Both great questions. I don’t really have a good answer to either. That being said I think any avenue that starts with punishing people for crimes other people have commit is a non starter.
I think it would be less about finding people capable of doing it and more about the people not being willing to risk jailtime to make one for you.
Do you know any machinists personally that could Jerry rig an AR? I know a couple back home, but I doubt they’d be willing to risk prison for me
Terrible.
For one, you shouldn’t need to prove to the almighty government you deserve to exercise a constitutionally guaranteed right.
Two, you get jail time if your referral commits a crime? What’s 1/4th of a life sentence? Or the death penalty if it’s a state that has it? You’re gonna take me from my son’s for 20 years because I wrote a referral to someone that ended up snapping? We’ve already got an overflowing penal system as it is. Now we’ve got people that who’s only “crime” is bad judgement being added to the prison population… And, what did you really accomplish? Law-abiding citizens won’t write referrals for other law-abiding citizens because they’re scared they’ll be thrown in prison for a crime someone else committed. I mean, how insane is it that we’re actually discussing putting people in prison for someone else’s crime. That’s about the exact opposite of liberty.
Three, now external forces get to decide if you can exercise a right or not. What happens when you need 3 referrals in order to peacefully assemble? If you don’t have 3 referrals can the police illegally search you and your person? Do you get a speedy trial sans 3 referrals? You might be a looney after all.
I’m not picking on you (at least I don’t mean to be), but this is a prime example of why pro-2A folks don’t want to give an inch on anything. Things like bump stocks could be legislated away, they’re basically useless if you know what you’re doing, but people don’t want to compromise because you end up needing a doctors note to exercise a fundamental right or in jail because you’re buddy Joe goes postal out of the blue.
tl;dr
yea yea.
Again, I ask Do mentally-ill people have the same rights as mentally-stable Americans?
Maybe punishing someone for someone else’s crime isn’t a good idea. But there are other forms of accountability that could be applied. This spawned from me believing that it’s our family and friends that know us best, and are (I think) able to communicate that.
How many times have we heard from family or friends that “he wasn’t right”? And this goes beyond shootings, but also examples like the Boston marathon bombing.
You’ve got a long way to go to prove that people that can’t find 3 people that don’t care about their families = mentally I’ll
Not only does that not address my honest question, I think you tried to pack like 3 sentences into one making it hard to understand the point you’re trying to make.
I bet you can’t find 3 people that don’t care about their families.
I can’t find 3 people, but I do care about my family.
I’m not a lawyer. That said, I’m not aware of any laws that limit constitutional rights based on a person’s mental state. Should there be, probably. You’re opening pandor’s box, though, so I’m not sure how much support you’re gonna get. For example, I think you would first need to define mentally ill. However, now that you’ve introduced a means to limit fire-arm ownership what’s to stop a Bernie Sander’s type from expanding what it means to be mentally ill?
Such as?
Quite often, but we also know the guy in this case, and in many cases, were known to the authorities and were still able to carry out their crimes.
I appreciate that you’re trying to come up with a solution. I just think there are so many other factors that restricting the ownership of an inanimate object is a band-aid solution at best. We need to have serious conversations about mental health and a culture that, for whatever reason over the last 30 years, has shifted to this mass-death mentality as an outlet.
I wouldn’t ask three people to write me referral out of respect for their families and their liberty. I’m not a looney bin, either, and I own quite a few firearms.
Apologies, I thought it was rhetorical.
Mentally Ill people do NOT have the same rights as mentally stable Americans.
I’m still struggling to see the leap where anyone that can’t find 3 people willing to go to jail for a crime they didn’t commit is mentally unstable.
Shit I think anyone that vouches for someone’s guns knowing they could be imprisoned and leave their family without them is mentally unstable lol
Thats just crazy. Background checks or some kind of gun control or mandatory training or screening is crazy. Crazy people & people that beat wives, kids, have cops at house every 2 weeks have the right to buy as many guns as they want. People shouldn’t have any inconvenience whats so ever for their favorite hobby. Buying a gun should be as easy as buying a dildo.
Do you agree with Carb that if you can’t find 3 people willing to vouch for you it must mean you’re mentally ill?
FWIW, I do not think carbidius’ proposed solution will work, but I applaud his willingness to think a little outside the box on this issue. For my part, in these forum discussions, when someone is trying to come up with a “solution” to a very difficult problem, even if I do not agree I am going to try to be a little more respectful.
Not that you or pfury was disrespectful; just that I think it’s worth considering and kicking the tires on some outside the box ideas instead of saying “that’s dumb, next question.”
Your point about expanding the definition of what is “mentally-ill” is the one that scares me. Enabling the gov to just round up anyone they want cause they find them “mentally Ill” is exactly what I would like to avoid, but what do we do? Again, I think that peers, family members, friends etc. that know someone are at the very least good resources for this.
As for accountability, Shit man, there’s millions of options; A monetary fine, restricting their own gun rights etc. None of which would bring back the victim of the crime at hand.
The shit about the gov and the FBI dropping the ball is quite possibly the most dis-heartening item to come out of this shit. And it also shows how incompetent the government can be, how are we supposed to rely on them to enforce ANY magical gun laws? …I have seen stories where the gov thwarted terrorist attacks in the past few year, so I don’t want to ignore that bit of good news.
It sucks that there are really now winners to exploit in these situations.
I think there’s an extra player in the game re: ‘super polarizing issues’ that most people forget is there. A reasonable shift.
Going from what we have now to UBC isn’t a huge leap.
Going from what we have now to imprisoning people for other people’s crimes and such a loose definition on mentally insane gets the lawls.
Agree wholeheartedly though. Any discussion is good discussion. If I came off as a dick I didn’t intend to
So here we are. The BoR does not apply to them. This is interesting to me. Identifying who they are, obviously tough.
Nah, I don’t think you really did. But sometimes in forums we post pretty abrupt/brief replies that sound more dickish than they mean to. I try to make it abundantly clear when I’m being a dick vs. when I appreciate a respectful opinion that I just disagree with, lol.
You did a little bit (come off as a dick). Borderline in my mind. But I’ve gotten better at not being so sensitive.
In real life I am definitely the guy to throw out a lot of ideas. 1/100 are good enough to work, and even that one usually gets scoffed at right off the bat.
Typically denying people BoR requires some type of judge discretion. It’s a very long process unless the circumstances are perfect (suicidal, etc).
Apologies. Wasn’t my intention.
I think there’s some basic fundamentals of America that can’t be ignored when coming up with potential solutions. To me, due process is one of those. The thought of punishing someone for what someone else did feels a little too NK’y to me
Not really but its overly obvious better screening needs to happen. Vouching meh…that wouldn’t stop guys like Vegas killer…Hes not all the way wrong people sell guns on Craigslist and other places…then months or yrs later they get used in crimes. Usually nothing happens to original owners. Hence most street crime… These guys arent master criminals buying crates of guns from Russians like in movies…its all right here from locals.
The mental illness part bothers me:
Something like 1 in 5 Americans take a psychiatric medication so depending on your definition of mentally ill you are talking a massive amount of Americans. Is the woman who takes a medication for a panic attack mentally ill? You have tons of successful people who have struggled with bipolar disorder or depression who won’t shoot people up. And someone who doesn’t fit a diagnosis like that certainly can.
How would you penalize someone that sells without doing a background check?