Pence: Indiana’s red flag law could serve as blueprint...rest of the country

[HoughMade]

If you asked our founding fathers whether a crazy guy who constantly threatened to shoot his neighbors because they are "well and thoroughly in on it" while carrying a loaded musket should have the musket removed from him, you will probably get a different answer than if you asked them whether a person should retain their right to keep and bear arms after a person with whom they have a legal dispute made a spurious accusation that they were dangerous.

 

[KLB]

I wonder if their solution would be to remove the firearm or remove the person.

 

[MinutemanPatriot]

Whetever the actual **** happened to erring on the side of liberty?

EXACTLY. And whatever happened to "SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED"???

It infuriates me to no end to see gun owners, of all people, making excuses FOR infringements!!!

 

[MinutemanPatriot]

If you asked our founding fathers whether a crazy guy who constantly threatened to shoot his neighbors because they are "well and thoroughly in on it" while carrying a loaded musket should have the musket removed from him, you will probably get a different answer than if you asked them whether a person should retain their right to keep and bear arms after a person with whom they have a legal dispute made a spurious accusation that they were dangerous.

I think that if such a scenario presented itself to the founders, they would address the underlying mental health issue, and remove the individual rather than violate the most important part of the Bill of Rights. They would not infringe on rights that they just finished bleeding and dying for!! 2A is the ONLY aspect of the entire Constitution and Bill of Rights that says "SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED" rather than "Congress shall make no law..." It clearly indicates, using plain logic and English grammar, that NO agency (or other part of government whether it be local, county, state or federal) has the power to in any way shape or form put ANY restriction on gun rights.

Red Flag laws violate very nearly the ENTIRE Bill of Rights, save for the 3rd & 10th. How much infringement are you willing to tolerate, let alone advocate!!

Again, I am astounded and DEEPLY dismayed that there are gun owners apologizing for infringements of ANY kind against the 2nd Amendment!! OUR NATION's FOUNDERS WOULD BE ASHAMED OF SOME OF YOU ALL TO THE POINT OF SAYING YOU'RE NOT EVEN AMERICANS!!

 

[jamil]

I think that if such a scenario presented itself to the founders, they would address the underlying mental health issue, and remove the individual rather than violate the most important part of the Bill of Rights. They would not infringe on rights that they just finished bleeding and dying for!! 2A is the ONLY aspect of the entire Constitution and Bill of Rights that says "SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED" rather than "Congress shall make no law..." It clearly indicates, using plain logic and English grammar, that NO agency (or other part of government whether it be local, county, state or federal) has the power to in any way shape or form put ANY restriction on gun rights.

Red Flag laws violate very nearly the ENTIRE Bill of Rights, save for the 3rd & 10th. How much infringement are you willing to tolerate, let alone advocate!!

Again, I am astounded and DEEPLY dismayed that there are gun owners apologizing for infringements of ANY kind against the 2nd Amendment!! OUR NATION's FOUNDERS WOULD BE ASHAMED OF SOME OF YOU ALL TO THE POINT OF SAYING YOU'RE NOT EVEN AMERICANS!!

In your conversation with the founders, where they told you how ashamed they were of the “gun owners” who you said, said things they didn’t say, weren’t even Americans; did you ask them how ****ty was their coffee back then? They had ****ty water and a pretty ****ty way of making it. Just had to be horrible. The tea had to be even worse!

 

[MinutemanPatriot]

In your conversation with the founders, where they told you how ashamed they were of the “gun owners” who you said, said things they didn’t say, weren’t even Americans; did you ask them how ****ty was their coffee back then? They had ****ty water and a pretty ****ty way of making it. Just had to be horrible. The tea had to be even worse!

..WTF does THAT have to do with the spirit of our nation's founders and their absolute hatred of things that gun owners ARE DOCUMENTED ON THIS VERY SITE having just said!!

I imagine that our nation's founders would be utterly aghast at the cavalier attitude of people LIKE YOU with regards to the state of our liberty!

PEOPLE LIKE YOU AND ATTITUDES LIKE YOURS ARE THE VERY REASON WHY THIS COUNTRY IS SO F#CKED UP!!!!!
SHAME ON YOU!

 

[JettaKnight]

I think that if such a scenario presented itself to the founders, they would address the underlying mental health issue, ...

Well, first you'd have to explain the complexities of mental diagnosis, psychotropic drugs, and get them to realize that locking a person in long term solitary confinement isn't a good solution. (ever been to Eastern Pennsylvania Penitentiary?)



Besides, addressing mental health requires a robust system to deal with it, and that costs money... money no one wants to spend (and tax) because it's "welfare".

 

[MinutemanPatriot]

Well, first you'd have to explain the complexities of mental diagnosis, psychotropic drugs, and get them to realize that locking a person in long term solitary confinement isn't a good solution. (ever been to Eastern Pennsylvania Penitentiary?)

Besides, addressing mental health requires a robust system to deal with it, and that costs money... money no one wants to spend (and tax) because it's "welfare".

Medical intervention doesn't have to be overly complicated and it CERTAINLY doesn't have to involve infringements on rights so sacrosanct in the eyes of the founders that they're NEVER to be INFRINGED upon!!

Again, I see gun owners excusing the unlawful actions of tyrants with abandon... Dammit, you're not supposed to be licking the jackboot, let alone deep-throating the g-damn leather!!!

 

[JettaKnight]

..WTF does THAT have to do with the spirit of our nation's founders and their absolute hatred of things that gun owners ARE DOCUMENTED ON THIS VERY SITE having just said!!

I imagine that our nation's founders would be utterly aghast at the cavalier attitude of people LIKE YOU with regards to the state of our liberty!

