Posted on 09/05/2025 10:40:27 AM PDT by PROCON
Not sure how much, if any truth there is to the rumors flying around social media that the DOJ was considering methods by which certain groups of people could be disarmed because of their gender identity. Washington Gun Law President, William Kirk, discusses several aspects of this including the political hypocrisy of both sides of the argument, the effectiveness of this plan and if it is even legally possible. (Hint: No). So learn more today and arm yourself with education today.
They are mentally ill so should not have access to any weapons.
Read Jeff Childers column today. It’ll explain everything. This is just the very clever slight of hand to twist the Democrats in their desire for gun control. He’s just setting them up for another 80/20 issue. If you notice this whole business is unsubstantiated rumor.
Doesn’t the law already require some degree of mental health to own a gun?
I mean - can someone who has no idea what year it is and thinks he’s Napoleon.. can such a person walk in and buy a gun?
My point is - these are boys who think they are girls and visa-versa. They are so deluded they cut off body parts. That’s as insane as it gets - so it should be covered under existing mental health restrictions.
The gun shop does a routine background check, finds the person is a tranny and therefore stark raving mad - unfit to drive, unfit to raise children, unfit to own a firearm.
At least, that’s the way it should work.
Ditto
This leads to the discussion that really needs to happen about treating the mentally ill in this country.
It always seems to end up at the edge of denying freedom.
Seems straight forward enough.
People who are mentally ill should be locked up.
If you think you are somehow a boy brain in a girl body you are mentally ill.
QED You should not have access to guns.
banning after a judicial hearing for medical reasons like taking anti psychotics and other psychiatric medication seems like something that should be looked at. I don’t like the idea of a blanket ban, and I don’t even believe currently it can be done the way the constitution is written
I think a big part of the problem could be the drugs they are taking.
“Shall not be infringed.”
It’s so simple only a politician could fail to understand it.
Agree, but because I don't accept the premise. Not that I don't accept 2A, I am an unabashed 2A supporter, but that the GOP doesn't want to actually fix the problem because trannies drive mushy middlers to the GOP.
We could FIX the tranny problem TOMORROW.
This is exactly what the Democrats are waiting for in the US -- for SCOTUS to solve their tranny problem."Polls show the transgender ideology is deeply unpopular, especially among women and parents. In 2017, former President BarackObama told NPR that his promotion of transgender ideology made it easier for Trump to win the presidency."This could easily be permanently resolved and these butchers be put away the same way the Left destroyed Big Tobacco.The GOP needs to stop trading off the fact that the subject is a good grind against the Democrats at the District level -- as flatly stated by no less than Obama himself -- and the Republicans actually protect their constituents!
Gender Care Master Settlement AgreementThe GCMSA was entered on ________, 2026, between the 4 largest US gender care companies: Planned Parenthood @PPFA, the American Medical Association @AmerMedicalAssn, the American Academy of Pediatrics @AmerAcadPeds, and @WPATH – the "original participating manufacturers", (referred to as the "OPM") and the attorneys general of 46 states. The states settled their lawsuits against the gender care industry for recovery of their gender-related health-care costs.
The companies agreed to curtail or cease certain gender care marketing practices, as well as to pay, in perpetuity, various annual payments to the states to compensate them for some of the medical costs of caring for persons with gender care-related illnesses.
The money also funds a new detransition advocacy clearinghouse, the "Global Truth About Gender Initiative", that is fully-funded for enlightenment campaigns, such as "There Are Only Two Sexes" and "Detransition Now!"; and maintains a public archive of documents resulting from the cases. In the GCSA, the original participating manufacturers (OPM) agreed to pay a minimum of US$1 trillion over the first 25 years of the agreement.
Do you want to know how that was done? Replace "tobacco" with "gender care", that is nearly verbatim the 1998 Tobacco Master Settlement Agreement.
What the GOP is missing out on, is that bringing this to a halt will take at least a year -- what better quality-of-life issue to run on in 2026 than this Master Settlement Agreement? Fill Committee meetings with detransitioned men and women. Have another Committee take up meetings on amending Title IX to keep these mutants out of women's sports.
