• We welcome content that is not political, divisive, or offensive. If we feel your content leans this way or has the potential to, it may be removed at any time. A hot pepper forum is not the place for such content. Thank you for respecting the community!

So you had a stroke: gimme your guns

AJ Drew

AJ Drew

Someone please explain how this makes sense.  If you have a stroke and can no longer balance a check book, the president wants to take your right to own guns away.  If you had a TBI and have memory issues, the president wants to put you on a special list of folk who cant buy guns.  Oh wait, if you are a senior citizen with these challenges just cause you are getting old, no stroke, TBI or other brain injury then you get on the no gun list too.  Evidently, it is already happening to veterans and will likely be happening to anyone receiving social security benefits.

I could understand it if the idea were applied to people who pose a danger to them selves or others as a result of these things.  But it seems to hinge on memory and the ability to do math, not emotional instability.
 
I am not a big gun fan.  I kind of think of them like hammers, saws, and other tools.  But it seems to me that the sick,injured, and elderly are the ones most likely to need firearms for self defense.

http://www.latimes.com/nation/politics/la-na-gun-law-20150718-story.html#page=1
 
Anyone have a clue why this makes sense to anyone?
 
Yeah I hear what you are saying. The number of individuals that would have rightfully been denied by this program would no doubt fall very short of the number of individuals who would be wrongfully affected by this background check. If it is just a reaction as the article stated to school shootings and such, I don't remember hearing about those criminals receiving disability social security. IMO it is a program that can suffer from abuse, like many programs that have been initiated.
 
Im all for the rights of the people but I cant really get myself upset about disallowing people with MEMORY issues from owning guns.
 
hogleg said:
If I could just remember where I buried that Mak-90   :think:
Click to expand...
 
     Hogleg, c'mon. Automatic weapons go under the mattress. It was the money that you buried in the mayonnaise jar in the back yard. 
     By the way, you better remember where you buried that dough before noon, bub. If you can't pay for those peppers, I'll send my goons (oldsalty and moruga welder) after you to break your thumbs! 
 
You'd think I'd have an opinion on this as someone who has taken guns as the result of a stroke. Then there's that whole opinionated ass hole thing.

And so I do.

Every stroke is different, from the type, location in the brain, severity of damage to recovery. In this particular situation it came down to a safety issue given the level of delusion and subconscious fabrication. I prefer not to be shot for walking in the door.
 
My biggest issue is there is no due process in this what so ever.  If a person is to loose a civil right, a person ought to be put in front of a judge or jury.  The matter needs to be adjudicated on an individual basis.  We do not take guns away from all black people because some commit violent crimes.

Of course the NRA is hot about this.  But so are advocates for the Disabled and doctors who work in the field.  If a person is dangerous to themselves or others, sure.  But if they can not balance their check book?  Oh come on, that describes most of the people i know.  Hell, my wife can't use the debit card that I write checks on because she seems to think that if the ATM says there is X amount of money in there then it is OK to spend it.

 
Justosmo said:
Im all for the rights of the people but I cant really get myself upset about disallowing people with MEMORY issues from owning guns.
Click to expand...
Seriously?  People with bad memories might forgot that they are not allowed to shoot you?  What?
 
 
miguelovic said:
Every stroke is different, from the type, location in the brain, severity of damage to recovery.
Click to expand...
Right on.  This law reads like 'Some black people commit violent crimes, so take guns away from all black people'.  When my mother came to live with us, one of the rules was I take her guns.  On the other hand,I have been living with the outcome of TBI and have yet to forget that I am not allowed to shoot a person.
 
Hybrid Mode 01 said:
 
     Hogleg, c'mon. Automatic weapons go under the mattress. It was the money that you buried in the mayonnaise jar in the back yard. 
     By the way, you better remember where you buried that dough before noon, bub. If you can't pay for those peppers, I'll send my goons (oldsalty and moruga welder) after you to break your thumbs! 
Click to expand...
What if he remembers where the machine gun is but not the money?  Seems like you are sending Oldsalty and Moruga into a bad situation.
 
ajdrew said:
 
 
What if he remembers where the machine gun is but not the money?  Seems like you are sending Oldsalty and Moruga into a bad situation.
Click to expand...
 
     Oh, crap. I hadn't thought of that. T
 
     But the way things seem to go around here, maybe hogleg will be laughing to hard to shoot?
 
ajdrew said:
Seriously?  People with bad memories might forgot that they are not allowed to shoot you?  What?
Click to expand...
 
I do not believe (or I did not mean) bad memories like "oh i forgot where my keys are" but there are pretty serious brain disorders involving memory.
 
Have you ever seen a person with Dementia? Even early onset/begining stages are pretty serious. People dont just forget things, they can forget how the world works around them. They can go into severe panic fits and have SERIOUS rage issues.
 
 
That is what i meant by memory issues. Those people SHOULD have their guns taken away or disallowed from buying. 
 
As i said, im all for peoples rights. Own whatever you want. But there should be some rules.
 
Justosmo, until my last hospital stay I was my mother's care giver of sorts.  Now I can not keep up.  She is likely going to assisted living so my home can be normal again.  Yes, I get dementia.  Fortunately, I duck faster than she can throw.  Thing about the law is that they are trying to make it dependent on if you can manage your finances.  That is flat dumb.  You forget to pay bills, so you cant own a firearm.  What the hell?

