Second Amendment NY law on gun ownership and mental status

Discussion in 'Bill of Rights' started by CATO, Oct 20, 2014.


  1. CATO

    CATO Monkey+++

    Most of us would agree we don't want nut bags to have a gun. But, that begs the question of identifying exactly who the nut bags are.

    This law gives an insane amount of control to those who may have an agenda to decide who is mentally fit for gun ownership. Are they going to have a check-list or just "being a kook is like pornography . . . I know it when I see it."

    #slipperyslope

    http://mobile.nytimes.com/2014/10/1...orts-put-34500-on-new-yorks-no-guns-list.html
     
    Last edited: Oct 20, 2014
  2. kellory

    kellory An unemployed Jester, is nobody's fool. Banned

    Well, that would seem to rule out all of congress as unfit....
     
  3. BTPost

    BTPost Old Fart Snow Monkey Moderator

    I really have few issues with these type of Statutes, AS LONG AS, they allow Judicial Review, thru the complete Appellate Judicial Systems, both State and Federal. This would allow for anyone, so enjoined, to Appeal to the Next level of Courts, if they believe, that they have been Wrongly Enjoined. They would get their "Day" in Multiple Levels of the Judicial System. Indeed, they would be arguing to Retain their Civil Rights, and the State would need to show "Good Cause" to remove those Rights.....
     
    kellory and CATO like this.
  4. ghrit

    ghrit Ambulatory anachronism Administrator Founding Member

    I DO have a problem with these idiocies. Mostly, they allow a single person, qualified or not, to get some poor soul on a list. It should NOT be incumbent on the listee to establish that he doesn't belong there. Worse, the litigation involved to get off the list is apt to drive them insane regardless of what got them on the list in the first place. And we know how fast the judicial system works, do we not? I'll have less of a problem with putting someone on a no gun list IF the reviews are done ahead of listing, but even then the review board must not have a political axe to grind. I'll take bets on that, especially in New York --
     
  5. BTPost

    BTPost Old Fart Snow Monkey Moderator

    You are correct @ghrit... What I had intended, was that the Original complaint, be Adjudicated in a Court of Law. where both the complainant and defendant, MUST be present, with counsel, and the Placement on the List, or Enjoinment, be by Judicial Judgement, which that then could be Appealed up thru the Court System, if necessary. That is what I had intended with my post. Just didn't get the whole POINT across....
     
    CATO likes this.
  6. Yard Dart

    Yard Dart Vigilant Monkey..... Moderator Site Supporter++

    We have seen how well the .gov no-fly list has worked out. Folks having to jump through flaming hoops to get off that list to fly. Most of the folks were magically added to the list without any discussion or legal recourse to prevent from it happening.

    Control is all this bill means to accomplish..... control of the people...... and listing those that do not fit the definition of a loyal subject to the liberal agenda.
     
    Sapper John likes this.
  1. Yard Dart
  2. Yard Dart
  3. GOG
  4. Yard Dart
  5. bmtm09
  6. Yard Dart
  7. marlas1too
  8. Salted Weapon
  9. Legion489
  10. Yard Dart
  11. AD1
    [MEDIA]
    Thread by: AD1, May 18, 2016, 10 replies, in forum: Firearms
  12. BTPost
  13. lonewolf88
  14. Yard Dart
  15. Legion489
  16. Legion489
  17. fedorthedog
  18. Legion489
  19. Minuteman
survivalmonkey SSL seal        survivalmonkey.com warrant canary
17282WuJHksJ9798f34razfKbPATqTq9E7