0
2

[–] LoftyGoat 0 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago 

So... politicians and the religious would be unarmed. Would they be allowed to hire someone to carry guns on their behalf? Limit that also and the possibilities are endless.

0
3

[–] Dghaven 0 points 3 points (+3|-0) ago 

And this is how you get lawful citizens afraid to get help for depression or any other mental health issues for fear of losing thier 2nd ammendment rights. Driving people away from getting help isn't going to keep nut jobs from getting guns, it's going to make the problem worse by stigmatizing mental health issues, which I would guess most people have to pne degree or another, at least according to a liberal application of the dsm.

0
4

[–] 0fsgivin 0 points 4 points (+4|-0) ago 

Oh good...now i wonder what the definition of mentally ill will be?

0
0

[–] crazy_eyes ago 

if you disagree, no gun for you more guns for me

0
2

[–] Mike_Lithurtz 0 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago 

They will define that as: "Anyone who owns a gun".

0
11

[–] Owlchemy 0 points 11 points (+11|-0) ago 

Just another attempt ... or in this case, attempts ... to take rights away from people without just cause. No proof needed ... just cry to a judge, take someone's rights. It's the same thing they're trying to do with vets, PTSD ... take away their guns, no reason, just because we think there might be a problem ... no proof necessary, it's the new norm, people have to prove their innocence instead of requiring the accuser, who may be unstable themselves, to prove guilt. Unamerican, plain and simple, yet tolerated in this day and age.