Elmo Posted July 4, 2011 Share Posted July 4, 2011 This is NOT cool... http://www.nytimes.com/2011/07/03/us/03guns.html?_r=2&ref=us&pagewanted=all Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nyantler Posted July 4, 2011 Share Posted July 4, 2011 I see no problem with a person being able to petition in court for his gun rights to be reinstated... if he can prove that he is well enough to own them again and the court agrees... I don't see the problem.. but one should not have them reinstated without a court evaluation of his/her competency Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Elmo Posted July 4, 2011 Author Share Posted July 4, 2011 I have not problem with having it re-instated with proper evaluation but according to the article, judges have been re-instating it with absolutely no evaluation at all. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
erussell Posted July 5, 2011 Share Posted July 5, 2011 Wow thats a tough one, feel sorry for people who have this problem. Would feel a little better if they had a full phsych eval and a doctor sign off and proof they are taking there meds to. It's just to much of a risk to have someone off there meds running around with a gun. I agree it's your constitutional right to own a gun and no one can take it away, But if you have a tendancy to say there are voices in your head telling you to load your guns and shoot people you shouldn't have access to guns no matter how much medication you are on. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Posted July 5, 2011 Share Posted July 5, 2011 Assuming the article is complete with all of the facts, the issue here is more about the competency of judges than anything written in law. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Elmo Posted July 5, 2011 Author Share Posted July 5, 2011 The burden always falls on the judicial system. By loosely stating the law, judges are allow to use the "discretion". The law should be very specific to the criterias that must be met before anyone with a history of potentially violent mental disorders can have their rights to bear arms reinstated. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Posted July 5, 2011 Share Posted July 5, 2011 If a judge decides to take those responsibilities in such a hap-hazard fashion, I can't imagine how you would write any law to protect against that. The description of the judge's questioning, indicates that he was really not all that serious about his duties. I'm not sure how the laws and procedures regulating that situation are worded, but the extent of the questioning certainly was nearly worthless. That's just one of the shortcomings in relying on judges. ....stuff happens. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.