2A may preclude lifetime ban on possession by people committed to mental institution

Joined
Feb 18, 2013
Messages
1,252
Likes
1,105
Location
Just North of Boston
Feedback: 11 / 0 / 0
So says a federal magistrate in Iowa:

...
In Tuesday’s United States v. Johnson (N.D. Iowa), a federal magistrate judge concluded that,

[A] statute that operates to deprive Johnson of a fundamental constitutional right for the rest of his life, based solely on brief mental health commitments two decades ago, does not appear to be “narrowly tailored to serve compelling state interests.”...

A crack in the door maybe?

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...n-committed-to-a-mental-institution-long-ago/


 
If someone's too dangerous to handle a firearm, then what are they doing walking around?

The mental-health provisions of GCA68 result in lifetime PP status regardless of whether the person ever sought help or has gotten better with appropriate therapy and medication. To be fair, GCA68 reflects the state of mental-health treatment at that point in history. Science has made considerable advances in the last half-century.

OTOH a lot of bona-fide violent nutcases are not PPs because they've never had any documented contact with the mental-health system, so GCA68 performs rather poorly at its ostensible objective of keeping guns out of the hands of the unstable and violent.
 
If someone's too dangerous to handle a firearm, then what are they doing walking around?

The mental-health provisions of GCA68 result in lifetime PP status regardless of whether the person ever sought help or has gotten better with appropriate therapy and medication. To be fair, GCA68 reflects the state of mental-health treatment at that point in history. Science has made considerable advances in the last half-century.

OTOH a lot of bona-fide violent nutcases are not PPs because they've never had any documented contact with the mental-health system, so GCA68 performs rather poorly at its ostensible objective of keeping guns out of the hands of the unstable and violent.

Problem is that I feel the same way about criminal convictions. If the person is to dangerous to be allowed to defend themselves, why are they forced to live with out protection of 24/7 armed guards (aka prison)?
Not to mention it destroys the whole concept of rehabilitation
 
Back
Top Bottom