whitehall
Diamond Member
- Thread starter
- #21
Incorrect.Wrong, one must have reasonable grounds for claiming someone lose their rights due to mental illness. If you suspect someone report them and let the authorities decide what to do. In the US one does not have to justify the use of their rights, one must justify taking rights away. Further Psychiatrists do not decide if one loses their rights a Court does that. A Judge must rule you incompetent.In Feb of 2013 a former Marine named Eddie Ray Routh murdered former Navy Seal Chris Kyle and another Veteran Chad Littlefield at a gun range in Texas. The motive was unclear but the attorneys for Routh will base their defense on PTSD. Former Marine Sgt. (wrong way) Tahmooressi ended up in Mexico with a trunk full of weapons. His defense ....PTSD. Wouldn't it be prudent to prevent PTSD patients from possessing deadly weapons until they are cleared by government psychiatrists?
Wrong gunny. The ATF form asks if the applicant is currently undergoing treatment for mental illness. Crazy people are (rightfully) denied permission to purchase a firearm. There is no further judicial review. Now, if the government decides to confiscate weapons it is another issue.
The 4473 asks nothing about currently receiving mental health treatment:
“Have you ever been adjudicated mentally defective (which includes a determination by a court, board, commission, or other lawful authority that you are a danger to yourself or to others or are incompetent to manage your own affairs) OR have you ever been committed to a mental institution? (See Instructions for Question 11.f.)”
Only after someone has been afforded due process can an issue of mental health be a factor in determining whether or not one may be allowed possession of a firearm.
Incorrect.Wrong, one must have reasonable grounds for claiming someone lose their rights due to mental illness. If you suspect someone report them and let the authorities decide what to do. In the US one does not have to justify the use of their rights, one must justify taking rights away. Further Psychiatrists do not decide if one loses their rights a Court does that. A Judge must rule you incompetent.In Feb of 2013 a former Marine named Eddie Ray Routh murdered former Navy Seal Chris Kyle and another Veteran Chad Littlefield at a gun range in Texas. The motive was unclear but the attorneys for Routh will base their defense on PTSD. Former Marine Sgt. (wrong way) Tahmooressi ended up in Mexico with a trunk full of weapons. His defense ....PTSD. Wouldn't it be prudent to prevent PTSD patients from possessing deadly weapons until they are cleared by government psychiatrists?
Wrong gunny. The ATF form asks if the applicant is currently undergoing treatment for mental illness. Crazy people are (rightfully) denied permission to purchase a firearm. There is no further judicial review. Now, if the government decides to confiscate weapons it is another issue.
The 4473 asks nothing about currently receiving mental health treatment:
“Have you ever been adjudicated mentally defective (which includes a determination by a court, board, commission, or other lawful authority that you are a danger to yourself or to others or are incompetent to manage your own affairs) OR have you ever been committed to a mental institution? (See Instructions for Question 11.f.)”
Only after someone has been afforded due process can an issue of mental health be a factor in determining whether or not one may be allowed possession of a firearm.
The word "adjudicated" has been broadened in a federal statute signed by the president to include "persons who were ordered to receive outpatient mental health treatment". In the case of the maniac who murdered 32 people in Va. Tech in 2007 he was ordered by a local court to receive outpatient mental health treatment instead of having a criminal record for stalking coeds at the university.