North Carolina folks watch your radar for another firearm background check

Discussion in 'Legal and Activism' started by Bigcountry02, Dec 26, 2013.

  1. Bigcountry02

    Bigcountry02 Coffee! If your not shaking, you need another cup Supporter

    7,249
    48
    48
    FYI! This is reminding of the movie Minority Report on the pre-mental status. The assumption game is going to be played out!

    North Carolina folks watch your radar for another firearm background check beyond mentally ill.

    More at the link below:

    http://www.charlotteobserver.com/20...o-expand-firearm-background.html#.UryLGGd3ucx

    States should make background checks for firearm buyers a stronger tool to prevent gun violence by focusing not only on applicants with mental illness but also on whether they have been violent or abused alcohol or drugs, a group of experts says.

    At the same time, it should be easier to temporarily confiscate the weapons of people who do have mental health issues. And law enforcement should have more authority to remove guns from those who pose an immediate or even possible, credible threat to themselves or others, according to a report issued this month.

    For those measures to work, the report concludes, all firearm transfers should require background checks.

     
  2. mopowerbmx

    mopowerbmx New Member

    1,093
    0
    0
    Oh ****!!!!!! Sigh. Looks like I need to start buying the guns I want real quick. I have a misdemeanor assault from almost 20 years ago from a bar fight. Never been in any other trouble since.
     

  3. deadsp0t

    deadsp0t New Member

    1,470
    0
    0
  4. vincent

    vincent New Member

    4,123
    0
    0
    I love how these leftist fools think they can somehow accurately predict the operation of someone's mind by "expanded BGC's"...:rolleyes:

    The Charlotte Observer is just a silly libby rag, I'd take everything in that paper with a grain of salt...

    With a Republican majority, and a Republican Governor, I'm not too worried about losing any gun rights here, especially since HB 937 flew right through almost uncontested...
     
  5. Quentin

    Quentin New Member

    7,551
    1
    0
    Hope you're right, Vincent! It would be sad to see my birth state meekly follow the scripts written by our illustrious leaders. Tarheels are better than that! But carpetbaggers worry me.
     
  6. Axxe55

    Axxe55 The Apocalypse Is Coming.....

    7
    2
    0
    what a crock of crap! like anyone can accurately predict the intentions of the mentally unstable.

    who is going to oversee these background checks ad who is going to make up the guidelines they follow in allowing or denying someone the right own or possess a firearm?
     
  7. John_Deer

    John_Deer New Member

    6,624
    2
    0
    I like this part. The state legislature is most likely to listen to an unbiased doctor. I don't like the idea of doctors being able to limit someones RKBA without a judge making the final decision. That way a person can appeal the judges decision if he/she has just cause. There are doctors and judges for that matter who think no one should have a firearm except for hunting and sport.

    “We’re trying to reframe the approach to be more about individual assessment of risk and less about the categorical exclusion of people with mental health diagnoses,” Jeffrey W. Swanson, a Duke University School of Medicine psychiatry professor who worked on the report, said Monday. “The idea in the public mind that everybody with mental illness is a dangerous, homicidal monster is just wrong.”

    In fact, he said, mental illness is a factor in only a small fraction of gun violence overall, something around 4 to 5 percent. Mass shootings such as the Sandy Hook Elementary School massacre in Connecticut a year ago draw news media attention but are rare, compared with the estimated 31,000 gun deaths reported each year.

    Read more here: http://www.charlotteobserver.com/20...rm-background.html#.UsxInfRDtoy#storylink=cpy
     
  8. vincent

    vincent New Member

    4,123
    0
    0
    That's a really good point...

    Also, I dislike the way the term 'mental illness' is being used. It's a fact that a very small percentage of people that suffer from a mental disorder are prone to violent tendencies...

    It's being used as a blanket term to encompass as many people as possible, violent or not...

    Rough patch in your marriage and see a counselor? No guns for you!!!

    Relative died and saw a therapist for depression? No guns for you!!!

    Are you a veteran who saw combat? No guns for you!!!

    All this crap really is...(any and all of it) is a pathetic attempt to circumvent the 2A with the goal of 'public safety' as the excuse...infuriating...:mad:
     
    Last edited: Jan 8, 2014
  9. John_Deer

    John_Deer New Member

    6,624
    2
    0
    One thing I do not like is the restraining order part. I have seen people have restraining orders placed on them when they were out of state and have been gone for weeks before the restraining order was issued. On the deadliest catch an Alaskan boat captain had been at sea for weeks when a restraining order was placed on him. Restraining orders placed on someone who has never been a threat and has gone as far as leaving the state to avoid the person who applied for the restraining order are abusive. When someone applies for a frivolous restraining and denies a peaceful person their rights there should be recourse in a civil court that allows the peaceful person to win punitive damages.
     
  10. nitestalker

    nitestalker New Member

    6,489
    0
    0
    This is going to be the new war on gun owners. Mental illness is seen as a path around the 2nd Amendment. This was the tactic used by the Nazis and Stalinist to deprive people of their freedoms. They do not have to be criminals to be locked up.
    The medical profession and Mental health specialist will decide who should be allowed gun ownership. In some countrys you are required to have a mental exam every 5 years to renew gun permits. :eek:
     
  11. John_Deer

    John_Deer New Member

    6,624
    2
    0
    The authors of the gun control act of 1968 literally ripped the pages out of Hitlers playbook on gun control. If they researched NAZI German laws to create our laws the end game is obvious, total confiscation. Why do a lot of people not trust the NRA? The NRA supported the gun control act of 1968. The NRA only wanted to prevent felons from having guns but they backed the whole package to get the one item.

    The fact of the matter is the gun control act of 1968 was not to prevent crime. The GCA of 1968 was written to protect firearms manufacturers not to protect the public, like most gun control laws. It would not surprise me one bit if behind the scenes firearms manufacturers are playing both sides.
     
  12. vincent

    vincent New Member

    4,123
    0
    0
    http://www.firearmstalk.com/forums/f97/origins-gun-control-act-1968-warning-long-26881/

    ;)