Results 1 to 15 of 15

Thread: Armed and Aging

  1. #1
    Regular Member Whitney's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Poulsbo, Kitsap County, Washington, USA
    Posts
    449

    Armed and Aging

    http://www.alternet.org/civil-libert...e-gun-controls


    I ran across this article from another board I visit. The laws suggested in the article should sound eerily familiar to some.


    FUQ: I snipped a few choice paragraphs.

    Whatever their reasons, the rate of older Americans with firearms is expected to rise as the population ages; the U.S. has 45 million residents age 65 or older, a demographic likely to more than double by 2060, according to census takers. Such numbers have caught the attention of gun manufacturers and supporters.

    “So much of the dialogue around guns in this country has been around crime, and lately, mass shootings. And the older population is not part of that. But when you look at the suicide issue, it’s impossible to ignore older Americans,” Frattaroli said. “With that in mind, any conversation about guns has to include a conversation [about] gun ownership among older adults. There’s definitely more to be done on that issue in the United States.”

    State lawmakers in California recently offered a unique solution that could appease both sides: the gun violence restraining order. The statewide policy, which went into effect Jan. 1, 2016, is based on the domestic violence restraining-order system, in which concerned citizens can turn to the courts for help, said Frattaroli, who serves as associate director for outreach for Johns Hopkins University’s Center for Injury Research and Policy.

    Specifically, the gun violence restraining order addresses concerns a loved one or neighbor might have about someone experiencing any crisis—whether an age-related ailment like dementia or something else like job loss or a spouse’s death—that might prompt them to harm themselves or others with a gun, Frattaroli said.

    A judge can order police to remove the guns for up to a year, as well as prohibit the troubled citizen from buying new guns, she added. An assemblywoman introduced the measure in 2014, two days after Elliot Rodger, 22, fatally stabbed, shot or hit with his car 20 people (six of whom died) before killing himself in Isla Vista, Calif.


    ~Whitney
    The problem with America is stupidity.
    I'm not saying there should be capital punishment for stupidity, but why don't we just take the safety labels off of everything and let the problem solve itself?

  2. #2
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    earth's crust
    Posts
    17,838
    Yet another lizzurd idea .... there's a million of them ...

    Thanks for the laugh.

    Think white folks don't want to give up their guns ... old whites are magnitudes worse ... many process servers would be dead if they actually tried to make this an unconstitutional law.

  3. #3
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    Location
    WNC
    Posts
    127
    The idea that some "concerned citizen" - be it a neighbor or family member - should have the right to petition the court to restrict the rights of another is complete bonkers.

    There are - and have been for decades - legal processes to insure that someone who was mentally incapacitated (for whatever reason) could be protected from harm - including self-harm.

    Simply one more way for those on the left coast to try and deprive others of their rights.

  4. #4
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    earth's crust
    Posts
    17,838
    Quote Originally Posted by drsysadmin View Post
    The idea that some "concerned citizen" - be it a neighbor or family member - should have the right to petition the court to restrict the rights of another is complete bonkers.

    There are - and have been for decades - legal processes to insure that someone who was mentally incapacitated (for whatever reason) could be protected from harm - including self-harm.

    Simply one more way for those on the left coast to try and deprive others of their rights.
    Oh but I'm sure that this one would include the taking of the person's guns w/o any hearing .. you would basically have to prove you're not crazy to get them back .. and with many judges, they think that owning a gun is proof that you are crazy already. I have spoken to many commie judges ... there are a lot of them wearing robes.

  5. #5
    Regular Member solus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    here nc
    Posts
    6,871
    Quote Originally Posted by drsysadmin View Post
    The idea that some "concerned citizen" - be it a neighbor or family member - should have the right to petition the court to restrict the rights of another is complete bonkers.

    There are - and have been for decades - legal processes to insure that someone who was mentally incapacitated (for whatever reason) could be protected from harm - including self-harm.

    Simply one more way for those on the left coast to try and deprive others of their rights.
    alas that is not true in the case of NC's persons of color and determination of their mental health, or whether or not to cure the STD given to them by scientists to see how the disease(s) progresses or to have them submit to Sterilization of Persons Mentally Defective.

    sorry there are no legal processes to protect those not mentally incapacitated e.g., In March 2015, Long Island woman Kamilah (Kam) Brock said she had been involuntarily committed by the NYPD for saying President Obama followed her on Twitter. http://www.snopes.com/2015/09/14/kam...nypd-incident/

    this should worry you more.

    ipse
    I'm only human; I do what I can; I'm just a man; I do what I can; Don't put the blame on me; Don't put your blame on me ~ Rag'n'Bone Man.

