Nobody cares. The law worked perfectly by disarming another gun owner...
This was the intent of the law, was it not?
However, I'm of the mindset that the overwhelming majority of people living in the US would allow themselves to be murdered by a government agent before they would consider using a gun to defend themselves from one. Sad times are starting now...
Actually, if you bothered to read the article and not just the headline, you would see, no that was not the intent of the law. The law was written to only apply to people FORCIBLY COMMITTED, not people voluntarily seeking treatment like this case, and for insomnia no less... Not being able to sleep does not make a person inherently dangerous. The boundaries of reasons to confiscate people's guns are simply being tested to see how far they can go before people react. It always starts at the margins and works its way in.This was the intent of the law, was it not?
However, I'm of the mindset that the overwhelming majority of people living in the US would allow themselves to be murdered by a government agent before they would consider using a gun to defend themselves from one. Sad times are starting now...
1. If people actually cared, they would take a stand. Bundy Ranch was an example of people who chose to assert themselves. It's baffling to me how people will allow the subversion of the second amendment, which is clearly defined in the Bill of Rights, but will stand at the Bundy Ranch where the legal right is hazy... On one hand you have an article written into the Bill of Rights; incontestable, and on the other you have a matter subject to opinion, and people choose not to protect the Bill of Rights. This makes no sense to me...
2. The intent of the law is an extension of the intent of the legislator, and who might that be? Somebody who has a rather outspoken gun control agenda...
3. The law applies to everybody, for anybody can be involuntarily committed and the line isn't as clear as you would think... If you check yourself in voluntarily, and the doctor decides that it would be a "good idea" to observe you for some arbitrary period, then you are now involuntarily committed since the doctor has chosen an observational period for which you are legally obligated to stay.
4. The law is intended to remove guns from the population, placing wool on a wolf doesn't make for a sheep, and this law represents a wolf wrapped in wool pretending to be a sheep. The reality is that people can't have a society with human rights without the burden of defending those rights. There is no utopia, and the further we stray from natural equilibrium in search of the impossible, the harder we'll fall...
