KittySlayer
Grandmaster
If they DO show up to take firearms away for a "red flag violation", what are the odds that they will find ALL of the firearms?
Why do you think they are calling it a RED FLAG law.
If they DO show up to take firearms away for a "red flag violation", what are the odds that they will find ALL of the firearms?
Oh yeah, now THAT surely won't be abused.
I have no problem with separating a Psycho from guns, hammers, knives, ANFO and anything else he may use for murder and mayhem.
Lock him up board up his house and if he is adjudicated mentally ill and unable to rejoin society auction all of the belongings and place all of the funds in some kind of secure interest bearing account for their use or for their estate.
OK, say it this way:
"I have no problem with someone being able to decide that I need to be separated from guns, hammers, knives, ANFO and anything else that they think I may use for murder and mayhem, if I'm accused of being a Psycho.
Lock me up board up my house and if I am adjudicated mentally ill and unable to rejoin society auction all of my belongings and place all of the funds in some kind of secure interest bearing account for my use or for my estate."
Still OK with that?
Isn't that the original catch 22, if I'm sane enough to recognize that I'm crazy, then I'm not crazy.
OK, say it this way:
"I have no problem with someone being able to decide that I need to be separated from guns, hammers, knives, ANFO and anything else that they think I may use for murder and mayhem, if I'm accused of being a Psycho.
Lock me up board up my house and if I am adjudicated mentally ill and unable to rejoin society auction all of my belongings and place all of the funds in some kind of secure interest bearing account for my use or for my estate."
Still OK with that?
That’s just it though. You can be honest about it and properly decide that someone like that shouldn’t have access to guns. How do you scale that through legislation so that zealot activists and tyrants don’t just use it to disarm people?Well actually, if I was posting manifesto's about killing people and my family was so afraid of the way I was acting, yes I should be examined. As we would (most of us) that the Marjory Stoneman Douglas, El Passo and Dayton psycho's should have been.
Just because you love someone does not mean you do not take measures to protect others and them.
Another of the shooter's girlfriends is now saying that he told her he "heard voices" telling him to hurt people. And yet, she said nothing. But let's blame the guns, not these bat**** crazy *******s and their equally crazy bat**** crazy friends that know about them and do and say nothing.
Well actually, if I was posting manifesto's...
Stop right there. If you have ever typed up a document that can be described as a "manifesto", you should be examined.
If you share that document on social media, you should probably be committed.
Depends on the context. If you start an organization which supports unity and sanity, and you write up a document describing the intentions and views for the organization, that could be called a manifesto, and as long as tehre are no malicious intentions, there's nothing wrong or to be feared by that. What makes these shooters' manifestos a problem is that the intent is psychopathic and makes the manifesto pretty ****ed up.
All I can say is my 23,000 page manifesto is taking a very long time to write.
All I can say is my 23,000 page manifesto is taking a very long time to write.
How can we tell a manifesto from a raison d'être
Stop right there. If you have ever typed up a document that can be described as a "manifesto", you should be examined.
If you share that document on social media, you should probably be committed.