RE: All Hail the Second Amendment
May 28, 2014 at 7:55 pm
(This post was last modified: May 28, 2014 at 7:56 pm by Brakeman.)
(May 28, 2014 at 1:36 am)Minimalist Wrote: And Brakeman. Are you sure about that?
http://azstarnet.com/news/science/enviro...e8a57.html
Quote:In January 2011, after a wildly psychotic Jared Loughner shot 19 people in Tucson, the National Rifle Association still wanted to make it easier for people judged mentally ill to rearm themselves.
Arizona's Legislature was considering ways for people committed by a judge to mental-health treatment to later request their gun rights back.
The Arizona Criminal Justice Commission, populated by police chiefs and prosecutors, wanted a high standard for the person to show he deserved to have his gun rights restored: clear and convincing evidence.
The NRA wanted a lower standard: preponderance of the evidence. In fact, the NRA had demanded this in a variety of states where the issue arose, and at least one, Idaho, adopted it as law.
I don't think the article's author was unbiased at all. I thought the article was very poor. However, I think that this article from the beast's mouth is much more accurate.
http://www.nraila.org/news-issues/fact-s...?s=&st=&ps=
One can agree with your claim without having to read between the lines too much.
I'd like to say that the reluctance to tighten the standards is born from fear of over-reach from the anti-gun crowd. I'd also like to say that the NRA's opinion isn't necessarily the gun owning majorities opinion. I'd like to say both, and I believe there is a good part of both of those factors in play, but I must instead say that I am ashamed of them. While I detest gun control measures that would be ineffective and arduous, I don't see that tightening standards for the mentally disturbed should be that contentious.
Find the cure for Fundementia!