Firearm & Gun Forum - FireArmsTalk.com

Firearm & Gun Forum - FireArmsTalk.com (http://www.firearmstalk.com/forums/)
-   Legal and Activism (http://www.firearmstalk.com/forums/f97/)
-   -   Delawareans another push for gun control in your state (http://www.firearmstalk.com/forums/f97/delawareans-another-push-gun-control-your-state-102011/)

Bigcountry02 12-26-2013 08:08 PM

Delawareans another push for gun control in your state
 
This is pushing the threshold! If you have a so-called qualified mental health providers (Psychiatrists to school counselors) that are anti-gun, period. They will call the police because of their anti-gun views and this will spiral out of control.

WTF!

Read the article.

http://www.delawareonline.com/article/20131225/NEWS02/312250047/Biden-renews-push-gun-bill?nclick_check=1

Attorney General Beau Biden is lobbying the state Senate to reconsider a controversial gun-control bill that was defeated on the final days of the General Assembly in June, a victim partly of intense, conservative grass-roots opposition.

Bidenís bill, sponsored by Democratic Rep. Michael Barbieri in the House, establishes a process to ban Delawareans from owning a gun if a mental health professional suspects they present a danger to themselves or others. The legislation would require qualified mental health providers, from psychiatrists to school counselors, to call police if they believe a patient presents such a danger.

The proposal received just six yes votes in the Senate on June 27, a massive defeat for Biden, after clearing the House in a 40-1 vote on May 14. Even one co-sponsor, Republican Sen. Greg Lavelle, voted against the bill when it reached the Senate floor. Biden and Lavelle are now trading criticisms over the proposal.:)

manta 12-26-2013 09:06 PM

Quote:

Democratic Rep. Michael Barbieri in the House, establishes a process to ban Delawareans from owning a gun if a mental health professional suspects they present a danger to themselves or others.
Sounds sensible to me. Would I want someone that said that they wanted to go on a mass shooting spree to legally obtain firearms NO. Obviously they could get them illegally but why make it easy for them. To me allowing someone that is known to be a danger to themselves and others legally obtain firearms doesn't make sense. I am sure others will disagree , just my opinion.

Axxe55 12-26-2013 09:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by manta (Post 1467733)
Sounds sensible to me. Would I want someone that said that they wanted to go on a mass shooting spree to legally obtain firearms NO. Obviously they could get them illegally but why make it easy for them. To me allowing someone that is known to be a danger to themselves and others legally obtain firearms doesn't make sense. I am sure others will disagree , just my opinion.

and just who is qualified to make these decisions that will adversely affect a person's ability to own a firearm?

i hardly think someone who is anti-gun to start with is objective to be making such decisions in the first place.

what qualities would we have them make such determinations based on what?

BTW, it's already illegal for a person to possess or buy a firearm if they are judged to be mentally defective in the first place. but it has to go through a court of law and be presided over and ruled by a judge.

this stupid law would put more power in the hands of those who have an agenda to fulfill and not actually keep guns out of the hands of those who shouldn't have them in the first place. too much power in the hands of small minded people who haven't any common sense to begin with.

but you are free to disagree if you want to.

chloeshooter 12-26-2013 09:46 PM

while I wholeheartedly believe we need to keep firearms away from dangerous people, defining what exactly qualifies as 'mentally ill' is a scary proposition. Heck there are people who believe wanting to own a gun in the first place makes you mentally ill! And that if you wish to carry it can only mean you are a paranoid delusional. As others mentioned, legislation such as this gives a lot of power to people NOT QUALIFIED to make such important decisions (Lou Holtz, ex-Notre Dame football coach says it best: "you know what they call the guy that graduates last in medical school? Doctor!")

I went into my doctor last week for an ear infection, and before doing anything else I was asked "do you feel safe at home?". I was tempted to say "Hell yea, I have a S&W MP15, a 12 gauge shotgun and an SR40 all ready to go!" but realized that kind of kidding could only hurt me. So I said "yes, I feel very safe at home".

Daoust_Nat 12-28-2013 01:16 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Axxe55 (Post 1467742)
and just who is qualified to make these decisions that will adversely affect a person's ability to own a firearm?

i hardly think someone who is anti-gun to start with is objective to be making such decisions in the first place.

what qualities would we have them make such determinations based on what?

BTW, it's already illegal for a person to possess or buy a firearm if they are judged to be mentally defective in the first place. but it has to go through a court of law and be presided over and ruled by a judge.

this stupid law would put more power in the hands of those who have an agenda to fulfill and not actually keep guns out of the hands of those who shouldn't have them in the first place. too much power in the hands of small minded people who haven't any common sense to begin with.

but you are free to disagree if you want to.

I agree with this. Using the logic that the guy with the biggest club determines fair, in this case it could be a gun grabber. It would be so easy to "fairly" determine all who have a firearm, or want 0ne, are not right mentally. Kind of like Joseph Heller's Catch 22.

Notice there was no mention of any way for one judged dangerous to have themselves adjudicated cured, and get their rights back.

Another bad idea that will do far more harm then good.

Axxe55 12-28-2013 01:29 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Daoust_Nat (Post 1468569)
I agree with this. Using the logic that the guy with the biggest club determines fair, in this case it could be a gun grabber. It would be so easy to "fairly" determine all who have a firearm, or want 0ne, are not right mentally. Kind of like Joseph Heller's Catch 22.

Notice there was no mention of any way for one judged dangerous to have themselves adjudicated cured, and get their rights back.

Another bad idea that will do far more harm then good.

kind of like the fox guarding the chicken coop!

IMO, there is no way someone with an anti-gun agenda could be objective in making decisions about the mental stability of others in regards to their gun rights and ownership.

deadsp0t 12-28-2013 02:03 AM

I don't see how we can keep having these shootings, find out it's mentally unstable people yet do NOTHING.. I don't know what's to be done but this can't keep happening..

Shootergirl88 12-28-2013 02:04 AM

That Sucks!

1911love 12-28-2013 09:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by deadsp0t (Post 1468589)
I don't see how we can keep having these shootings, find out it's mentally unstable people yet do NOTHING.. I don't know what's to be done but this can't keep happening..

A lot of these crazies are committing their first crime, the mass shooting. We can't punish them before they commit a crime. The ones that we catch as having a great chance of hurting others need to be adjudicated mentally defective by a JUDGE, not a counselor at school/work or some other unqualified/biased person.

Of course not all will be "caught", that's why you eliminate GFZs and allow people to be armed. These are common sense solutions that are proven to work, it's just the people with the power to implement them are rufusing to listen. These people are to blame for every death that could've been prevented using true common sense, not the fake "common sense" of the antis.

But I digress, there ought to be a law to stop all these shootings. The previous sentence is in green, I'm on a mobile so we'll have to pretend.

deadsp0t 12-28-2013 09:16 PM

Until something is done that the pro gun community approves of then these shootings will continue to be blamed on us and our weapons.
GFZ's are popping up at a much higher rate then before and much faster then then few communities that are doing away with them, this does not appear to be an approach that is ACTUALLY working.

I'm not saying what you're suggesting wouldn't work. What I am saying, is things are going the other direction and faster the other direction by the day. If something doesn't change then the attacks will continue and the anti crowd will continue to grow.


All times are GMT. The time now is 02:41 PM.

Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.