Gun Seizure Laws More Popular Since Parkland Shooting

[Dale]

"Gun Seizure" as used in this headline has a very limited application. It refers to guns being taken away from an individual with known mental health issues, with a known propensity to violence. The laws that allow this are called Red Flag laws. Fourteen states, including some of the largest states in the country, now have such laws.

Parkland means the Marjorie Stoneman Douglas High School. Shooter Nicholas Cruz had well known tendencies to violence. Florida passed a Red Flag law after the shooting.

The oldest Red Flag Law in the country is in Connecticut. The Connecticut law was inspired by a mass shooting at a state lottery office and went into effect in 1999. It is claimed that gun suicides have dropped 10% in Connecticut since then.




Gun-seizure laws grow in popularity since Parkland shooting
By RYAN J. FOLEY February 10, 2019


Link:
Gun-seizure laws grow in popularity since Parkland shooting

 

[Not David]

I don't disagree with that.

 

[dogs4thewin]

I don't disagree with that.

Why not?

 

[Not David]

Why not?

I'm in favor of taking guns out of people with mental disabilities.

 

[dogs4thewin]

I'm in favor of taking guns out of people with mental disabilities.

but first of all how do we define that and second of all what about due process? I have no issue with taking guns away for safety either, but as a very strong second amendment supporter I also want a strong due process system to ensure that the only people affected are those that need to be and not just anyone that people think may be an issue.

 

[Not David]

but first of all how do we define that and second of all what about due process? I have no issue with taking guns away for safety either, but as a very strong second amendment supporter I also want a strong due process system to ensure that the only people affected are those that need to be and not just anyone that people think may be an issue.

I have no problem with that either.

 

[dogs4thewin]

I have no problem with that either.

you did not answer my first question how would we even determine that? There are people who have mental conditions who are perfectly fine when on medication, and there are also you talked about mental disabilities there are different levels of that. For example I have a moderate case of cerebral palsy. I am affected in my walking and fine motor skills among other things such as seizures and poor eyesight ( which is why I do not own a gun. CP can, however come in forms as mild a limp that one would notice unless they knew and as sever as needing assistance eating and having to be watched 24/7 ( pretty much bedridden). Yet, no matter how server everyone with CP is considered to be developmentally disabled, same with some other such conditions there are varying degrees. Someone with a very mild form of CP or someone who has other conditions but are high-funationing should not be forbidden from owning a weapon because he or she is developmentally disabled. Now clearly if someone has CP or another condition and has the mind of five year old then they clearly do not need guns, but that does not mean that that person with the same developmental condition who has a limp or is otherwise very mildly affected should be barred from having firearms.

 

[Not David]

you did not answer my first question how would we even determine that? There are people who have mental conditions who are perfectly fine when on medication, and there are also you talked about mental disabilities there are different levels of that. For example I have a moderate case of cerebral palsy. I am affected in my walking and fine motor skills among other things such as seizures and poor eyesight ( which is why I do not own a gun. CP can, however come in forms as mild a limp that one would notice unless they knew and as sever as needing assistance eating and having to be watched 24/7 ( pretty much bedridden). Yet, no matter how server everyone with CP is considered to be developmentally disabled, same with some other such conditions there are varying degrees. Someone with a very mild form of CP or someone who has other conditions but are high-funationing should not be forbidden from owning a weapon because he or she is developmentally disabled. Now clearly if someone has CP or another condition and has the mind of five year old then they clearly do not need guns, but that does not mean that that person with the same developmental condition who has a limp or is otherwise very mildly affected should be barred from having firearms.

Ok, there is a clear difference between one level of mental illness and another. Let's clarify the mental capacity of those who use weapons.

 

[Erik Nelson]

Andrew Pollack on Twitter

The Cultural Shifts Contributing to the School Shootings (Video) | Cold Case Christianity

1. Round the clock bullying on social media.
2. Mood altering medications.
3. Lack of strong father figure.
4. Secularization of society.