Donate Bitcoin

Donate Paypal


PeakOil is You

PeakOil is You

Do I have a right to feel safe?

For discussions of events and conditions not necessarily related to Peak Oil.

Re: Do I have a right to feel safe?

Unread postby ROCKMAN » Thu 15 Oct 2015, 10:58:46

cog - "every valid FOID card is checked every day against mental health records...". So the state has access to the mental health records from every institution in the country? So if one of their residents is deemed mentally unstable by a hospital in Texas they'll know that in Illinois??? More important I'd like to see proof that every psychiatrist in the state posts their mental health evaluations of every patient into some data base the state has access to anytime they wish. Sounds like a great idea IMHO. Which is why I suspicious. Does the state also check for indications of suicidal tendencies for all its citizens and takes some proactive action to help them? Likewise if a resident is deemed to unstable to purchase a weapon are they still allowed to keep their driver's license/vehicle? There have been many cases in the country of the mentally ill/pissed off folks involved in vehicular homicide. Are they still allowed to have custody of the children if they are parents? Are they allowed to work in a school or daycare facility if they are deemed not mentally stable enough to purchase a firearm?

And the most important question of all: are all the folks in Illinois running for public office have their mental health backgrounds researched?
User avatar
ROCKMAN
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 11397
Joined: Tue 27 May 2008, 03:00:00
Location: TEXAS

Re: Do I have a right to feel safe?

Unread postby ROCKMAN » Thu 15 Oct 2015, 11:04:07

Looking at the title of the thread reminded me of a proposition I saw offered many years ago: with every "right" come some level of obligation. We have the right to drive our cars. But we're obligated to not only make sure they a mechanically safe to drive but to prove it to the state every year by having a certified inspection. At least that's the law in Texas. Every person has the right to create a baby...but also the obligation to provide proper care for that child.

So following such logic if you buy it: if one has the "right" to feel safe what are the obligations that go along with that right?
User avatar
ROCKMAN
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 11397
Joined: Tue 27 May 2008, 03:00:00
Location: TEXAS

Re: Do I have a right to feel safe?

Unread postby ralfy » Thu 15 Oct 2015, 11:59:47

davep wrote:The whole point of the 2nd amendment is to be able to provide resistance to the Government. Banning guns without a peaceful use goes counter to the heart of that no matter what you may think of guns.

Sure, there should be some tightening of the law to stop the mentally ill or felons getting their hands on guns in gun fairs etc. Maybe insisting guns are properly stored when not carried (to avoid having children/intruders get hold of them). And some basic marksmanship/safety training for any potential militia-man would appear to be a minimum level to ensure you don't blow your own foot off (and potentially to remove some of the mystique surrounding guns). And if somebody threatens to use their guns on another, the guns should be removed straight away by the police (as they do in Switzerland) to de-escalate the situation.

These are basic common sense and the middle two may not even need to be legislated for if people had common sense. But it's evident that a lot of people don't seem to possess any. Oh, and don't ever get your guns out when you're drunk. Never do it; your judgement is impaired.


From what I know, the purpose of the Second is to justify the formation of regulated militias, which at that time was needed because the standing army was small and multiple threats appeared, i.e., fellow whites, invaders, slaves, and native Americans. At the same time, various militias were already in place, including those that operated as slave patrols.
User avatar
ralfy
Light Sweet Crude
Light Sweet Crude
 
Posts: 5571
Joined: Sat 28 Mar 2009, 11:36:38
Location: The Wasteland

Re: Do I have a right to feel safe?

Unread postby ralfy » Thu 15 Oct 2015, 12:06:20

Perhaps one should see the proliferation of gun ownership and feeling safe thanks to the same in light of one of the most expensive police and military forces in the world, one of the largest prison systems in the world, extensive surveillance systems that are also used to monitor the domestic population, the country as one of the main arms dealers worldwide, etc.
User avatar
ralfy
Light Sweet Crude
Light Sweet Crude
 
Posts: 5571
Joined: Sat 28 Mar 2009, 11:36:38
Location: The Wasteland

Re: Do I have a right to feel safe?

Unread postby Tanada » Thu 15 Oct 2015, 13:37:13

ralfy wrote:From what I know, the purpose of the Second is to justify the formation of regulated militias, which at that time was needed because the standing army was small and multiple threats appeared, i.e., fellow whites, invaders, slaves, and native Americans. At the same time, various militias were already in place, including those that operated as slave patrols.


That would be an inaccurate assessment because the usage of the terminology has changed in the two centuries since it was written down.

