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

To: cuban leaf

If they are so dangerous why not commit them?

So you take away the guns and they run a car up a curb or jump off a bridge.

The only red flag here is that the law is focused on the gun not the person.


18 posted on 08/13/2019 11:44:24 AM PDT by fruser1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies ]


To: fruser1

The only red flag here is that the law is focused on the gun not the person.


Actually, if it is focusing on taking the gun from a particular person, that makes it personal.

i.e. it IS focused on the person.

But for it to work, it needs tons of safeguards to prevent it being used as a form of “swatting”. And it can’t be enforced, “long term” without more than just a judge thinking a guy might, possibly, maybe do something bad. There needs to be some sort of definable threshold.

One good one would be two or more witnesses testifying that you have made actionable threats, on or off line.

It falls into the concept of “an armed society is a polite society”, by adding the corrolary, “if you own a gun, and you threaten someone on or off line, expect that gun to be taken away from you for a time.”


34 posted on 08/13/2019 11:52:53 AM PDT by cuban leaf (We're living in Dr. Zhivago but without the love triangle)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | 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