Riddle me this.....

[sirs]

Putting aside the issue of Global Warming.....If, as Pres. Obama has repeatedly claimed, climate change is a greater threat than terrorism, then aren’t people who deny the climate threat, mentally unstable??  Perhaps even a threat to themselves, if not others??

[Xavier_Onassis]

Probably they are. Some of them are raving loons, others are Big Oil and Big Coal  people who want to become even richer, others are simple minded buffoons who hate Obama so much that they would be against  eating apple pie if the President said he liked it.

Since the rise of ocean levels by a foot could easily kill hundreds of thousands of people in places like Bangladesh, it is clear that it is more of a threat and will last much longer than the threat posed by some wacko bombers in Syria.

[sirs]

Probably they are.

Bingo.......and now Obama's imperial decree of how doctors should now report people deemed “mentally ill” to the FBI, could then lead to people who simply don't agree with man made global warming, as mentally ill, and unfit to own guns.....and thus be denied the ability to exercise their 2nd amendment right.

Thank you, xo

[Xavier_Onassis]

I sure as hell would not ruin my day.

I do not feel safer knowing that some loon has an arsenal.

[sirs]

and there in lies the issue at hand.....your definition of "loon" vs reality's definition.  I know of no one, NRA member or not, who would support a KNOWN loon access to a firearm

[Xavier_Onassis]

When a loon looks in a mirror, he sees a  patriotic eagle and defender of the American Way.

[sirs]

See what I mean?  Your version of loon vs reality's version of loon couldn't be more clear...and why we thank God we live in this country, with the freedoms GUARANTEED to us, that neither you nor the Government can take away

[Plane]

  How "loon" gets defined makes a lot of difference.

   In the Soviet Union there were insane asylums full of guys locked up because they were too insane to understand the perfection of Communism and the control of the party.

    If liking guns gets defined as deviant , a catch twenty two would be created .

[Xavier_Onassis]

I am sure that sirs would be adamant over the right of the Sandy Hook shooter's mom having a right to her personal arsenal.
He might have been in favor of her scolding her naughty son for taking her guns out to play with them. Who knows.

[sirs]

If the mom isn't a legally designated "loon", she has every right to have whatever legal firearm she wants.  It's then up to her, to properly keep them away from anyone SHE believes a loon. 

What you do NOT do however is revoke her rights, based on someone related to her

[Plane]

I am sure that sirs would be adamant over the right of the Sandy Hook shooter's mom having a right to her personal arsenal.

Taken at his word, so would the President.

[Xavier_Onassis]

What you do NOT do however is revoke her rights, based on someone related to her


===========================================
I only want the government to revoke her rights. It is not like she has any need of all those guns for any purpose.

[sirs]

Without some illegal act or diagnosed mental breakdown, neither you, NOR THE GOVERNMENT, have ANY say, what-so-ever, as to someone else's limit on their constitutional rights.  It's not up to you or the Government to determine what someone "needs" or doesn't need....ESPECIALLY as its related to a constitutional right.  Regardless your feelings, she has/had done nothing wrong/illegal to warrant such an outrageous call. 

And its a mindset like that that makes me feel so blessed I live in a country where you have the right to say such horrid unconstitutional garbage, but can not exercise it any further beyond that.  Shall I proclaim you don't need to criticize GOP candidates so much?  Perhaps you should only be allowed to dump on Trump M,W, & F, and perhaps every other Saturday.  I mean, that's really all you "need" to

In THIS country, your rights END where it begins to impede on someone else's 

[Xavier_Onassis]

Her son was a nutcase to obeys The Voices and she lets him take those guns out and shoot them. That is a pretty good reason to at least prevent her from giving them to her son.

Had this been done, twenty three children would be alive today.

You want to roll with the child killer, fine with me. I consider this to be crazy.

[Plane]

  The rule changes needed to keep Adam Lanza from ever at all having access to deadly weapons , or even just guns, would be a social change to a full police state.

    All those children needed was to not be placed in the extreme hazard of a gun free zone.

    Getting rid of gun free zones would hardly change our society at all.