Posted on 09/11/2013 7:29:00 AM PDT by TurboZamboni
Iowa law enforcement officials are debating the wisdom of granting gun permits to blind people. The Des Moines Register reports that Iowa law doesn't allow sheriffs to deny a permit to carry a gun in public based on physical ability. Some sheriffs have been granting gun permits to people with visual impairments while others have been denying them. Blind people and other Iowans can obtain the permits for carrying a weapon in public because of changes to state law that took effect in 2011. Jane Hudson with Disability Rights Iowa said keeping legally blind people from obtaining weapon permits would violate the Americans with Disabilities Act.
(Excerpt) Read more at abcnews.go.com ...
“So if one of these people shoot an innocent bystander can they use the ADA as a defense??”
They would have exactly the same defense as anyone else who shot an innocent bystander.
Everyone has to know their limitations.
For me, it all boils down to a test something like this.
Suppose you were in a restaurant and, heaven forbid, a madman came in and began shooting.
Would you hope that an armed citizen with good vision was in that restaurant? Certainly.
Would you hope that an armed citizen with poor vision was in that restaurant? Again, certainly.
Would you hope that an armed citizen with no vision was in that restaurant? Uh, probably not. Wouldn't be helpful. In fact, it would probably only make a very bad situation worse.
In fact, I cannot conceive of any situation were a totally blind person would be safe with a gun. So I would deny the permit, just as I would deny a permit to a person who is a known psychotic and hears voices.
No one here is a bigger 2nd Amendment supporter than me. But every amendment has its boundaries. The 1st Amendment gives me free speech. But I cannot scream at my neighbor's house at two in the morning.
Of course, the devil is in the details. Big Brother government could define "blind" to be anyone who wears glasses, and "psychotic" to be anyone who is a registered Republican.
If a blind woman was grabbed, dragged into an alley and being raped, would you hope she had a loaded derringer in her pocket?
“In fact, I cannot conceive of any situation were a totally blind person would be safe with a gun. So I would deny the permit, just as I would deny a permit to a person who is a known psychotic and hears voices.”
Your lack of imagination is not a reason to deny citizens their Constitutional rights.
That's the gray area right there. In fact, the respected firearms expert Massad Ayoob has argued for giving firearms training to the totally blind. He uses an argument much like yours.
For me, it's a tough call. All I can say is this. If the woman were my wife, and she had any sight, I'd want her to be carrying a firearm.
But if she had no sight at all, I think a contact stun gun would be the way to go. Not only would it be safer for innocent bystanders, it would also be more practical.
But I'm still uncomfortable with that. You shouldn't be basing rights on practicality. But common sense must play a part too.
Agreed. See my tag line for the solution.
Again, it goes back to where you draw the limiting line for a Constitutional right. That line must be drawn a broadly as possible, giving the individual as much freedom as possible.
But no right can be unlimited and without boundaries. I suppose my original post was influenced by an NRA course I took many years ago. One poor gentleman in that class had a palsy so bad that when at the range, his pistol barrel swung wildly all over the place.
The NRA instructor finally, and gently, took the pistol from the gentleman's hand and told him that he was exempt from that part of the class.
I believe that the NRA instructor acted correctly in that case. And I believe that it would be correct to deny that gentleman a gun permit.
I don’t think the blind having guns is nearly as dangerous as allowing LIBs/DIMs/RINOs to vote.
You wouldn't trust her to know when using it might endanger a bystander?
Good question. A concern would be that she would not do anything at all for fear of endangering a bystander.
Consider a situation where you are in your house during a blackout. You are "blind". And an intruder is banging on your bedroom door. Finally the door swings open. Do you shoot, or do you hesitate because it might be one of your kids trying to flee to safety? It's not such an easy call.
“Consider a situation where you are in your house during a blackout. You are “blind”.”
Exactly so. Yet, you do not advocate taking a person’s Constitutional right to bear arms away from them because of that disability. You rely on them to use their judgement.
Being blind does not prevent someone from having the ability to use judgement.
There's the line I was talking about earlier.
Restrictions for home firearm possession should be as minimal as possible. Heck, I even support giving convicted felons the right to home firearm possession after, say, five years of no arrests.
But restrictions for public carry should be just a bit tighter. Because it's now not just you and your family that's involved. It's also me and me family.
The gentleman with palsy that I referenced earlier has every right to do whatever he wants in his own home. But less so out in public.
Notice that I said "just a bit tighter" two paragraphs above. But as you and I both know, the government likes to tighten things just a bit until there is no freedom left. That's the real problem.
Regards to you. It's been an interesting discussion, and I'm interested in any further thoughts you might have on this. But I'll be offline for awhile as I'm now going out to pick the last of the season's tomatoes.
I guess dems do not think blind people should be allowed to defend themselves....second class citizens in that case.
I'd shoot. My kids are all grown and gone, and there's no good reason anyone should be in my house trying to get into my bedroom.
if you shoot someone through a door with a shotgun, you’re also shooting ‘blind’.
or shooting ‘Biden’ if you prefer.
I'll bet you wouldn't be saying that if the Sports Illustrated swimsuit models were in town.
Maybe not. Wife at 6 with shotty, on the other hand......
Voting and gun ownership are both important rights. If it is reasonable to restrict one such right from a group of disabled people, would it be right to restrict the other right?
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.