http://thehill.com/homenews/adminis...mprehensive-background-checks-ban-bump-stocks
Old enough to fight for the country but not to buy a gun?
Old enough to fight for the country but not to buy a gun?
http://thehill.com/homenews/adminis...mprehensive-background-checks-ban-bump-stocks
Old enough to fight for the country but not to buy a gun?
Everything goes to 21. No driving. No fu***ng. No aborting. No voting. No drinking. No contracts. No credit. No military service.
If you’re too immature to know right from wrong, then you’re obviously too immature to understand all those other things.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Absolutely!Only applies to people who follow the law. Will not reduce access or prevent crime.
Whoever said anyone was consistent about anything, especially if it's both a political and an emotional issue?so you all forgot to say raise the age of consent
Everything goes to 21. No driving. No fu***ng. No aborting. No voting. No drinking. No contracts. No credit. No military service.
If you’re too immature to know right from wrong, then you’re obviously too immature to understand all those other things.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
The more I think and read about the "mental health" issue, the less impressed i am with using it.
Apart from mental health defects being a spectrum, not a fixed diagnosis, how and where do you draw a line? If you can measure BAC, and a .08 BAC is drunk, but .079 is not, then how do you measure mental health?
Then there is the due process aspect. Over a century ago people were being forcibly committed to asylums because they were eccentric, difficult to deal with, or old and rich and stingy (we want Uncle Joe's money, so let's commit him)! Today, due to laws enacted because of that trend, it is very difficult to commit someone without their consent.
A lot of the mental health evaluation is up to the OPINION of the doctor. If you cherry-pick a doctor who hates guns (easy to find one like that), then simply wanting a gun could be seen as a mental defect. "You can't have guns simply because you want one". The opportunity for implementing an agenda is huge here.
Any proposal that avoids due process in front of a truly impartial judge, with rebuttal opinions being allowed is on its face going to be ripe for abuse.
If you start requiring full-on mental health judgements, court evaluations, and so on, it will become prohibitively expensive to enforce, much less defend.
In any case, prohibiting a person from gun ownership before they commit a crime is a very slippery slope. You can't arrest someone prior to them committing a crime, so the recourse is to label them insane enough to prohibit ownership. Still won't stop someone from otherwise getting a gun in any case....unless you commit them... We're coming full circle to the 1920s again...
No, but they'd love to use it as an excuse to take away your guns...Where do we draw the line? I have depression due to chronic pain. Because of that I take an antidepressant every day. It also has the benefit of helping with the pain. Due to pain I have trouble falling asleep, so I take a small dose of another antidepressant that helps me fall asleep.
Does this mean I have mental health problems? If I hadn't of broken my back in the Marines I wouldn't now be enjoying all this pain.
...
- marry - 14 in Texas with parental consent...