It is correct to say that all males were expected to train together on the town commons every few months so that they would be prepared if they were called out for an emergency. In the context of 'well regulated' they meant properly self equipped and capable of properly handling a firearm. The 'militia' meant every able bodied male who owned a firearm, nothing more and nothing less. If the mayor/council/governor called up the militia due to an emergency they were required to show up with their own weapon and ammunition to protect the community from any threat, or help out in an emergency.

When the US got involved in World War I they called for volunteers, but not militia, because they wanted to make sure everyone had the same training and used the same weapons with common ammunition. Men who showed up with their personal weapons had to choose either to send their weapons back home and accept the US Army weapons and training, or go home, and quite a few went home. As a result of all the headaches caused the US Government passed the National Guard act where they split the costs of arming and training militia with the state governments. As a result the National Guard has all standard weapons and training, but do not serve on active duty unless called up by the Federal Government. The first time that happened to a large extent was Viet Nam when President Nixon called up and deployed National Guard to ease the requirements to draft manpower for the war. National Guard and Reserve units have served in every conflict since then that was more than a few weeks in duration.

However the individual right to keep and bare arms is an individual right that has never been disputed by the Supreme Court, even when it had a majority Liberal membership. You have the right to self defense, it is a natural right that every lifeform on the planet has. If you go into an arena and fight a bull and get killed the Bull does not get 'blamed' for defending itself, and if someone breaks into your home or accosts you on the street you have the right to fight back. In almost all cases self defense is recognized as a valid reason for use of deadly force.
Alfred Tennyson wrote:We are not now that strength which in old days
Moved earth and heaven, that which we are, we are;
One equal temper of heroic hearts,
Made weak by time and fate, but strong in will
To strive, to seek, to find, and not to yield.
User avatar
Tanada
Site Admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 17050
Joined: Thu 28 Apr 2005, 03:00:00
Location: South West shore Lake Erie, OH, USA

Re: Do I have a right to feel safe?

Unread postby Cog » Thu 15 Oct 2015, 14:17:35

@Rockman

The mental database that the ISP accesses is Illinois only. Unless the person in question is forbidden in the federal NIC system and then Illinois has access to those prohibited persons as well. I could be wrong on this but I think Illinois also has access to some other state mental databases that have reporting requirements similar to Illinois.

A psychiatrist would only fill out a form on a mentally disturbed person for forwarding to the ISP if he felt the person he was treating was a danger to himself or others. This is entirely within the psychiatrist's discretion. Now if the person is involuntarily committed, the facility manager or hospital must submit paperwork to the ISP to have their FOID card revoked. Sometimes this happens, sometimes it doesn't.

Regarding driving. The FOID card and the driver's license are entirely different things as far as the ISP goes. If you were involuntarily committed to a nut house or hospital you may well lose your FOID card but you won't lose your driver's license.

In other words this is no nutjob database shared among the various states. And since mental illness has so many gradations of symptoms and treatments there will most likely never be one.
User avatar
Cog
Fusion
Fusion
 
Posts: 13416
Joined: Sat 17 May 2008, 03:00:00
Location: Northern Kekistan

Re: Do I have a right to feel safe?

Unread postby Newfie » Thu 15 Oct 2015, 21:14:19

I guess where I am sitting on this issue is this......

There is a certain element (or lements) within our population that make me nervous. I would like to see their gun ownership restricted.

However I see no decent way to do so, it would be an unfair prejudice.

Nor do I see a way to adequately ban certain types of guns. It reminds me of the old judge who said he could recognize pornography when h saw it but not otherwise define it.

Then there is the question of enforcement. We can't keep drugs out of prisons, how can we expect to control guns.

My Wife was relating to me hoe in Germany folks are, or were, expected to report to the police when they move, even within a city. Hard to imagine that level of control here. Perhaps gun control is easier elsewhere because folks are more compliant and used to being under government control.

So it seems that gun ownership is rising, the desire for control weakening. Ownership of anti personnel type weapons is increasing while hunting is decreasing. Laws are being flouted and trust in the government is decreasing.

Sounds like a bad B movie setup.
User avatar
Newfie
Forum Moderator
Forum Moderator
 
Posts: 18458
Joined: Thu 15 Nov 2007, 04:00:00
Location: Between Canada and Carribean

Re: Do I have a right to feel safe?

Unread postby ralfy » Thu 15 Oct 2015, 21:23:25

Tanada wrote:
That would be an inaccurate assessment because the usage of the terminology has changed in the two centuries since it was written down.


