Skip to main content

View Diary: Let's Push "The Gun Owner's Acccountability Act" (49 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Yes. (0+ / 0-)

    But, its okay for the government to take away your constitutionally protected right but not for a mental health professional to help determine whether you should have that right?

    You seem to be a little bit confused as to the definition of 'rights'.  By definition you can't be forced to prove competancy in order to claim a right, you can only have that right removed if you have been found to be incompetant or otherwise have it removed through the due process of law.  

    It's okay to disallow those who have been adjudicated as mentally unfit from owning a firearm.  In other words, a judge has already signed a paper saying that you're too nuts to be allowed your freedoms and your rights must be abridged for the safety of yourself and / or others.  

    Let's pass a law saying that you have to take courses in classical logic before you can argue on the internet.  That wouldn't interfere with free speech, right?  (/snark)

    •  Maybe not the same comparison but... (0+ / 0-)

      pilots can be medically disqualified though I know being a pilot is not a constitutional right.  But they are required to take physical exams and you are required to pass a test to get a driver's license.

      I see what you're saying but the method you describe relies totally on reaction and not prevention.  If you're found mentally unfit could be if you're lucky enough to stumble into a mental professional's office and there's an open appointment or there were some other reason or suspicion that forced you into being examined.  

      How many people do not get examined by mental health professionals but should?  My point is if you're going to arm yourself, then for the benefit of everyone else, you should be evaluated.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site