1. Welcome to SportsJournalists.com, a friendly forum for discussing all things sports and journalism.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register for a free account to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Access to private conversations with other members.
    • Fewer ads.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Mentally ill, and want your gun back? No problem.

Discussion in 'Sports and News' started by YankeeFan, Dec 22, 2013.

  1. YankeeFan

    YankeeFan Well-Known Member

    Connecticut’s law giving the police broad leeway to seize and hold guns for up to a year is actually relatively strict. Most states simply adhere to the federal standard, banning gun possession only after someone is involuntarily committed to a psychiatric facility or designated as mentally ill or incompetent after a court proceeding or other formal legal process. Relatively few with mental health issues, even serious ones, reach this point.

    As a result, the police often find themselves grappling with legal ambiguities when they encounter mentally unstable people with guns, unsure how far they can go in searching for and seizing firearms and then, in particular, how they should respond when the owners want them back.

    ...

    A systematic review of these cases — from cities and counties in California, Colorado, Connecticut, Florida, Indiana, Ohio and Tennessee — underscores how easy it is for people with serious mental health problems to have guns.

    Over the past year in Connecticut, where The Times obtained some of the most extensive records of seizure cases, there were more than 180 instances of gun confiscations from people who appeared to pose a risk of “imminent personal injury to self or others.” Close to 40 percent of these cases involved serious mental illness.

    Perhaps most striking, in many of the cases examined across the country, the authorities said they had no choice under the law but to return the guns after an initial seizure for safekeeping.

    For example, in Hillsborough County, Fla., 31 of 34 people who sought to reclaim seized firearms last year were able to do so after a brief court hearing, according to a count by The Times.


    nyti.ms/JUJZYG
     
  2. Mark2010

    Mark2010 Active Member

    Yeah. Defining the standard of who is and isn't too dangerous to own a firearm is an impossible task.
     
  3. Guy_Incognito

    Guy_Incognito Well-Known Member

    "If you like your firearm, you can keep it."
     
  4. daemon

    daemon Member

    So what other parts of the Bill of Rights should we strip from citizens based on a responding officer's judgment? I'm especially curious to hear a logical answer from somebody who otherwise believes the second amendment is impervious. Bonus points if that somebody also believes the government should keep its hands outta yer health care, regardless of the cost.
     
  5. britwrit

    britwrit Well-Known Member

    You can have my gun when you pull it out of my cold, dead hands.... or when the aliens broadcasting from the moon tell me to let go.
     
  6. hondo

    hondo Well-Known Member

    Speaking of the mentally ill and guns:
    http://outkickthecoverage.com/the-best-alabama-fan-photo-of-the-year.php
     
Draft saved Draft deleted

Share This Page