The standard you proposed is as you say for punishing people who committed a crime. What you're proposing is applying this to people who have NOT commited a crime, but rather you're imposing prior restraint on people who are not guilty of any criminal activiy. This is the sort of thing that tyrannies love to do, but has no place in a free country. Slippery slope - apparently a concept that you can't acknowledge.
You just couldn't deal with it.
I would say that the posters here have dealt with your liberal ideas just as they deserved to be dealt with.
BZZZT!!! Wrongo! It's also the system used for committing people who have committed no crime to mental institutions. It's called DUE PROCESS, a standard that has existed in law from before the Second Amendment was written.
What you're proposing is applying this to people who have NOT commited a crime, but rather you're imposing prior restraint on people who are not guilty of any criminal activiy.
Please learn to use the spell check provided.
We do have mental hospitals in this country. There is a process for putting people in them and has been for over a century. Not everybody who is crazy is incapable of functioning in free society, to a degree. I have an ex-step-sister for example, who has been mentally retarded from birth. She has a custodian. She may not drive. Yet I have seen no significant abuse of that system. Are you telling me, that she should be free to bear a firearm anywhere she chooses?
Yes, any system is capable of abuse. Just because it is, doesn't mean we shouldn't have one. That's what the vigilance of the people was all about.