    Please do not get confused between my personality & my attitude. My personality is who I am ~ my attitude depends on who you are and how you act.

    Remember always, do not judge someone because they sin differently than you do!

    Get your facts first, and then you can distort them as much as you please. Mark Twain

  6. #6
    State Researcher
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Utah
    Posts
    4,795
    Quote Originally Posted by Whitney View Post

    FUQ: I snipped a few choice paragraphs.

    ...

    “So much of the dialogue around guns in this country has been around crime, and lately, mass shootings. And the older population is not part of that. But when you look at the suicide issue, it’s impossible to ignore older Americans,” Frattaroli said. “With that in mind, any conversation about guns has to include a conversation [about] gun ownership among older adults. There’s definitely more to be done on that issue in the United States.”

    State lawmakers in California recently offered a unique solution that could appease both sides: the gun violence restraining order. The statewide policy, which went into effect Jan. 1, 2016, is based on the domestic violence restraining-order system, in which concerned citizens can turn to the courts for help, said Frattaroli, who serves as associate director for outreach for Johns Hopkins University’s Center for Injury Research and Policy.
    Hmm. I'll have to go read the article. The title and the first paragraph you quoted lead me to think maybe the article was going to be about older folks getting guns to protect themselves. The old, "too old to get into a fight, I'll have to shoot 'em" routine.

    But they're worried about elderly suicide? In California where this year there have been legislative discussions on legalizing physician assisted suicide??!?!

    Clearly, these folks don't consider human life so sacred as to try to prevent suicide. They just want to be in charge of making the decision about who and when. It seems they are fine with suicide as long as a State licensed doctor or two agree with you and provide medication. But they feign great concern over suicide if it is a personal decision, then carried out by an individual not asking for help from anyone.

    All this of course ignoring the tiny number of guns used in suicides, and the tiny number of gun owners who commit suicide.

    Charles
    All experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. Thank heaven we do not permit a few to impose anarchy.

    "With Anarchy as an aim and as a means, Communism becomes possible."
    --Marxist.org

    "Communism and Anarchy [are], a necessary complement to one another. "
    --PETER KROPOTKIN, "Anarchism: its philosophy and ideal." 1898.

  7. #7
    Accomplished Advocate color of law's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Cincinnati, Ohio, USA
    Posts
    3,731
    Suicide is not a crime. Attempted suicide is a crime in most states. So, please don't attempt to commit suicide.

  8. #8
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    earth's crust
    Posts
    17,838
    Quote Originally Posted by utbagpiper View Post

    Clearly, these folks don't consider human life so sacred as to try to prevent suicide. <snip>

    Charles
    They already champion abortion.. so that they don't consider life as sacred was known before.

  9. #9
    Moderator / Administrator Grapeshot's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    North Chesterfield, Va.
    Posts
    34,613
    Quote Originally Posted by davidmcbeth View Post
    They already champion abortion.. so that they don't consider life as sacred was known before.
    One can be prosecuted for giving or receiving an illegal abortion.

    I have not yet seen anyone prosecuted for successfully committing suicide.
    You will not rise to the occasion; you will fall back on your level of training.” Archilochus, 650 BC

    Old and treacherous will beat young and skilled every time. Yata hey.

  10. #10
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    earth's crust
    Posts
    17,838
    Quote Originally Posted by Grapeshot View Post
    One can be prosecuted for giving or receiving an illegal abortion.

    I have not yet seen anyone prosecuted for successfully committing suicide.
    If the .govs could take the property of the person who suicides, I think the results would be much different.

  11. #11
    Moderator / Administrator Grapeshot's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    North Chesterfield, Va.
    Posts
    34,613
    Quote Originally Posted by davidmcbeth View Post
    If the .govs could take the property of the person who suicides, I think the results would be much different.
    So then the persons would give away their tangible assets first.
    You will not rise to the occasion; you will fall back on your level of training.” Archilochus, 650 BC

    Old and treacherous will beat young and skilled every time. Yata hey.

  12. #12
    State Researcher
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Utah
    Posts
    4,795
    Quote Originally Posted by Grapeshot View Post
    One can be prosecuted for giving or receiving an illegal abortion.