You want to end this holocaust? Put a goddamn end to it!
How about banning transgenders instead?
Cause if guns are banned, they’ll just find other ways to kill people.
This is a wedge issue for lefties - pick your constituency. Fall in with Trans and say you cannot discriminate even for public safety and they cant argue denial of 2A rights for any other without getting forever. On the other hand fall in with the gun grabbers and get pilloried by the Trans advocates forever.
Ever wonder why there were so few mass killings before the 1970s? I remember three mass murderers between 1949 and 1970. all crazies.
https://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/story-first-mass-murder-us-history-180956927/
Howard Unruh, 1949. Considered the first mass murderer, So dangerous he died in a mental hospital in 2009.
Richard Speck, 1966. Murdered eight student nurses with a knife. Died in prison.
Charles Whitman, 1966. killed many from the Texas Tower. Had a tumor on the brain, killed on site.
Then in the 1970s, the mental hospitals were closed down, the crazies declared “sane” enough to walk the streets and murder rates took off like a rocket.
Here is partial list of people who would have been in a MENTAL WARD before many of the ASYLUMS were shut down, crazies declared “sane” and dumped on the streets.
ALL CRAZIES allowed to roam the streets...
Mark David Chapman who murdered John Lennon
John Hinckley Jr. who shot President Reagan
Robert John Bardo who shot Rebecca Schaeffer
David Berkowitz, the .44 Cailber Killer.
Jared Laugher who shot Gabby Giffords.
Pat Purdy, released from a mental hospital, allowed to buy guns, then shot up the Stockton School Yard.
Patrick Sherrill who shot up the Edmond Post office.
James Oliver Huberty who shot so many at MacDonalds
This is just a SHORT LIST of people who were crazy enough who would have been in a mental hospital before they were closed down in the 1970s.
When you add the MASS MURDERERS and SCHOOL SHOOTERS who would have been shown to be insane but allowed to roam freely you will begin to understand why it is...
LONG PAST TIME TO REOPEN THE MENTAL WARDS AGAIN!
I am AOK with anyone having guns. Reason being most of the deranged are so anti-gun that they would not have them even if they were free. Doing so would bring the 2A back to it’s original meaning. The loonie lefties that do have guns are very not legal at present (gangs, cartels, etc), and if they get arrested, I would hope we have more on them than a gun violation.
No. They aren’t banning a “group”. You get dysphoria added back into the catalogue of mental illnesses. The mentally ill are already prohibited.
It is a false choice.
I don't really care anymore.
The Democrats have been quite successful at selective bans targeting specific groups. The goal of civilian disarmament ("gun control laws") is to ensure that political opponents in a population are unable to forcibly resist a government that intends to exploit and oppress them.
We should consider the same tactic and make the goals explicit. Guns for us, not for them. Let's be the nightmare that our enemies keep accusing us of being.
No firearms for:
But, but, but - the Second Amendment, blah, blah, blah, "Racism", blah, blah, blah.
Don't really care anymore.
The Second Amendment has been effectively nullified since the passage of the National Firearms Act of 1938. Subsequent Federal and State "gun control" laws have all been flagrantly unconstitutional. The Supreme Court of the United States has been dodging the issues for the last 80 years. Time's up.
We should go all the way with this. Guns for us, not for them. That is the principle we can advocate. If you don't like our principles, we have others.
And if the Democrats oppose us and start actually defending the Second Amendment, we can act embarrassed and agree with them for once, repenting of our evil ways. In a spirit of "bipartisanship" we can all endorse the Second Amendment and repeal all of those unconstitutional laws that stop Democrats from arming themselves.
The greatest threat to Democrats so far has been other armed Democrats. It's a win-win situation for us.
Libs for decades were demanding that firearms be kept out of the hands of the mentally ill. They better be careful what they wish for. An example of the law of unintended consequences
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.