|
|
|
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:
WA: Shootings: Guns are scapegoat for mental illness
Submitted by:
Mark A. Taff
Website: http://www.marktaff.com
|
There
is 1 comment
on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments
|
Recently CNN quoted Peter Ambler of the Giffords organization as stating: “It’s not mental illness, it’s hate and guns.”
I’m not sure, but I don’t believe hating something so much that one chooses to kill is an example of sound mental health.
Gun control zealots want to vilify all firearms and the hundreds of millions of people who own them. The overwhelming majority of these owners are law-abiding citizens who would never consider harming others, except for self defense. |
| Comment by:
PHORTO
(8/10/2019)
|
Good point, but "hate" and "intolerance" are not mental illnesses, and you've got to be careful going there. The Soviet Union committed and imprisoned thousands upon thousands based upon arbitrarily designating "anti-social behavior" as mental illness, and that encompassed any behavior the government didn't like.
Absent a current crime, there must be a documented history of violence that establishes probable cause upon clear and convincing evidence. If no crime has yet been committed and there is no history of violence, probable cause to issue a warrant simply doesn't exist. Rights cannot be suspended/denied based upon what a person "might" do unless it can be demonstrated that s/he has done it before. |
|
|
| QUOTES
TO REMEMBER |
| Are we at last brought to such humiliating and debasing degradation, that we cannot be trusted with arms for our defense? Where is the difference between having our arms in possession and under our direction, and having them under the management of Congress? If our defense be the real object of having those arms, in whose hands can they be trusted with more propriety, or equal safety to us, as in our own hands? — Patrick Henry, 3 J. Elliot, Debates in the Several State Conventions 45, 2d ed. Philadelphia, 1836 |
|
|
