View Single Post
Old January 15, 2013, 09:52 AM   #21
Spats McGee
Join Date: July 28, 2010
Location: Arkansas
Posts: 7,001
Originally Posted by nate45
Proving one isn't a felon or a loon, isn't tantamount to surrendering our second amendment rights in my mind. . . .
Perhaps not in your mind, but it puts the burden on those wishing to exercise this fundamental, individual right on those wishing to do so, before they are allowed. For a comparison in the First Amendment context, it is akin to a prior restraint.

Originally Posted by nate45
. . . .I've tried, but I can't find an excuse for not making it as difficult as possible for felons and those adjudicated to be mentally ill from acquiring firearms. Background checks and coordinating mental health records with the database, is actually one of the few things that would really help.

Screaming my rights, in the face of something that would actually keep firearms out of the hands of criminals, isn't doing us any favors.
There's little evidence to support the notion that imposing such a restriction (forcing everyone to prove that they're entitled to exercise the 2A prior to exercise of same) would actually keep firearms out of the hands of criminals.

Mind you, I'm not fussing about the coordination of mental health records. That's probably a good idea. My concern on that front is how we (the American public & Congress) will define "mentally ill," and where we'll draw the policy line at when it's appropriate to deny someone the 2A.
I'm a lawyer, but I'm not your lawyer. If you need some honest-to-goodness legal advice, go buy some.
Spats McGee is offline  
Page generated in 0.04948 seconds with 7 queries