- Joined
- Jul 30, 2022
- Messages
- 1,928
- Reaction score
- 2,015
- Points
- 128
Article Link! DOJ Weighs Restricting Firearms for Gender Dysphoric
- Thread starter NavyVette
- Start date
- Joined
- Jul 30, 2022
- Messages
- 1,928
- Reaction score
- 2,015
- Points
- 128
- Joined
- Jul 30, 2022
- Messages
- 1,928
- Reaction score
- 2,015
- Points
- 128
Liberals removed Gender Dysphoria from being a mental disorder.
Of course I maintain that being a liberal is a sure sign of a mental disorder.
Of course I maintain that being a liberal is a sure sign of a mental disorder.
Outside of a individual stating Im a lunatic, how will they determine it?
Do they search mental health med prescription databases?
Seeing ,what ? 60% of citizens are prescribed OFF LABEL USE Antidepressants. Whos to determine what?
If they search social media? Who hasnt said some stupid shit? Honestly? End up like the UK getting arrested over speech.
Sipplery slope indeed.
Im all for putting something in place, personally anyone registered as a Democrat would eliminate 90% of gun violence right off the top.
Do they search mental health med prescription databases?
Seeing ,what ? 60% of citizens are prescribed OFF LABEL USE Antidepressants. Whos to determine what?
If they search social media? Who hasnt said some stupid shit? Honestly? End up like the UK getting arrested over speech.
Sipplery slope indeed.
Im all for putting something in place, personally anyone registered as a Democrat would eliminate 90% of gun violence right off the top.
I think that in reality, Trump is trolling the anti-gunners.
In reality, I would oppose any 2A restrictions or bans against any group (cultural, social, ethnic, religious, etc) of people. It would be stricken as unconstitutional in court in short order anyway.
As they say... be careful what you wish for.
- Joined
- Feb 3, 2023
- Messages
- 9,493
- Reaction score
- 11,054
- Points
- 168
I disagree. I believe that men who think they are women should be given guns to tuck in their pants with no holster. Before you know it, the twig and berries, as the English say, are gone in one swift 'uncommanded discharge'. No more tuck and tape.
- Joined
- Feb 3, 2023
- Messages
- 9,493
- Reaction score
- 11,054
- Points
- 168
North Carolina requires a mental health background check. Basically, they check medical records. It used to be required for all handgun purchases. Now I believe it is only for a conceal carry permit.
- Joined
- Feb 3, 2023
- Messages
- 9,493
- Reaction score
- 11,054
- Points
- 168
If you have been institutionalized or adjudicated as mentally incompetent you cannot own a gun in NC. The NCBI dos the background check.
You used to have to request a permit from your sheriff for handgun purchases. This law was on the books for over a century. You could purchase up to three guns a year if I recall. More, you have to ask the Sherriff again. This was repealed a couple of years ago. The law was alleged to be a method of preventing blacks from arming themselves in great numbers after the emancipation, but that is sheer speculation. There were no similar constraints for long guns.
Since constitutional carry is now being pushed (the Democrat Goiver vetoed this) the mental health background check will probably go away.
Personally, doesnt bother me. I don't want convicted felons and mental defectives owning guns. The clinical definitions of crazy are not ambiguous. And as I have said many times I dont give a fuck about the gun rights of convicted felons. As far as I'm concerned they forfeited that right. Recidivism in this country is 60%. So better than half commit another crime after doing their time.
You used to have to request a permit from your sheriff for handgun purchases. This law was on the books for over a century. You could purchase up to three guns a year if I recall. More, you have to ask the Sherriff again. This was repealed a couple of years ago. The law was alleged to be a method of preventing blacks from arming themselves in great numbers after the emancipation, but that is sheer speculation. There were no similar constraints for long guns.
Since constitutional carry is now being pushed (the Democrat Goiver vetoed this) the mental health background check will probably go away.
Personally, doesnt bother me. I don't want convicted felons and mental defectives owning guns. The clinical definitions of crazy are not ambiguous. And as I have said many times I dont give a fuck about the gun rights of convicted felons. As far as I'm concerned they forfeited that right. Recidivism in this country is 60%. So better than half commit another crime after doing their time.
Just remember, Once Upon A Time, men who thought they were women and vise-versa were considered to be mentally ill. Then the weak and meek were convinced by the loonies that their condition was/should be "normal" and 1% of the population controlled 100% of the narrative. 
We need to go back to sane times...
We need to go back to sane times...
Do the require a mental health check to vote, too? I'd argue that's at least as "justifiable" as one for exercising any other Right, including the 2A.
Until recently, I had not realized that NC is a VERY liberal state. I always assumed it was conservative, since it's part of the "South." Definitely NOT conservative!
If they're too dangerous to own a gun, then they're too dangerous to be walking around freely (with access to all manner of things equally or more dangerous than guns).
