POTUS 45.17 - Section 4 of Amendment 25

[Drew S.]

you moron, we've talked about this many times. managing money poorly and living paycheck to paycheck doesn't make you deemed mentally incapable of managing your affairs -- it makes you stupid.

Being deemed mentally incapable of managing your affairs requires a medical diagnosis.

If it requires a diagnosis it shouldn't be difficult for whoever is making that diagnosis to opine on whether they are fit to own guns or not.

 

[Handyman]

Re: POTUS 45.17 - Section 4 of Amendment 25

I just learned that the ACLU won a case that got the permit for the Saturday march by the white nationalists. Rationale by the ACLU? Free speech, even that which they abhor.

And, I just found out --> I agree with Noam Chomsky (I suspect it's the first time I've said those words):



http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/noam-chomsky-antifa-is-a-major-gift-to-the-right/article/2631786

Antifa would've been well served to stay home and watch the Bed Bath tiki torch fools stand alone in the sun and be disinfected.

Yeah...despite what Right Wing Nutjobs think the ACLU fights for the rights of everyone. The ACLU has been doing that since Skokie.

And Chomsky is wrong and so are you and you both need to brush up on history.

 

[burd]

Re: POTUS 45.17 - Section 4 of Amendment 25

You do realize that being declared mentally incompetent is not the same as being bad with money, right?

Ask Drew if he has ever been involved in a guardianship proceeding. Could be he is a ward.

 

[Handyman]

Re: POTUS 45.17 - Section 4 of Amendment 25

"Jews will not replace us!"

Wasnt that what Picket's Brigade was yelling as they crossed the field at Gettysburg?

Oh wait no it wasnt. But remember, this march was about a statue...

 

[rufus]

Re: POTUS 45.17 - Section 4 of Amendment 25

If it requires a diagnosis it shouldn't be difficult for whoever is making that diagnosis to opine on whether they are fit to own guns or not.

Well if you're ruled mentally incompetent, I'm pretty sure that would have to be done based on a diagnosis. Obama just couldn't walk in and say, "nope, you're not fit". Even though that's your worst fear.

 

[Drew S.]

Well if you're ruled mentally incompetent, I'm pretty sure that would have to be done based on a diagnosis. Obama just couldn't walk in and say, "nope, you're not fit". Even though that's your worst fear.

Well, that's what he tried to do! Why not add a box on whatever form the doctor files that asks 'Is this person fit to own guns or not'?

 

[Spartanforlife4]

Well if you're ruled mentally incompetent, I'm pretty sure that would have to be done based on a diagnosis. Obama just couldn't walk in and say, "nope, you're not fit". Even though that's your worst fear.

Are you sure about that? I heard stories about Obama and Hillary personally coming with a death panel to steal guns and Christmas trees. Then they'd invoke martial law on the town where it would be wiped off the map and is now populated by actors paid by George Soros to continue a normal appearance.

 

[Kepler]

Re: POTUS 45.17 - Section 4 of Amendment 25

I just learned that the ACLU won a case that got the permit for the Saturday march by the white nationalists. Rationale by the ACLU? Free speech, even that which they abhor.

And, I just found out --> I agree with Noam Chomsky (I suspect it's the first time I've said those words):



http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/noam-chomsky-antifa-is-a-major-gift-to-the-right/article/2631786

Antifa would've been well served to stay home and watch the Bed Bath tiki torch fools stand alone in the sun and be disinfected.

Antifa is apparently like cholesterol: there are good kinds and bad kinds. Most of Antifa is non-violent, and I have no problem with them protesting Nazis. The small portion of Antifa that is violent needs to go to the hoosegow.

 

[Handyman]

Re: POTUS 45.17 - Section 4 of Amendment 25

Are you sure about that? I heard stories about Obama and Hillary personally coming with a death panel to steal guns and Christmas trees. Then they'd invoke martial law on the town where it would be wiped off the map and is now populated by actors paid by George Soros to continue a normal appearance.

Not enough Wal-Mart Death Camps...2/10 Frauddy would disapprove

 

[Handyman]

Re: POTUS 45.17 - Section 4 of Amendment 25

You know what is a satifying moment in that Vice episode...the d-bag talking about how he goes to the gym and carries a pistol in the hopes of bringing violence and then him crying like a baby because he got maced twice. He wants to bring violence, just doesnt have the sack to actually deal with violence himself.

Further proof that you dont just let this babies walk and feel good, you stand up to them and watch them crumble. It takes more than the light of day to kill a cockroach you gotta squash it.

(no that is not me advocating violence in any way)

 

[jerphisch]

Re: POTUS 45.17 - Section 4 of Amendment 25

"Jews will not replace us!"

