And apparently walking in high heels…
Banning guns for people that had any drug conviction is rational and common sense. We should also ban guns from anyone who received a DUI or had their drivers license suspended for any reason. People who are late on their bills should also not have guns and the mental health provision should be if you have ever as much as ever spoke with a counselor you should not possess guns.
via Quote of the day—Italian Rose | The View From North Central Idaho.
That is the opposition, folks. Reasoned Discourse pouring out of their ears.
I can see a justification for drug convictions, though “any” is a bit excessive given Marijuana is still banned in most of the states that aren’t Colorado and I can’t imagine anybody shooting people while high on that. Other drugs that just leave you catatonic don’t make much sense to lump in there either.
I can think of reasons why a driver’s license suspension could be considered grounds to prevent someone from having a gun, but all of them involve “road rage,” and there are way more ways to get your license suspended than that.
Banning anybody who’s ever been late on a bill payment would prevent almost all security and police forces from owning guns. Doubly so and throw in military for psychiatric counseling. Does that second one count even if you were setting the appointment up for someone else? That’s just psychotic.
That is INSANE. I had/have ADD and was suspected of being dyslexic, so my parents took me to a child psychologist. I grew up into a law abiding medical researcher with advanced degrees in engineering.
When I was in college, I (along with the rest of my family) went to family counseling for a little bit while my parents were going through a divorce.
Would either of those be held against me when I go to buy a gun?
If my son follows in my footsteps of being ADD/ASD and I take him for evaluation do we both lose our gun rights (when he grows up of course)?
Wouldn’t such a law create even more problems if people (particularly men) would have to choose between marriage counseling and losing their gun rights?
It’s one thing for a court to say, based on evidence, that a person is a danger to themselves or others and must get psychological treatment. But to say that anyone who needs a professional to talk to, for a myriad of reasons, should lose their gun rights is discriminatory and dangerous.
Do you think you might be gay, and need counseling on how to come out to the rest of your family? – No guns for you!
Did you just give birth and are one of the nearly 50% of women who suffer postpartum depression? – No guns for you!
Are you being evaluated for a possible learning disability or being tested to see if you belong in a gifted program? – No guns for you!
Are you going through a rough spot in your marriage and want some counseling? – No guns for you!
Did you suffer a debilitating accident and seek counseling as part of your physical therapy? – No guns for you!
Just a huge laundry list to ban guns which will surely increase in scope until the only legal gun owner will be a left-handed, near-sighted, monk who lives in isolation and has taken vows of silence, celibacy, and non-violence. End sarcasm.
Ridiculous! Firearms are superb for providing for our fundamental right of self-defense and our political need to restrain tyranny. Be gone, you useful idiot of despots and dictators.
I would expect her list of who could not buy alcohol to be similarly broad, and, given that she’s a leftist, her list of who should not be allowed to buy marijuana to be, by contrast, almost non-existent.
I’ve been late on a few bills before because of firearms, so yeah.