- Joined
- Feb 3, 2023
- Messages
- 9,493
- Reaction score
- 11,054
- Points
- 168
Nobody ever killed another person or persons with a vote. So, no.
Nah. It's liberal in and around Raleigh Durham and Asheville. Yankee transplants and bleeding hares Gen Y and Z'ers. Lots of top universities here. It draws them in. Still, the state legislature has a GOP supermajority. Gun laws are not oppressive. That one I mentioned was put in place a century ago. Now it's gone.
We can agree on that. I prefer psychos be given a free a rubber room with three hots and cot forever. Felons who serve their time deserve a chance to become law abiding members of society. But they cannot be trusted with a firearm. They have demonstrated poor judgement and don't consider consequences. No gun for them.
You SURE about that?!?? Same goes for Speech. Yeah... votes and speech can end with dead people. History is replete with examples of that.
Based on my penchant for being intellectually consistent and logical.... if they have served their time and are deemed safe enough to be free among the public... then all Rights should be restored. Again... nobody can logically argue that someone who cannot be trusted with a gun, CAN be trusted to walk freely with access to all manner of other weapons and destructive devices. It makes no sense at all.
- Joined
- Feb 3, 2023
- Messages
- 9,493
- Reaction score
- 11,054
- Points
- 168
Well, there's nobody then there's me.
I'll just say it. I don't give a rats ass about felons. I don't trust them. Never will. They are all repeat offenders with a long pattern of behavior. Nobody that only did one thing wrong their entire life gets convinced of a felony. Their luck just runs out and they get caught. This is profiler 101. It starts when they are kids. Cheaters. Bullies. Pathological liars. Megalomaniacs. They are not all violent. But are capable of violence.
Can some people reform and repent? Sure. But it's not society's job to try and figure out what's going on in the head of a sociopath. Which most of them are. The simplest solution is always the best: No gun for you.
Last edited:
- Joined
- May 12, 2022
- Messages
- 1,945
- Reaction score
- 2,265
- Points
- 128
I tend to "fall back" to this point as well. The biggest concern is allowing dangerous people to have access to innocent people regardless of the tools said dangerous person employs.
I get it. But again... I must be intellectually consistent.
The notion that we can prevent them from having a gun is... well... profoundly naive. The notion that even if we can keep guns out of their hands (nope), that in so doing they are magically rendered "safe" and won't harm others by a myriad of alternative means and methods.
The simplest solution to recidivist felons is to KEEP them in prison.
- Joined
- Feb 3, 2023
- Messages
- 9,493
- Reaction score
- 11,054
- Points
- 168
You kind of reinforce my point. If they cant buy one legally some will buy one illegally. Which is why they cant be trusted with a gun. The rules don't apply to them. It's why they are felons. Those who do this will end up in the can again.
I dont care of they are walking the streets after serving their time. As long as they are unarmed. If they are felons and after release from prison are caught with a firearm, then it's buh bye for 10-20 years if there was no other crime committed.
Haters never stop hating. Cheaters never stop cheating, Thieves never stop thieving.
Society says people deserve another chance. Fine with me as long as they dont have a gun.
Actually, I contradict your point which is based on the notion that a dangerous person isn't dangerous UNLESS they have a GUN. And it's the felons with bad intent that you have to worry about, right? And NOTHING you do (no law) will prevent them from getting an illegal gun. So what is the point of legally preventing peaceable newly-law-abiding felons? In other words, your laws preventing felons from legally buying a gun does NOTHING more than placate naive people.
So, "armed" to you means ONLY with guns? You actually think a dangerous man is rendered harmless by removing only guns from the equation? I know you don't really believe that it's the gun that makes a man dangerous.
So that's why your position is illogical. Preventing felons who are released after serving their sentences from legally owning guns is nothing more than feel-good legislation. Furthermore it's intellectually inconsistent with the idea of "justice" and "time served." Punishment for life (for ALL felonies) is perhaps afoul of the 8th Amendment, eh?
Last edited:
- Joined
- Feb 3, 2023
- Messages
- 9,493
- Reaction score
- 11,054
- Points
- 168
A gun makes a weakling capable of doing more damage than he could physically. As we have seen in most mass shootings. None of these psychopaths could kick anybody's ass. Easily overpowered if they didnt have a firearm.
I am well aware someone with a machete or baseball bat or some other implement can and do hurt and kill people. But a firearm is unique in its ability to kill at scale. It's what they are designed for. Guns have always been about evening the odds and if possible making the odds uneven in favor of the one with the gun. Or the better gun. This is reality. Guns are not about shooting paper. They are made to kill.
In a world without guns, if I were sitting in a restaurant and a guy comes in with a bat I'd be removing his eyes with a fork in two minutes. If he has a gun the wounded and casualties are a lot higher. I;m not suggesting guns are the problem. I'm suggesting psychos and criminals are the problem. So we need to quit making it easy for them.