That's why I wrote "at that time."


It is correct to say that all males were expected to train together on the town commons every few months so that they would be prepared if they were called out for an emergency. In the context of 'well regulated' they meant properly self equipped and capable of properly handling a firearm. The 'militia' meant every able bodied male who owned a firearm, nothing more and nothing less. If the mayor/council/governor called up the militia due to an emergency they were required to show up with their own weapon and ammunition to protect the community from any threat, or help out in an emergency.



From what I know, the meaning is given in Art. 1 Sec. 8 and the five Militia Acts. Beyond that, states can form their own militias, which was the case as seen in the last sentence of the paragraph that I wrote.


When the US got involved in World War I they called for volunteers, but not militia, because they wanted to make sure everyone had the same training and used the same weapons with common ammunition. Men who showed up with their personal weapons had to choose either to send their weapons back home and accept the US Army weapons and training, or go home, and quite a few went home. As a result of all the headaches caused the US Government passed the National Guard act where they split the costs of arming and training militia with the state governments. As a result the National Guard has all standard weapons and training, but do not serve on active duty unless called up by the Federal Government. The first time that happened to a large extent was Viet Nam when President Nixon called up and deployed National Guard to ease the requirements to draft manpower for the war. National Guard and Reserve units have served in every conflict since then that was more than a few weeks in duration.



That can be seen in light of the 1903 Militia Act.

In any event, all of them have become irrelevant given what I raised in my subsequent post.


However the individual right to keep and bare arms is an individual right that has never been disputed by the Supreme Court, even when it had a majority Liberal membership. You have the right to self defense, it is a natural right that every lifeform on the planet has. If you go into an arena and fight a bull and get killed the Bull does not get 'blamed' for defending itself, and if someone breaks into your home or accosts you on the street you have the right to fight back. In almost all cases self defense is recognized as a valid reason for use of deadly force.


The point isn't that the right to bear arms is being disputed. It's that the Second is being used to justify it.

Because the right to defend oneself and loved ones is a natural one, then there is no need to justify it. However, the need to defend strangers is not. Hence, the Second.
User avatar
ralfy
Light Sweet Crude
Light Sweet Crude
 
Posts: 5571
Joined: Sat 28 Mar 2009, 11:36:38
Location: The Wasteland

Re: Do I have a right to feel safe?

Unread postby Revi » Thu 15 Oct 2015, 21:26:47

They just passed a law in my state that allows anyone to concealed carry unless they are a felon or mentally ill. I really don't feel any safer. I suppose it is the way it is nowadays, but I would love to live somewhere where I don't have to worry about every altercation turning into some kind of a shootout. It would be nice...
Deep in the mud and slime of things, even there, something sings.
User avatar
Revi
Light Sweet Crude
Light Sweet Crude
 
Posts: 7417
Joined: Mon 25 Apr 2005, 03:00:00
Location: Maine

Re: Do I have a right to feel safe?

Unread postby ralfy » Thu 15 Oct 2015, 21:27:52

Newfie wrote:I guess where I am sitting on this issue is this......

There is a certain element (or lements) within our population that make me nervous. I would like to see their gun ownership restricted.

However I see no decent way to do so, it would be an unfair prejudice.

Nor do I see a way to adequately ban certain types of guns. It reminds me of the old judge who said he could recognize pornography when h saw it but not otherwise define it.

Then there is the question of enforcement. We can't keep drugs out of prisons, how can we expect to control guns.

My Wife was relating to me hoe in Germany folks are, or were, expected to report to the police when they move, even within a city. Hard to imagine that level of control here. Perhaps gun control is easier elsewhere because folks are more compliant and used to being under government control.

So it seems that gun ownership is rising, the desire for control weakening. Ownership of anti personnel type weapons is increasing while hunting is decreasing. Laws are being flouted and trust in the government is decreasing.

Sounds like a bad B movie setup.


I'm reminded of the points given in this article:

http://www.shtfplan.com/headline-news/5 ... d_08102011

including the one involving the availability of only around two weeks' or so worth of food, fuel, medicine, and perhaps even ammo in various towns and cities.
User avatar
ralfy
Light Sweet Crude
Light Sweet Crude
 
Posts: 5571
Joined: Sat 28 Mar 2009, 11:36:38
Location: The Wasteland

Re: Do I have a right to feel safe?

