Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Kerberos
Nice thought, but unfortunatly in this day and age if you want to own a gun, that is enough to clasify you as a nutjob.

We're talking about the law, not Rosie O'Donnell's wet dreams, okay?

18 USC 922 (d) It shall be unlawful for any person to sell or otherwise dispose of any firearm or ammunition to any person knowing or having reasonable cause to believe that such person -
(4) has been adjudicated as a mental defective or has been committed to any mental institution;

(g) It shall be unlawful for any person -
(4) who has been adjudicated as a mental defective or who has been committed to a mental institution;
to ship or transport in interstate or foreign commerce, or possess in or affecting commerce, any firearm or ammunition; or to receive any firearm or ammunition which has been shipped or transported in interstate or foreign commerce.

When they start trying to pass laws defining the desire to own, carry, or operate firearms as a "mental defect," then I'll be actually worried.

62 posted on 11/13/2002 8:48:21 AM PST by mvpel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 55 | View Replies ]


To: mvpel
or who has been committed to a mental institution

No matter what the conclusion of the doctors at that institution was. No matter the reason for being committed.

66 posted on 11/13/2002 10:26:11 AM PST by m1911
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 62 | View Replies ]

To: mvpel; Alan Chapman
Ok, so lets talk about the law and go through this a step at a time.

"(4) has been adjudicated as a mental defective or has been committed to any mental institution;"

Now I would read that to mean, in part one, that someone who has been adjudicated in a court of competent jurisdiction as a homicidal sociopath, as an example, that it would not be a good idea for them to own a gun. Okay, sounds reasonable. Moreover, in the second part I would interpret that to mean someone who is currently a resident of a mental institution. Again, fair enough, as I think it is safe to say that one would not want inmates of a mental hospital running around with firearms.

Now, let’s take a look at what they are proposing in these bills.

“The bill also reaches for a gun owning prohibition on nearly 3 million more Americans who have spent time in mental health facilities. This group has no more involvement in violent crime than does the rest of the population”

So does that mean that if 20 years ago while you where going through a divorce, had financial problems, and lost your job, and you decide to check into Charter for emotional problems for 15 days, that you are now no longer eligible to own a firearm to protect yourself and your family. Incidentally, the 3 million figure they quote that would fit that definition is way low. If you have doubts about that, look in any major metropolitan area phone book and you will find that mental health facilities are big business these days.

” or who have been written a prescription for depression

Having worked for Eli Lilly, the makers of Prozac, a drug for bi-polar disorder, I can assure you that there are millions of people in this country that take this drug on a daily basis. I am sure you know people who take Prozac, but you are probably unaware that they do. In fact, you might find that some of your buddies down at your local gun club take Prozac.

In case you are unfamiliar with bi-polar disorder, it is a chemical imbalance in the brain that people are born with and sometimes manifest itself as depression, it is not something that they have created or contributed to through their behavior, aside from not taking their medication on a regular bases. Do you believe that these people should also be deprived of their Constitutional rights to protect themselves and their families?

” The bill would also help FBI officials to effectively stop millions of additional Americans from purchasing a firearm, because they were guilty in the past of committing slight misdemeanors.”

Oops, hope they don’t find out about that J-walking thing.

“It could require that states forward information concerning drug diversion programs and arrests that do not lead to prosecution, in order to determine whether a person was an unlawful user of... any controlled substance”

So in other words if that state simply alleges that one might have abused any controlled substances, and I am assuming that would include illegal as well as prescription narcotics, but in fact did not have enough evidence to bring proceedings against you to prove their case. That would be good enough for you to deprive people of the right to protect themselves?

” When they start trying to pass laws defining the desire to own, carry, or operate firearms as a "mental defect," then I'll be actually worried.”

Well if you support these kinds of bills that day wont be far away. Paranoid delusion comes to mind just off the top of my head.

67 posted on 11/13/2002 10:39:04 AM PST by Kerberos
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 62 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson