Posted on 07/26/2013 3:40:30 AM PDT by rellimpank
If preventing them also means denying a sane person his rights, then yes, I can deal with a crazy person with a gun.
I'd rather take my chances with an individual misusing freedom than a giant bureaucracy misusing power.
I cannot fault your logic. But local common sense should prevail, however I never saw a bureaucrat who had any common sense.
Anything that is Federalized is assured to be fatally twisted from all sense of reality.
“Don’t doubt me on this.”
I don’t.
C’mon! No one is talking about talking your guns! You’re just paranoid! /sarc.
Another blatant LIE from the Left, I’m getting sick of the fact that more and more of their agenda has to rest on a foundation of lies
Gun Registration is gun confiscation in slow motion:
http://gunwatch.blogspot.com/2012/12/gun-registration-is-gun-confiscation.html
That is worthy of quoting Ping!
Here’s an interesting turn of logic on the subject of mentally unstable gun owners.
Most of us agree (and we are correct) that liberalism is a form of mental illness. Would any of us want Ed Shultz or Chrisie Matthews carrying? How about Maxine Waters? Or those screaming libs that say (with a perfectly straight face) that NRA members should be locked up or hung. The examples of above behavior and thinking are nearly endless.
Most of the regulatory bureaucrats in the system undoubtedly are not far off in that regard.
So, if we wouldn’t want them to have guns, would we want them to have the power to decide if *we* are mentally competent to own guns? These are the people that say we aren’t not competent to control most of our daily lives.
Why have I not been reading about dead deputies? Have they really been able to do this without casualties, or have we just really come to such a low state?
Then they shoot your dog and raid your house anyway...
This will continue...
After all, what can you do to stop them?
Yes. I do. There are varying levels of crazy.
As for those acting up in public, that’s why I AM ARMED!
I’ll take of them my damn self.
They have been keeping a low profile haven’t they?
CHildofthe60s had the Gubment IDing the “insane” exact.
As an example, in Tampa, Fl, my mother and step father owned a home (Note for Libtards -”owned” = no mortgage) in Old Hyde Park, five houses off Bayshore Blvd. This is the best area in Tampa.
My step father likes to walk to his broker’s office and Bayshore has a nationally recognized bayside walkway. He also likes to talk with some of the other people enjoying a walk.
One day, as was his habit, he invited someone he met there to stop in some time for coffee. BAAD Move - turns out it was a bureaucrap. That thing noticed ABe’s collection of stacks of newspapers in his room and decided he was a “hoarder”.
Said bureaucrap walked over a palace size antique oriental carpet, but was convinced Abe needed state aid and Baker Act’ed him.
Mom found out it was simpler to let the state pay for his time being examined because it would take longer to have the court free him than to let the Baker Act circus do its thing. Her lawyer said these events were common as that is how the businesses doing such “examination” made payroll/profit.
Worst part is that the social worker was told by Abe he was a chartist and used newspaper financial pages for his data source for charting prices of stocks he was interested in. Worked, too - remember where he lived?
Made no difference to a social worker or the FloriDUH gubment clowns and their “private sector partners”. Wenchie Poo drank his coffee and went back to Baker Act him.
Partners in crime would be more accurate.
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.