TexasCHLforum.com

powerboatr wrote:yes but the other side of the coin is he has been treated for suicidal ideations, attempts or thoughts and NOW is a peace officer carrying a deadly weapon....
does it bother anyone he could slip into the pre existing state and do a suicide with standby collateral damages(other dead people), maybe a traffic stop sends him over the edge...

I know from y time as a suicide prevention officer in the Navy......the ones whom profess these thoughts....are never cured, they still pop up and you never ever know when they push you over the limit
I would be scared to death if this guy pulled me over.
sorry, treatment or not he should not be a LEO.

No, I'm -not- worried about someone who had suicidal ideations, attempts, or thoughts, mainly because everyone has, at one point or another. The difference is the vast majority of us reject these ideas and thoughts immediately, but those who are severely clinically or situationally depressed might give it consideration. A few attempt it. A -very- few attempt it seriously.

And I don't worry about what anyone -could- do, I worry about what they are -doing-. Any one of us who carries a firearm on a daily or semi-daily basis -could- get "pushed over the limit" and go on a murderous rampage at any time. None of us do, though. Justifying actions against another based on what they "might" do, instead of what they -are- doing or attempting, is justification for taking ALL our guns, ALL our rights, because of what we -could- do, what we -might- do, but what we never -will- do.

If he's too much of a danger to have a gun, he's too much of a danger to walk the streets, have a driver license, be able to buy a baseball bat, kitchen knife, frying pan, or even, to reference another thread, to buy or handle a ceramic squirrel. If he's safe enough to squirrel or play ball, then we're not really worried about him.

VoiceofReason wrote:This officers situation may be a violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act or the rehabilitation act.

As a matter of fact the federal firearm law they are using may be in conflict with one or both laws.
I am not a lawyer but I have had considerable experience with both the Americans with Disabilities Act and the rehabilitation act.

One thing that I can see is "employers must keep all information concerning the medical condition or history of its applicants or employees, including information about psychiatric disability, confidential under the ADA."

This whole thing about a person being treated for depression for a couple of months, twenty years ago keeping him/her from owning a gun has me interested. Think I will do some more research on it.

This whole thing about "mental illness" preventing a person from owning a gun at ANY TIME has me infuriated. "Mentally ill" is, if you'll pardon a politically incorrect phrase, the politically correct "new black," or the politically correct "new Jew." It is a way for the government to justify taking rights away without cause, without due process, and without recourse.

I've gone off on this several times before, so I'll just summarize: Once you make "mentally ill" an excuse to remove rights, the definition of "mentally ill" will be expanded to include everyone, and no one will have rights.

Rights should -only- be affected through due and legal process, as a result of crimes committed and convicted. The state of one's head, emotions, or how many voices are carrying on a solo conversation has absolutely nothing to do with it.