Originally Posted by Barkoff
Originally Posted by jorgeI
Originally Posted by Barkoff
Originally Posted by jorgeI
Originally Posted by Barkoff
So I think most believe the mentally ill and firearms are a bad mix. So I am curious about your opinions, and at what step (if any) in the process,


Operative word "due" as in 'due process" that we already have in place and keeping with the spirit and law of our Bill Of Rights and the Constitution... PERIOD


Due process for what Jorge? So then your opinion will always be, no crime, then no taking of firearms?
Then you pretty much give up the right to say “authorities knew, and did nothing”.

Horseshit. We HAVE a process in place, everyone just ignores it because of political bullshit like what happened here in Florida. EVERYONE knew this guy was a nut, reported it to the cops AND the school. Our current laws have provisions to take this guy into custody (it's called the Baker Act here), have him evaluated by a psychiatrist, not some quack psychologist, then present to evidence to a judge to have him committed.


So then if he commits no crime, you are willing to lock him away on the opinion of a psychiatrist? What evidence will you present to a judge if he has not tried to commit suicide, nor committed a crime?


It is perfectly legal (operative word) to confine someone if he is deemed clinically ill (nuts) and a danger to himself and society. We do it ALL the time. Look up Baker Act. F U C K Red Flag laws.

A good principle to guide me through life: “This is all I have come to expect, standard lackluster performance. Trust nothing, believe no one and realize it will only get worse…”