Unread postby Cog » Thu 15 Oct 2015, 22:52:05

Revi wrote:They just passed a law in my state that allows anyone to concealed carry unless they are a felon or mentally ill. I really don't feel any safer. I suppose it is the way it is nowadays, but I would love to live somewhere where I don't have to worry about every altercation turning into some kind of a shootout. It would be nice...


States that have passed constitutional carry are no more dangerous than states that have not. Maine will be no different. Obtaining a permit to exercise an enumerated right is an infringement. If you want perfect safety, move to another planet.
User avatar
Cog
Fusion
Fusion
 
Posts: 13416
Joined: Sat 17 May 2008, 03:00:00
Location: Northern Kekistan

Re: Do I have a right to feel safe?

Unread postby Cog » Fri 16 Oct 2015, 08:09:58

I find some of the "common sense gun regulations" rather amusing. Chiefly among them that every private gun transaction must go through an FFL, which is what universal background checks is all about. Did you know that it is perfectly legal to build an AR-15 rifle and have NO background checks? This is the case in almost every state in the union.

This is how it works. The AR-15 rifle is composed of two major components. The upper receiver and the lower receiver. The upper receiver is composed of the barrel, bolt carrier group, gas tube and block, muzzle brake, and hand guards. I can order one of these tomorrow and have it delivered right to my front door. This part of the AR is not considered a firearm for purposes of BATFE regulation and oversight and there are no background checks done.

The lower receiver IS the part of the AR which has the serial number and is considered a firearm. Its major components include the receiver itself, the trigger group, safety selector switch, buffer tube, grip, and butt stock. If I order one of these, it must be shipped to an FFL and a background check will be done.

This is where it gets interesting. If the lower receiver is only finished to the 80% level by the manufacturer, it is not considered a firearm by the BATF and no background check is required for the purchase. I can have a 80% receiver shipped directly to my house. The only part I need to do is to mill/drill out the trigger group housing and the various holes for the trigger pin, safety selector switch etc.. The basic tools needed to do this are a drill press or hand drill, a router, and the template jigs you can buy from a lot of different companies. Here is an example
of such a company. http://www.80percentarms.com/products/80-ar-15-easy-jig

When its all said and done and you have milled your 80% lower to a 100% lower and have installed the various springs, pins, and trigger group, you now have a fully functioning AR without a single background check and the rifle itself is not traceable since it has no serial number and was never considered a firearm by anyone. And building your own rifle is perfectly legal with the BATF as long as you do the work yourself and did not build it with the intent to sell it to others. You don't even have to put a serial number on it.

This post does not constitute legal advice and some states, chiefly on the east and west coast, have particular regulations you might fall afoul of.

From watching the youtube videos on how this is done, with some patience, you can convert a 80% lower to a 100% in about 8 hours. Maybe less depending on your skills with metal working and your setup.
Last edited by Cog on Fri 16 Oct 2015, 08:23:19, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Cog
Fusion
Fusion
 
Posts: 13416
Joined: Sat 17 May 2008, 03:00:00
Location: Northern Kekistan

Re: Do I have a right to feel safe?

Unread postby davep » Fri 16 Oct 2015, 08:21:42

You can even 3-D print lower receivers http://3dprint.com/54163/printedfirearm-ar10-piece/
What we think, we become.
User avatar
davep
Senior Moderator
Senior Moderator
 
Posts: 4578
Joined: Wed 21 Jun 2006, 03:00:00
Location: Europe

Re: Do I have a right to feel safe?

Unread postby Revi » Fri 16 Oct 2015, 08:28:49

I feel a lot safer now, thanks...
Deep in the mud and slime of things, even there, something sings.
User avatar
Revi
Light Sweet Crude
Light Sweet Crude
 
Posts: 7417
Joined: Mon 25 Apr 2005, 03:00:00
Location: Maine

Re: Do I have a right to feel safe?

Unread postby Cog » Fri 16 Oct 2015, 08:40:21

I should point out that if you are a prohibited person, a felon or mentally ill person, or your state has regulations banning AR's, the moment you take one gram of metal off of the 80% lower, you are in violation of the law since it is no longer a 80% lower but now a gun.
Last edited by Cog on Fri 16 Oct 2015, 08:42:14, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Cog
Fusion
Fusion
 
Posts: 13416
Joined: Sat 17 May 2008, 03:00:00
Location: Northern Kekistan

Re: Do I have a right to feel safe?

Unread postby Cog » Fri 16 Oct 2015, 08:41:27

Revi wrote:I feel a lot safer now, thanks...