Wasnt that what Picket's Brigade was yelling as they crossed the field at Gettysburg?

Oh wait no it wasnt. But remember, this march was about a statue...

Don't forget the "Fags go home" chant, another rally cry of the Confederacy.

 

[Kepler]

Re: POTUS 45.17 - Section 4 of Amendment 25

The problem with the defenders of the rally isnt their beliefs in White Supremacy

There are certainly forms of White Supremacy where even the fact of it is the problem. If someone is a "white people are better than black people so I'm only going to white doctors" moron, he's not making a threat (and Darwin will take care of him when only Ben Carson can do his brain operation). If someone is a "white people are better than black people so I'm working to prohibit blacks from voting or having children" moron he's making a threat. Threats are not protected speech.

 

[Handyman]

Re: POTUS 45.17 - Section 4 of Amendment 25

There are certainly forms of White Supremacy where even the fact of it is the problem. If someone is a "white people are better than black people so I'm only going to white doctors," he's not making a threat he's just a moron (and Darwin will take care of him when only Ben Carson can do his brain operation). If someone is a "white people are better than black people so I'm working to prohibit blacks from voting or having children," he's making a threat. Threats are not protected speech.

Right I was speaking only for the rally itself. The rally could be about how toupees are evil the point is you can say it.

I am watching the Vice thing in pieces...just saw the dude drive his car through the crowd. That is about as awful as it gets.

 

[rufus]

Re: POTUS 45.17 - Section 4 of Amendment 25

Yeah Fortune 500 companies, police departments, schools they never fall for con men. The opposite of your last paragraph is certainly true for you and others on here. This was an awful rule that took away due process from thousands of people for no good reason. Unless there are all these cases of meals on wheels folks being blown away that I'm not aware of.

How do they get ruled mentally incompetent if not by diagnosis?

Again, Obama and his authoritarian army couldn't just designate anyone they wanted. You're just either too blinded by bias, or just too friggin' stupid to get that through your thick skull.

 

[rufus]

Re: POTUS 45.17 - Section 4 of Amendment 25

If it requires a diagnosis it shouldn't be difficult for whoever is making that diagnosis to opine on whether they are fit to own guns or not.

You're the one who first brought this up. You tell us how it requires someone to be ruled incompetent.

 

[Kepler]

Re: POTUS 45.17 - Section 4 of Amendment 25

Right I was speaking only for the rally itself. The rally could be about how toupees are evil the point is you can say it.

Anyone who watched Super Chicken knows toupees are evil.

 

[BassAle]

Re: POTUS 45.17 - Section 4 of Amendment 25

If it requires a diagnosis it shouldn't be difficult for whoever is making that diagnosis to opine on whether they are fit to own guns or not.

the government already had a database of social security recipients that were deemed mentally incapable of managing their affairs. It would be simple to add that to the background check.

 

[alfablue]

Re: POTUS 45.17 - Section 4 of Amendment 25

You know what is a satifying moment in that Vice episode...the d-bag talking about how he goes to the gym and carries a pistol in the hopes of bringing violence and then him crying like a baby because he got maced twice. He wants to bring violence, just doesnt have the sack to actually deal with violence himself.

Further proof that you dont just let this babies walk and feel good, you stand up to them and watch them crumble. It takes more than the light of day to kill a cockroach you gotta squash it.

(no that is not me advocating violence in any way)

Like the brownshirts, all it takes is to stand up to them. Germany didn't and England did.

Most of them will cower at the threat of violence onto them.

 

[rufus]

Re: POTUS 45.17 - Section 4 of Amendment 25

You know what is a satifying moment in that Vice episode...the d-bag talking about how he goes to the gym and carries a pistol in the hopes of bringing violence and then him crying like a baby because he got maced twice. He wants to bring violence, just doesnt have the sack to actually deal with violence himself.

Further proof that you dont just let this babies walk and feel good, you stand up to them and watch them crumble. It takes more than the light of day to kill a cockroach you gotta squash it.

(no that is not me advocating violence in any way)

Is that the same guy that posted a recent video about how he now has an arrest warrant out for him, and he's sobbing and sniffling like a baby through the whole thing?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lyeTj002DCo

Damm. It disgusts me that this pu$$y is from New Hampshire.

 

[unofan]

Well, that's what he tried to do! Why not add a box on whatever form the doctor files that asks 'Is this person fit to own guns or not'?

There are states trying to ban doctors from even talking about guns with their patients, and you think there's going to be a form where a doctor could explicitly bar someone from possessing a gun by checking a box?