You can login if you already have an account or register by clicking the button below.
Registering is free and all you need is a username and password. We never ask you for your e-mail.
[–]Owlchemy0 points
11 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.
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.
[–]LoftyGoat0 points
2 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.
Sort: Top
[–] Owlchemy 0 points 11 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.
[–] 0fsgivin 0 points 4 points 4 points (+4|-0) ago
Oh good...now i wonder what the definition of mentally ill will be?
[–] Mike_Lithurtz 0 points 2 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago
They will define that as: "Anyone who owns a gun".
[–] crazy_eyes ago
if you disagree, no gun for you more guns for me
[–] Dghaven 0 points 3 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.
[–] LoftyGoat 0 points 2 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.