The focal point for Texas firearms information and discussions
https://mail.texaschlforum.com/
No problem it is just that we are speaking of this particular case, so when the generalities don't match the conversation......VoiceofReason wrote: I did not say “He”. In this sentence I was speaking in generalities to include anyone (past, present and future) that may unfairly be denied the right to own a firearm for this reason. I could have worded it differently to make it easier to understand.
VoiceofReason wrote:Just random thoughts.
So President Judge Emeritus Kate Ford Elliott believes the state can deny the Second Amendment rights of the U.S. Constitution if it “applies only to an "extremely small" class of citizens and has a solid public safety basis.”“That prohibition does not amount to a breach of Keyes' rights under the Second Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, Ford Elliott found, because it applies only to an "extremely small" class of citizens and has a solid public safety basis.”
I wonder if this precedent could be used to keep former service men/women with PTSD from owning guns.
More information https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q ... 2I&cad=rja" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Already been tried. http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2 ... -guns.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; If they get away with doing it to civilians what is to keep them from doing it to former service men/women with PTSD?EEllis wrote:VoiceofReason wrote:Just random thoughts.
So President Judge Emeritus Kate Ford Elliott believes the state can deny the Second Amendment rights of the U.S. Constitution if it “applies only to an "extremely small" class of citizens and has a solid public safety basis.”“That prohibition does not amount to a breach of Keyes' rights under the Second Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, Ford Elliott found, because it applies only to an "extremely small" class of citizens and has a solid public safety basis.”
I wonder if this precedent could be used to keep former service men/women with PTSD from owning guns.
More information https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q ... 2I&cad=rja" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
That small comment can really lead to some ugly ideas.
This. There is a serious disconnect when someone can't be trusted with a firearm off duty but can carry it to enforce laws when on official duty. Scary.MeMelYup wrote:According to that information, if the officer in question ever has to shoot anyone in the line of duty the city will have gross legal problems. They have armed an officer that is considered to unstable to own or carry a gun if he were not a police officer.