "due process".
Wait a minute. That is not my solution. I merely recounted what happened, and don’t remember editorializing on whether it was good or bad. But, that said, I don’t think crazy people and drug addicts should drive, and I don’t think they should be running around loose with guns, either.
“I dont think crazy people and drug addicts should drive, and I dont think they should be running around loose with guns, either.”
Perhaps they should just be hanged.
Just remember, those lovely progressives that used to run the Soviet Union considered dissidents to be “mentally ill”.
You have to be crazy to oppose the left.
Yep, it’s one of the main reasons I’m watching tonight — other than the fact that Obama’s non-verbal communications are so much fun to watch. He’s a real piece of work, that Barry.
Who, in their right mind, actually fills out forms to purchase a gun?
Just remember, those lovely progressives that used to run the Soviet Union considered dissidents to be mentally ill.
“perhaps safeguards for keeping weapons out of the hands of the mentally ill.”
That would include three-quarters of the nuts in the FBI and half in the Secret Service, and all the fruitcakes in the ATF and Interior and IRS.
The vast majority of mentally ill people are not dangerous, not even to themselves. Depriving them of their right to keep and bear arms is a horrible idea.
Legislators in general. I spent the weekend drafting a letter to kill a bill filed in the state senate. I only found 9 points of failure in it (this is a record); there was a 10th but it was taking too long to locate a report backing the 10th point. The authors appear to be good conservative Republicans and I am sure the bill was well meant -- but they were in way over their heads in issues about which they know nothing.
Interesting that Kim Jong-Il’s name appears to be written in Chinese and not Korean.
One executive order, or a memo to the ATF.
That's because he's a Chinese tool that's only working in NK.
Disarm the Tucson sheriff.
I didn’t mean to imply it was your idea, and I agree with you, crazy people and drug addicts shouldn’t have the means to harm other people. I believe that there has to be some sort of formal process to ascertain their level of competence, however. Allowing any single person to have that kind of authority over other people’s lives is tantamount to dictatorship.