|
|
 Originally Posted by OngBonga
I dunno, it's probably fair to say that people posting "ominous shit" on the internet, depending on what that actually entails, shouldn't be allowed guns.
No, it's not fair. Not even close. I've posted on here several times about wanting to punch Poopadoop in the face. Does that mean I shouldn't be allowed to have knuckles??
I assume "ominous shit" means stuff relevant to the topic of guns, for example, saying he's going to be the next mass shooter, or posing with guns on a significant anniversary of a school shooting.
Every single one of those things is protected by the first amendment of the constitution.
Sure it's wrong to restrict his freedom, but if the only way to legally stop him having guns is to lock him up for a day or two, is that really too heavy a price?
Why do we need to "legally stop him from having guns"?
If it is, change the law so they can use "ominous shit" as justification to take guns off people without having to institutionalise them.
People have a right to due process. You have to prove that this person is a danger to themselves, or someone else. And being a dick hole on the internet doesn't prove anything.
|
Reply With Quote