LOL I had you in mind when I posted it. Have no fear, once everyone has an AR at home the world will be an infinitely safer place.
User avatar
Cog
Fusion
Fusion
 
Posts: 13416
Joined: Sat 17 May 2008, 03:00:00
Location: Northern Kekistan

Re: Do I have a right to feel safe?

Unread postby ROCKMAN » Fri 16 Oct 2015, 09:12:09

Cog - Thanks for the details...very interesting. But: ". This is entirely within the psychiatrist's discretion." So if the doc misses the clues or doesn't want to risk being sued by a patient he tags he can allow some nutjob to get the card.

And through the whole discussion I haven't notice much focus on how many violent acts are committed with illegally obtained weapons. Weapons that no law can stop.

I also find it a bit telling that I haven't seen much response as to what obligations one has if they have some "right to safety". Seems like a rather simple question.
User avatar
ROCKMAN
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 11397
Joined: Tue 27 May 2008, 03:00:00
Location: TEXAS

Re: Do I have a right to feel safe?

Unread postby Cog » Fri 16 Oct 2015, 10:28:25

Ok Rockman, here is what the Illinois mental health reporting requirements say: More at link
https://www.dhs.state.il.us/page.aspx?item=73229
Physicians, licensed clinical psychologists, Qualified Examiners have an obligation to report persons that they have determined to be a "Clear and Present Danger" to themselves and/or their community. Those reports are to be made to the IDHS?FOID Mental Health Reporting System within 24 hours of the determination. Those physicians, licensed clinical psychologists, and Qualified Examiners who determine a person to be developmentally disabled or intellectually disabled are also obligated to report the person within 24 hours of the determination.

However there is a caveat:

Confidentiality and Liability
The identity of the person making the report shall not be released to the subject of the report. The clinician shall not be held liable for making or not making the report except in cases of willful and wanton misconduct.

There is a lot of wriggle room here on the psychiatrist's part.

Nearly all guns were legal at the time they were manufactured and sent on to a dealer. From that point on it gets murky depending on who you consider a good source of information. The FBI doesn't break down the murder stats on whether the gun was obtained legally or illegally. Or at least I have not found the data on that anywhere.

Some guns are outright stolen from cars or homes, some are straw purchases where a non-felon buys one for his felon friend, Some are face to face personal sales where the seller does not know that the person buying it is prohibited. The bottom line is if you are a felon, and most of the murders are committed by such, then you commit an illegal act just by being in possession of a gun.

The other way to look at is that most murders are committed by criminals not the non-criminal. People with extensive juvenile and adult arrest records and convictions. For instance, when the average non-criminal wakes up in the morning, he isn't considering whether to knock off the local 7-11 or get in a gun battle with the cops. The mass shooters and suicides as exceptions to this general rule.
User avatar
Cog
Fusion
Fusion
 
Posts: 13416
Joined: Sat 17 May 2008, 03:00:00
Location: Northern Kekistan

Re: Do I have a right to feel safe?

Unread postby Newfie » Fri 16 Oct 2015, 10:39:05

Rockman,

If what you are driving at is the existence, or lack thereof, of a right to feel safe, then I think the lack of an answer points to there being no definable "right." I hope that made sense.

I've thought about it a small bit and my conclusion is we have no "right" in the sense that it is something conveyed by the government. We have a personal "obligation", as parents and partners, to provide safety. The government (federal, state, local) has the same obligation to the public in general. And folks have an obligation to manage the government so that it provides that safety. But I see no definable "right."

...............

Re the mental issue, I can see that being severely abused. My ex Wife was the sort who would have used that during our divorce had she been able. Having dealt with way too many family court judges to trust them beyond holding a door open once dead. Not just what happened to me but what I saw done to other folks, male or female.
User avatar
Newfie
Forum Moderator
Forum Moderator
 
Posts: 18458
Joined: Thu 15 Nov 2007, 04:00:00
Location: Between Canada and Carribean

Re: Do I have a right to feel safe?

Unread postby Cog » Fri 16 Oct 2015, 13:41:40

In addition to the mental issue, wives use accusations of domestic violence and get restraining orders against their soon to be ex-husband. Judges readily grant them regardless of any proof or charges. But in the meantime, your guns are seized and you have a legal battle to get them back.

Pro-tip: If you are getting ready to divorce, transfer your guns to a friend until things shake-out.
User avatar
Cog
Fusion
Fusion
 
Posts: 13416
Joined: Sat 17 May 2008, 03:00:00
Location: Northern Kekistan

PreviousNext

Return to Geopolitics & Global Economics

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 12 guests