View Single Post
Old January 4, 2013, 02:45 PM   #93
Senior Member
Join Date: December 13, 2005
Posts: 2,540
Originally Posted by manta 49
My response may seem short and facile, but if an expansion would be useful to you, I would be happy to provide it.

The civilian keeping and bearing of arms is a matter of right, and a constitutionally explicit and fundamental one. The government may not curtail that right without due process. A psychiatric "check"is not due process, though a medical opinion can be an important step on the road to being adjudicated and incompetent.
The other choice is to do nothing.
I did not describe a choice, but explained why civilian ownership of arms differs from psychological testing for policing.

Originally Posted by manta 49
Would you be happy for a person that had accessed to be a risk of harming himself or others. Buying firearms and living beside you and your family.
I think your intent is to ask me whether I would be happy to have a person access arms and live beside my family, even though there is a risk he may harm himself or others. If I have misstated your question, let me know.

I have neighbors with arms. There is always a risk that another may harm himself or another. I prefer that my neighbors retain their right to arm.
zukiphile is offline  
Page generated in 0.03705 seconds with 7 queries