|
|
|
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:
We Don’t Need a Sweeping Overhaul of Gun Laws
Submitted by:
Mark A. Taff
Website: http://www.marktaff.com
|
There
is 1 comment
on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments
|
Further, states can strengthen these laws without imposing overly broad Second Amendment restrictions on the general public.
On the whole, federal prohibitions on possession of firearms by the mentally ill correctly focus on individualized determinations of dangerousness, and not on the broader category of diagnosis alone.
This is consistent with both the Second Amendment’s protection of a fundamental right and a recognition that the existence of a mental illness in and of itself does not mean a person poses a heightened risk of future violence. |
| Comment by:
PHORTO
(2/15/2019)
|
Due process must be followed BEFORE anyone's rights or property can be denied, NOT as an afterthought.
Per the 4th, 5th, 6th and 14th Amendments, a person cannot be denied rights or property unless due process is followed establishing cause for such denial, pursuant to an adversarial hearing wherein the respondent can face his accusers, cross-examine witnesses, and present witnesses and exculpatory evidence in his behalf.
This must occur before any warrant may issue or seizure takes place. |
|
|
| QUOTES
TO REMEMBER |
| No kingdom can be secured otherwise than by arming the people. The possession of arms is the distinction between a freeman and a slave. He, who has nothing, and who himself belongs to another, must be defended by him, whose property he is, and needs no arms. But he, who thinks he is his own master, and has what he can call his own, ought to have arms to defend himself, and what he possesses; else he lives precariously, and at discretion. — James Burgh, Political Disquisitions: Or, an Enquiry into Public Errors, Defects, and Abuses [London, 1774-1775]. |
|
|
