|
|
|
NOTE!
This is a real-time comments system. As such, it's also a
free speech zone within guidelines set forth on the Post
Comments page. Opinions expressed here may or may not
reflect those of KeepAndBearArms staff, members, or
any other living person besides the one who posted them.
Please keep that in mind. We ask that all who post
comments assure that they adhere to our Inclusion
Policy, but there's a bad apple in every
bunch, and we have no control over bigots and
other small-minded people. Thank you. --KeepAndBearArms.com
|
The
Below Comments Relate to this Newslink:
Veterans At Risk Of Suicide Negotiate A Thorny Relationship With Guns
Submitted by:
Mark A. Taff
Website: http://www.marktaff.com
|
There
is 1 comment
on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments
|
The VA's current policy is to flag the names of veterans who have been declared mentally incompetent in the FBI's National Instant Criminal Background Check System so they can't buy a new gun. But that violates their Second Amendment rights, says Republican Rep. Phil Roe of Tennessee, chairman of the House Veterans Affairs Committee.
"VA does not determine that the veteran is actually dangerous before sending the name to the FBI," said Roe, who sponsored the bill to require a judge or magistrate to put veterans on the NICS.
He and other advocates for gun rights say veterans shouldn't be barred from buying guns unless they've undergone some kind of due process and had a chance to make their case. |
| Comment by:
PHORTO
(5/4/2017)
|
| Due process. Period. |
|
|
| QUOTES
TO REMEMBER |
| For, in principle, there is no difference between a law prohibiting the wearing of concealed arms, and a law forbidding the wearing such as are exposed; and if the former be unconstitutional, the latter must be so likewise. But it should not be forgotten, that it is not only a part of the right that is secured by the constitution; it is the right entire and complete, as it existed at the adoption of the constitution; and if any portion of that right be impaired, immaterial how small the part may be, and immaterial the order of time at which it be done, it is equally forbidden by the constitution. [Bliss vs. Commonwealth, 12 Ky. (2 Litt.) 90, at 92, and 93, 13 Am. Dec. 251 (1822) |
|
|
