However, the 9th Circuit insisted federal law prohibits those who have "been adjudicated as a mental defective or [have] been committed to a mental institution" from ever again owning a firearm. [More]
Who wants to bet the same "reasoning" won't apply to people "adjudicated" too dangerous to have a gun over closed "boyfriend loopholes", "terror watchlists", "hater" determinations, and the like? And who wants to bet -- even if there were provisions to get "professional" determinations of current mental health -- that you'd be hard-pressed to find a shrink (assuming you could afford it) who is not anti-gun and who would be willing to declare a once prohibited person "safe," and that his malpractice carrier and/or corporate practice bosses would allow the risk?
Besides, who wants guns but white militia extremists and animal murderers?
"white militia extremists and animal murderers"
ReplyDeleteMore titles for my resume.