Didn’t you read the article? Particularly the individual who was “suspected” by Police because he filed several vandalism complaints without satisfaction. He then resorted to installing a security system to protect himself, with motion detectors, video cameras etc,,,. All police found when they raided the home was his guns locked up in a safe. They confiscated them anyway.
It appears that any citizen who installs home security or locks their guns up is behaving “delusional” or “Paranoid”, which warrants them to storm the premises and confiscate all firearms.
Here again, based on their interpretation to all the facts. And you have trouble seeing what is wrong about all of this in the first place?
This would appear to be abuse just as there are other abuses of any law.
But my question still stands:
Suppose that you know of someone who you believe to be an imminent threat to themselves or others...what do you do and should there be a mechanism for intervention?
Even the most ardent 2A supporters (of which I claim to be) concede that in cases of mental incompetence or incapacity there is no presumption of unrestricted rights, but the discussion rarely gets past the fears of the VA massively misdiagnosing vets of PTSD to disarm them.
I can’t recall anyone saying that a schizophrenic who doesn’t always take his meds should be granted unrestricted 2A rights, and I don’t think I will.
What if your neighbor and poker buddy runs through a very bad streak in life....fired from work, wife runs off with a female circus midget and cleans out the savings, etc etc etc and starts talking crazy enough to honestly scare you. What can you do? Is this a time or place for government intervention?
Or does he have to start acting out his threats and have the local SWAT team called out before something happens and you can give your quote to the newspaper that you knew it was just a matter of time until he snapped?
We don’t talk about this much on FR but maybe we should.