PEOPLE LIKE YOU AND ATTITUDES LIKE YOURS ARE THE VERY REASON WHY THIS COUNTRY IS SO F#CKED UP!!!!!
SHAME ON YOU!

It's almost as if we disagree on politics as much as the Founding Fathers did.



And to openly accuse Jamil of screwing up the America is, in itself, "f****d up".

 

[JettaKnight]

Medical intervention doesn't have to be overly complicated and it CERTAINLY doesn't have to involve infringements on rights so sacrosanct in the eyes of the founders that they're NEVER to be INFRINGED upon!!

Again, I see gun owners excusing the unlawful actions of tyrants with abandon... Dammit, you're not supposed to be licking the jackboot, let alone deep-throating the g-damn leather!!!

What if the person doesn't want mental help? What do you do then? They haven't done anything that warrants being incarcerated, and we all know that jail isn't a good place to find mental help...

 

[MinutemanPatriot]

What if the person doesn't want mental help? What do you do then? They haven't done anything that warrants being incarcerated, and we all know that jail isn't a good place to find mental help...

We all know that involuntary mental commitment wasn't a thing till several generations after the founders had passed... kinda like the sheepdog had died, so the foxes felt safe raiding the henhouse. I'm pretty sure that the founders would be adamant that government could do NOTHING until a violation of liberty had occurred.

Involuntary commitment is not the same thing as prison either. One is therapeutic whereas the other is supposed to be punitive. The fact that the government can't differentiate just proves government shouldn't be in charge of mental health!!

 

[KLB]

..WTF does THAT have to do with the spirit of our nation's founders and their absolute hatred of things that gun owners ARE DOCUMENTED ON THIS VERY SITE having just said!!

I imagine that our nation's founders would be utterly aghast at the cavalier attitude of people LIKE YOU with regards to the state of our liberty!

PEOPLE LIKE YOU AND ATTITUDES LIKE YOURS ARE THE VERY REASON WHY THIS COUNTRY IS SO F#CKED UP!!!!!
SHAME ON YOU!

Wow. You should take a deep breath and relax a little.

I also recommend you just let the language filter do its job, rather than trying to get around it like that.

 

[MinutemanPatriot]

Wow. You should take a deep breath and relax a little.

I also recommend you just let the language filter do its job, rather than trying to get around it like that.

If by relax a little, you mean accept tyranny and suffer those who think "a little slavery" is OK, then NO THANK YOU.

 

[JettaKnight]

We all know that involuntary mental commitment wasn't a thing till several generations after the founders had passed... kinda like the sheepdog had died, so the foxes felt safe raiding the henhouse. I'm pretty sure that the founders would be adamant that government could do NOTHING until a violation of liberty had occurred.

Involuntary commitment is not the same thing as prison either. One is therapeutic whereas the other is supposed to be punitive. The fact that the government can't differentiate just proves government shouldn't be in charge of mental health!!

Then who should?

Like I asked, if a credible case can be made that someone has a potential and propensity to do something harmful to themselves or others with firearm(s), what should be done?

Saying, "get them mental health support" is akin to Warren's "medicare for all" - yeah, that's good, but how do you do it?




If someone is schizophrenic and on heavy medication and meeting with a psychiatrist regularly, yet living on their own, should they be allowed to buy a firearm?

 

[JettaKnight]

If by relax a little, you mean accept tyranny and suffer those who think "a little slavery" is OK, then NO THANK YOU.

[video=youtube;uWyG9TU3ltw]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uWyG9TU3ltw[/video]

 

[MinutemanPatriot]

Then who should?

Like I asked, if a credible case can be made that someone has a potential and propensity to do something harmful to themselves or others with firearm(s), what should be done?

Saying, "get them mental health support" is akin to Warren's "medicare for all" - yeah, that's good, but how do you do it?




If someone is schizophrenic and on heavy medication and meeting with a psychiatrist regularly, yet living on their own, should they be allowed to buy a firearm?

Your answer, aside from proving your abject inability to grasp libertarian principles, ignores the fact that there are mechanisms already existing that don't involve the violation of 8/10ths of the Bill of Rights.

 

[MinutemanPatriot]

[video=youtube;uWyG9TU3ltw]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uWyG9TU3ltw[/video]

No coherent or reasoned answer, so you insert a random noise video.

Ok millenial. Here's your koolaid sippy cup.

 

[KLB]

If by relax a little, you mean accept tyranny and suffer those who think "a little slavery" is OK, then NO THANK YOU.

No. I mean you should adjust how you interact with people here to a more civil manner. Things like going around the filter and insulting people are generally frowned upon.

 

[JettaKnight]

Your answer, aside from proving your abject inability to grasp libertarian principles, ignores the fact that there are mechanisms already existing that don't involve the violation of 8/10ths of the Bill of Rights.

INGO isn't about calling everyone else freedom-haters, it's about having a discussion, so come down off the high horse and explain it to me like I'm five (because I'm a sippy-cup loving millennial*).

I'll repeat my question: "If someone is schizophrenic and on heavy medication and meeting with a psychiatrist regularly, yet living on their own, should they be allowed to buy a firearm?"





* You do know millenials are in the thirties by now, right? And did you bother to check how old I am?

 

[MinutemanPatriot]

My comments were a direct reaction to the statements of those I was responding to. Not insult but shaming. I can't help it if people choose to get butthurt over my speaking straight truth! And I believe NO ONE should be making excuses for or defending those who dismiss the supreme law of the land and embrace the dogma of the enemies of the Constitution.

But considering how the vast majority of Americans simultaneously claim to be Christians, yet refuse to learn/understand Christian doctrine or live by its' tenets, I'm not surprised either.