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

To: cuban leaf
So why is the Red Flag firearms seizing law necessary? If someone is actually making statements that show they would be a threat to themselves or others, the law in every state I am aware of allows for an involuntary 3 day hold in a mental health facility.

That process does a lot more than just take away firearms. That takes away the ability of the person to post on the internet, threaten people, use other dangerous weapons like their car or a knife, and it provides time for an actual determination of dangerousness. Of course the psychiatry community has shown that it is difficult to identify dangerous people, several recent mass murderers passed their psychiatrist's examinations.

If somebody is too dangerous to have a gun aren't they too dangerous to be, for example, flying a commercial jetliner?

The reason politicians want to focus on guns is that provides them a way to disarm the population without raising the concerns that are raised when you force someone into a mental hospital for 3 days. I suspect if you just proposed a 30 day ban on internet usage and video game playing along with the firearms seizures the Democrats would vote the bills down.

76 posted on 08/13/2019 12:22:53 PM PDT by freeandfreezing
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 61 | View Replies ]


To: freeandfreezing

If somebody is too dangerous to have a gun, then it is too dangerous not to incarcerate him.

Sick of Republican “mavericks” like Rand Paul and Flimsey Grahamnesty. They can never be trusted.


100 posted on 08/13/2019 1:11:59 PM PDT by elcid1970 ("The Second Amendment is more important than Islam.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 76 | 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