BTW: I am not a major firearms enthusiast.  They are tools like anything else.  I just prefer when the government leaves people alone.
 
i'm surprised none of the citizen mods have stepped up to tell you where this thread should be
 
i can understand now though how they get taken away, you cant even find the right forum
 
Heckle said:
i'm surprised none of the citizen mods have stepped up to tell you where this thread should be
 
i can understand now though how they get taken away, you cant even find the right forum
Click to expand...
I argued for marriage equality and people thought I was gay.  I argued that the Satanists should be able to put up their Satan statue and people thought I was a Satanist.  Same here.  This peaked my interest after posting about how often the VA asks me if I am thinking about taking my own life.  Someone told me that if you say yes, they will practically kick in your doors to look for guns.  Pointed me to a story where they not only did that but killed the vet. who was experiencing depression. 

So for the record, I am not a gay Satanist who is thinking about taking his life and worried about someone taking his guns away.  However, if I were and needed help killing myself it seems from news articles that all I would have to do is admit it and someone would come do the job for me.  Very odd world.
 
Damn I am good.  I posted an off topic topic in a forum defined in part as 'Off-topic'.  You gotta admit that takes effort.

 
 
I agree with what you're saying. Government regulations are usually more of a knee jerk reaction than anything. I would assume this particular one will continue until someone challenges it in court (and rightly so). We have a lot of laws and bylaws up here that don't hold water, usually the result of one single highly publicized incident.
 
I just don't trust the old mans judgement anymore and have taken a number of steps to protect myself, others, etc. I wouldn't have a problem taking him shooting but sleeping with a gun is long gone. He doesn't have legal control of his finances but we defer to his wishes in all things unless it is outside the bounds of reasonable logic.
 
It is something that should be assessed after a brain injury but by a competant person re: not the RCMP or a bureaucrat. We have the PAL program up here to certify gun ownership and sale. The course instructor would be a prime choice.
 
Mig, I am sure it would fail in court due to lack of due process.  The law itself says a person who is adjudicated (due process) a mental defect may not purchase firearms.  What the VA is doing and Social Security is thinking about doing is provide names to the background check ban without adjudication.  But that does seem to be where the US is going, far away from due process.

The two that really get me:

1. Presidential assassinations of US citizens.  The US president can put a persons name on a list and the CIA then uses military resources to execute the person.  No grand jury indictment, no court, no judge, no warrant, just a hit list and an execution.  Hope nobody thinks I am nuts for saying it, there are many human rights organizations which have spelled it out this simply.  No due process what so ever.

2. Domestic Violence / DVO - The laws for domestic violence orders are completely different than most in that anyone asking for one is to be granted one unless the accused can prove it is not warranted.  In other words, guilty until proven innocent.  On the surface, this is fine because anyone should be allowed to demand someone stay away.  Thing is, if you have your name on a DVO you may not purchase or own firearms, can not work with children, can not work many jobs.  Incidentally, they are issued in absentia.  So if you ever want to screw someone over bad, cost them their job, all you have to do is file for a domestic violence order claiming you do not know where they live.

There are lots of other examples.  My thing is that I want a jury (we the people) to decide such things.  In the case where you say a doctor, I think the doctor should present his opinion to a jury, the injured presents his or her opinions, and the jury decides.  It is a big we the people thing with me.  I dont trust the politicians themselves, nor the people they appoint.
 
The president may be able to add names to the cia list but uh, jfk didnt add himself to their list.
 
Heckle, confused.  Are you one of the folk who think Kennedy was murdered by the CIA?  My brain isn't bright enough to understand most of the theories.  I just go with a nut case had a gun and the president got shot.  Then another nut case shot the nut case.  Easy for me to believe because there are so many nut cases.  Wasn't Reagan and his press secretary shot by someone who wanted to impress Jody Foster?  Why would anyone want to impress Jody Foster?  See what I mean.  Nut cases everywhere.  It is like a damned almond joy bar only without the joy.
 
why wouldnt the president just use the military to use military assets to assassinate someone?
 
Im saying the CIA kills a lot of people. Including at least once a US president. Pretty much a given theyre responsible for the demise of some foreign heads of state.

ajdrew said:
 My brain isn't bright enough to understand
Click to expand...
 
You already know I dont believe that.
 
I know when someone is trying to play dumb just as well.
 
Heckle said: "I know when someone is trying to play dumb just as well."

I do goof around a bit for comic value, but on the JFK assassination I honestly can not follow many of the theories.  I can understand a simple thing like a second shooter hiding in a bush.  I can not understand the motivations.  There's the girlfriend thing, the mob thing, the... it goes on and on.  Seems much easier to believe a nut case with a gun.

Best example are the number of people who think spree killings are plots by the left to force stricter gun laws.  Seems more likely nut cases take guns and kill people.  Gotta admit there are a lot of nut cases.
 
Heckle asked: "why wouldnt the president just use the military to use military assets to assassinate someone?"

Back in the day, I would have answered because the military would say no.  We were very clearly instructed never to follow an unlawful order.  Killing anyone outside of an active combat zone is a major no no.  It is called terrorism.  I am fairly sure this is why the ongoing assassinations are being conducted by forces other than the military.
 
Today, with all the patriot act grey areas, I would say because the US Constitution rather clearly says that no citizen can be held accountable for a major crime unless a grand jury indictment is issued.  The President is completely barred and banned from having US citizens even accused of such a crime without a grand jury.  He certainly can not charge, convict, and execute them.  I have no frigging clue what he is thinking.  Hell, the way I read it you don't even have to be a US citizen to be guaranteed due process.  As long as you are not a member of the military, only we the people can even accuse you.  Not the president.
 

Amendment V
No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a grand jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the militia, when in actual service in time of war or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top