Didn't say that, did I?mojo84 wrote: ↑Thu Nov 15, 2018 1:35 pmSo, it's better to lock someone up without due process? Isn't locking them up more of a violation than temporarily removing one's guns?ELB wrote: ↑Thu Nov 15, 2018 1:22 pmThis. Focus on the person causing the problem, not the tools of folks not causing the problem.Soccerdad1995 wrote: ↑Tue Nov 13, 2018 5:20 pm ...
If someone is really this dangerous they need to be locked up immediately. ...
And double-amen to the advice above from my Army and Air Force bretheren about the inclination for divorce lawyers to misuse any law for an edge. I too have seen military and non-military husbands shafted because the wife's lawyer made fatuous claims about the husband, and it is no secret that divorce courts tilt toward wives.
I did say that if a person is dangerous enough to cause a problem by using a gun, he's dangerous enough to cause a problem by using his fists, a car, a bomb or whatever. The focus of any law controlling dangerous persons should be the dangerous person, not guns and cars and stuff used by everybody else.