Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: rktman

——“gun rights are not absolute.”-——

Well...gun rights are not absolute...

“Shall not be infringed” doesn’t mean guns should be treated like candy...

The criminally insane, the psychologically damaged, the other various bad evil people, don’t need access to guns...by legal means...

It’s called common sense...

Tampa Times can’t seem to understand the difference...


15 posted on 03/31/2015 6:15:44 AM PDT by Popman (Christ Alone: My Cornerstone...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: Popman
gun rights are not absolute

I contend that rights are absolute and our Founders saw it that way. While we may not like the idea of a just released ex-felon owning a weapon, he was supposed to have paid his debt to society and he has the essential right to defend himself. Even those that are mentally incompetent have the right to bear arms. Psychological problems in particular are very slippery slope when it comes to rights. Our soldiers and marines returning from war can be easily diagnosed by government, rightly or wrongly, and lose their rights to bear arms.

Each argument that anyone presents about how rights are not absolute can be countered by pointing at problem that has not been fixed. So that ex-felon that we fear will use a weapon perhaps should have never been paroled. The truly mentally incompetent should be treated. In the mean time, you should note that there is a staggering large number of criminals and folks with psychological problems with guns while gun crimes are decreasing. Rights are not an excuse to neglect other problems. Truly violent criminals, repeat convicts should be either executed or kept in prison for life. Of course, that rarely happens. People with psychological problems should receive appropriate medical attention and care from their families, churches, and communities. If that involves placing the mentally incompetent into a facility (private in my small government world) that doesn't allow guns, so be it. It wouldn't be the government denying rights.

The case of criminals in prison is different (note that I wrote, 'ex-felon' above). Prison in its essence is a denial of rights, but that is done with due process. Due process need not be extended to those that have not committed crime.

35 posted on 03/31/2015 7:03:13 AM PDT by ConservativeInPA (#JuSuisCharlesMartel)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson