So. We are paranoid to worry about them confiscating our guns, are we?

[ECSNorway]

khagler wrote:

---

ECSNorway wrote:

---

A question:

a) How do you judge who is sufficiently "mentally ill" that they should not be allowed to own a gun? Who is equipped to tell the difference between a Jared Loughner and a David Lewis?

b) What happens if you disagree with that decision? Is there an appeals process?

c) Who determines, under law, who is qualified to make the decision?

A. It's been a while since I bought a gun from an FFL, but as I recall the wording on the form is "involuntarily committed" (note that being involuntarily committed doesn't require anything that could possibly be deemed "mental illness," it just requires someone with the power to do so deciding to lock you up). Nobody is so equipped.
B. You're screwed. No.

C. Politicians who want to ensure that only they and their bully-boy enforcers have guns.

Well, yes. But I'm asking that of the people who actually think we legitimately need -only- these steps, not the fascists who actually run the parties.
--
Sucrose Octanitrate.
Proof positive that with sufficient motivation, you can make anything explode.