Lucky45 wrote:
C'mon Geister, PLEASE!!! Don't even go there, cause obviously you don't know the definition of slavery.
No, Lucky, it's obvious that YOU don't. I guess you assume that a person is only enslaved when they're wearing chains and working the fields.
If all of our personal information is in government databases and we have to ask someone permission to do ANYTHING non-threatening, then WE ARE SLAVES.
If you would read the works of our Founding Fathers, you would understand that WE are supposed to control the government, not the other way around. They should be asking US for permission to do things, not the other way around.
Lucky45 wrote:
Also, if you subscribe to that belief then you should have no problem with protesting about the wasting off tax dollars with police, ambulances, etc when these nutcases every week want to jump off a bridge, cut their wrist/neck or shoot themself. Would love to be the 911 operator and just hang up when you get those call? Let them do it.!!!
What in the world are you talking about? What I said is that people should NOT be denied their Rights because they MIGHT do something.
The government should NOT own me. I get tired of hearing about America's freedoms when at the same time I hear proposals toto put in a new government database and have to ask for permission to do ANYTHING non-threatening. You can't have both.
Once you start asking for the government permission to do anything, you give up more and more of your Rights until we are all just sheep.
I am not talking about depression.
There is NO clear cut line between different mental ailments. I've known people who've suffered through depression who also displayed signs of bipolar disorder. I've also known someone who had OCD who displayed signs of
depression, etc.
Psychology in itself is more subjective than science. Just take any intro to psych course and you'll see that a lot of of the findings are based more on a psychologist's opinions and bias than fact.
My own psychology textbook had anti-gun statements in it when it had nothing to do with the material. You really want them to tell us who can purchase a firearm?
I am talking about mentally sickness to the point where those people are a threat to others and have to be remove from general population, per se. for everyone's safety.
And how exactly do you determine who is mentally sick like that, especially with what I said above? Heck, according to some psychologists, anyone who has a general interest in firearms displays some sort of mental sickness. A few of them might even suggest that I'm more of a threat to others since I own a firearm.
No one has a mission to take away others freedom under the constitution,
This is a total conflict with what you've said. You want to deny handgun purchases by those who MIGHT harm you, but haven't yet. You're taking away someone's freedom because they MIGHT harm you.
If you're going to start down that route, why stop at mental patients? I mean, are you going to deny Rights to other groups of people who statistically will cause more crimes? Are you going to deny them their rights because they MIGHT do something as well? That's the road you're taking and once you get on that road, there's no stopping.
but we are not living in a utopia world where everything is roses.
We'd be living pretty close to a utopia if the Constitution and the Bill of Rights was followed to the letter and if the government would quit strangling our economy.
You shouldn't think that laws would prevent someone who's dead set on doing something. Let's say that a mental database was in place and Cho couldn't buy his Glock. What makes you think he wouldn't just steal a gun or use pipe bombs with short fuses?
Instead of focusing on who CANNOT have a firearm, you need to focus on who CAN have a firearm. Massacres like at VT could have been stopped by a well-placed shot from a good guy with a firearm.
(edited for 10 year old daughter rule. 
GH)
