…or ‘just a little off’?
The Liberty Sphere discusses the move by the administration (and it’s sycophants) to more loosely define ‘mental illness’. Not to get more folks in need dependent on the government.
But to get them declared a ‘prohibited possessor’ under federal law, with regard to firearms possession and ownership.
When Fidel Castro bullied his way into power in Cuba five decades ago, the west began to see, up close and personal, the manner in which totalitarian governments played fast and loose with the term “mentally ill.” Political dissidents were routinely rounded up, and if they were not murdered in cold blood, they were deemed insane, taken to state-run mental facilities, and given a series of electric shock treatments that rendered them imbeciles for all intents and purposes.
In like manner, the American government under Barack Obama and Democrats who run the U.S. Senate, and their allies in ultra-liberal state governments such California, are using the term “mentally ill” in a haphazard fashion, allowing them to confiscate guns.
And you don’t even have to be a patient. Merely being a family member of such a person is enough for the American Gestapo squads to seize your firearms. This news report from Bloomberg provides the details.
Quelle surprise.
h/t Nat’l Conservative Examiner
A bigger question is how California is able to have a registration system. Scary when it is recommended for the rest of the country.
Posted by WellSeasonedFool | March 18, 2013, 8:03 amYep. Not that there is any privacy anymore.
Posted by guffaw1952 | March 18, 2013, 8:05 amA few years back, the VA put me on antidepressants. Now I’m wondering how that could effect my FFL’s. I haven’t taken any for 3 or 4 years, but they are still in my record. I never did understand why I was on them in the first place.
Posted by robertsgunshop | March 18, 2013, 8:29 amFunny how that is for so many.
Posted by guffaw1952 | March 18, 2013, 11:11 amIt’s clear that TPTB will try anything now. It seems they’re getting desperate to disarm Americans; one can only speculate why … and the answers are disquieting.
Posted by Rev. Paul | March 18, 2013, 8:42 amIndeed!
Posted by guffaw1952 | March 18, 2013, 11:12 amGood point, and the whole 4th and 5th amendment come into question, along with illegal seizure if they are not reimbursed…
Posted by Old NFO | March 18, 2013, 4:32 pmYeah, like they’ve followed the letter of the law before.
Posted by guffaw1952 | March 18, 2013, 10:41 pm