
|
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:
MA: Plan to seize guns hits opposition
Submitted by:
Mark A. Taff
Website: http://www.marktaff.com
|
There
is 1 comment
on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments
|
Gun owners could have their firearms taken under a controversial plan to keep weapons out of the hands of people who are mentally ill or deemed dangerous.
The legislation, if approved, would allow police, health care workers, family members and others to ask a judge to issue an “extreme risk protection order” allowing police to revoke the firearms license, for up to a year, of someone considered a danger to himself or others.
Police could seize firearms belonging to that person, as well.
Gun control advocates say the measure, modeled on domestic violence protection orders that have been on the books for decades, will reduce gun violence and suicides that claim tens of thousands of lives each year. |
Comment by:
dasing
(4/17/2017)
|
Who decides that a person is mentally ill? |
|
|
QUOTES
TO REMEMBER |
"Some people think that the Second Amendment is an outdated relic of an earlier time. Doubtless some also think that constitutional protections of other rights are outdated relics of earlier times. We The People own those rights regardless, unless and until We The People repeal them. For those who believe it to be outdated, the Second Amendment provides a good test of whether their allegiance is really to the Constitution of the United States, or only to their preferences in public policies and audiences. The Constitution is law, not vague aspirations, and we are obligated to protect, defend, and apply it. If the Second Amendment were truly an outdated relic, the Constitution provides a method for repeal. The Constitution does not furnish the federal courts with an eraser." --9th Circuit Court Judge Andrew Kleinfeld, dissenting opinion in which the court refused to rehear the case while citing deeply flawed anti-Second Amendment nonsense (Nordyke v. King; opinion filed April 5, 2004) |
|
|