    I have not yet seen anyone prosecuted for successfully committing suicide.
    Rare for a woman to prosecuted for receiving an illegal abortion these days.

    And while it is impossible to prosecute for committing suicide, there may be civil ramifications including life insurance not being required to pay out in some cases.

    More importantly, one is likely to face prosecution for aiding with another's suicide.

    In the extreme, those who engage in claimed "mercy killings" are likely to face criminal penalties as in this case that resulted in probation or this one resulting in 100 years to life.

    Last year a fellow in Utah was charged with reckless endangerment (and plead guilty to negligent homicide) after he gave a suicidal friend a gun. The gun owner was a prohibited person due to a prior felony.

    In 2015, the Utah Supreme Court held that a gun owner may face civil liability if a gun is too easily accessible to a drunk guest who ends up shooting herself accidentally.

    And I suspect that in many places, attempted but failed suicide is sufficient cause to involuntarily commit a person and strip them of their rights, including RKBA.

    Charles
    All experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. Thank heaven we do not permit a few to impose anarchy.

    "With Anarchy as an aim and as a means, Communism becomes possible."
    --Marxist.org

    "Communism and Anarchy [are], a necessary complement to one another. "
    --PETER KROPOTKIN, "Anarchism: its philosophy and ideal." 1898.

  13. #13
    State Researcher
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Utah
    Posts
    4,795
    Quote Originally Posted by Grapeshot View Post
    So then the persons would give away their tangible assets first.
    Now one of the recognized final warning signs of impending suicide is giving away personal treasures/heirlooms.

    A person truly committed to ending his own life is not likely to be deterred forever, except through commitment to the kind of facility with padded rooms.

    Decent folks, however, do not want to see someone end his own life over a transient mental illness or temporary depression that might be successfully treated and corrected such that the person can go on to live a long, productive, happy life. Morally, I think there is as much obligation to protect a man from his own mental illness as there is to protect him from a pack of wild dogs attempting to tear him to pieces.

    Considering that successful suicide cannot be undone or treated, and that unsuccessful suicide attempts may well result in life-long disability or disfigurement, while the truly committed can end their life tomorrow even if prevented from doing so today, the rational position for the law is to err on the side of protecting life.

    Charles
    All experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. Thank heaven we do not permit a few to impose anarchy.

    "With Anarchy as an aim and as a means, Communism becomes possible."
    --Marxist.org

    "Communism and Anarchy [are], a necessary complement to one another. "
    --PETER KROPOTKIN, "Anarchism: its philosophy and ideal." 1898.

  14. #14
    State Researcher
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Utah
    Posts
    4,795
    I quickly read the article. Frankly, it is rather shallow. While it starts with a seeming pro-gun slant and gives a slight nod to seniors defending themselves, the clear thrust (limited as it is) of the article is about the "risks" of old folks owning guns, with an unusual focus on suicide.

    One of their examples was a retired dentist. Such a medical professional either has access to prescription drugs, or a good working knowledge of which cocktail of over-the-counter drugs will best do the deed. This study out of England examined the differences between how doctors and laymen commit suicide. With the rarity of guns in England compared to here, the translation isn't perfect. But the point remains that medical professionals have options available that others often don't. That one chose to use a gun is probably rare. But that is their example.

    Anyway, it is an interesting tact to take in an article in a section entitled "Civil Liberties". I guess for gun grabbers, any manufactured excuse is a fine excuse.

    Charles
    All experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. Thank heaven we do not permit a few to impose anarchy.

    "With Anarchy as an aim and as a means, Communism becomes possible."
    --Marxist.org

    "Communism and Anarchy [are], a necessary complement to one another. "
    --PETER KROPOTKIN, "Anarchism: its philosophy and ideal." 1898.

  15. #15
    Regular Member OC for ME's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    White Oak Plantation
    Posts
    12,272
    https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/f...01320140AB1014

    Ex parte...it is California...anti-liberty.

    As to the article...a bunch of anti-liberty BS!!!
    "I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty than to those attending too small a degree of it." - Thomas Jefferson.

    "Better that ten guilty persons escape, than that one innocent suffer" - English jurist William Blackstone.
    It is AFAIK original to me. Compromise is failure on the installment plan, particularly when dealing with so intractable an opponent as ignorance. - Nightmare

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •