• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Boulder shooter's brother says shooter was nutts. Time for gun restraining orders?

swing_voter

swing_voter

DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 4, 2019
Messages
13,042
Reaction score
8,463
Location
'Murica
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Independent
What do you do if your brother, who you know to be severely paranoid decides to buy an AR15?

Let me introduce to you the "gun restraining order".

A family member can go before a judge and request a gun restraining order.

If it's granted, the restrainee has to give up his firearms, the family can keep them safe, and can't be anywhere within a 100 yards of a firearm or ammunition.

The restrainee also goes on a list that prevents him from buying firearms or ammunition.

Like all court decisions, this can be appealed.



.
 
swing_voter said:
What do you do if your brother, who you know to be severely paranoid decides to buy an AR15?

Let me introduce to you the "gun restraining order".

A family member can go before a judge and request a gun restraining order.

If it's granted, the restrainee has to give up his firearms, the family can keep them safe, and can't be anywhere within a 100 yards of a firearm or ammunition.

The restrainee also goes on a list that prevents him from buying firearms or ammunition.

Like all court decisions, this can be appealed.
Click to expand...

Better to just ban the guns.
 
If a person's own family believes they are mentally unstable, there is probably decent reason to believe they shouldn't be sold a weapon capable of murdering dozens of people in the blink of an eye.

But I think we both know that any regulation that removes a person's right to own whatever weapon they choose, no matter the level of threat they pose to society, will automatically be referred to as "gun grabbing" by the usual suspects and therefore be a non starter. The day they decided a bunch of kindergarteners having their heads caved in with an AR-15 by a disturbed individual wasn't enough of an incentive to act, it became clear nothing would be.
 
swing_voter said:
What do you do if your brother, who you know to be severely paranoid decides to buy an AR15?

Let me introduce to you the "gun restraining order".

A family member can go before a judge and request a gun restraining order.

If it's granted, the restrainee has to give up his firearms, the family can keep them safe, and can't be anywhere within a 100 yards of a firearm or ammunition.

The restrainee also goes on a list that prevents him from buying firearms or ammunition.

Like all court decisions, this can be appealed.



.
Click to expand...
If there is probable cause that someone is insane that individual should have a court ordered psychological evaluation. If that individual is found to be dangerously nuts then he should be locked up in a loony bin until cured. Not out freely roaming around waiting to explode.
 
Excast said:
If a person's own family believes they are mentally unstable, there is probably decent reason to believe they shouldn't be sold a weapon capable of murdering dozens of people in the blink of an eye.

But I think we both know that any regulation that removes a person's right to own whatever weapon they choose, no matter the level of threat they pose to society, will automatically be referred to as "gun grabbing" by the usual suspects and therefore be a non starter. The day they decided a bunch of kindergarteners having their heads caved in with an AR-15 by a disturbed individual wasn't enough of an incentive to act, it became clear nothing would be.
Click to expand...


So are you proposing that a person looking to buy a gun, nominates several family members to counter-sign an application to buy a gun ?
 
It seems like it would be expensive and take too long to get a restraining order and with no guarantee that one will be granted.

And too, people might be reluctant to get a restraining order on a disturbed family member for fear of retaliation.
 
Moot said:
It seems like it would be expensive and take too long to get a restraining order and with no guarantee that one will be granted.

And too, people might be reluctant to get a restraining order on a disturbed family member for fear of retaliation.
Click to expand...

Unless you made the background check period something like 60-90 days.
 
swing_voter said:
What do you do if your brother, who you know to be severely paranoid decides to buy an AR15?

Let me introduce to you the "gun restraining order".

A family member can go before a judge and request a gun restraining order.

If it's granted, the restrainee has to give up his firearms, the family can keep them safe, and can't be anywhere within a 100 yards of a firearm or ammunition.

The restrainee also goes on a list that prevents him from buying firearms or ammunition.

Like all court decisions, this can be appealed.



.
Click to expand...
Another common sense gun regulation feared by the NRA and the Republican Party for no reason.
 
Ginger Ale said:
Yep.

It will never happen in America, but yes, I think it would be better.
Click to expand...
what do you think the fall out would be and the body count if the government actually tried to ban all guns and confiscate those currently owned?
 
jamesrage said:
If there is probable cause that someone is insane that individual should have a court ordered psychological evaluation. If that individual is found to be dangerously nuts then he should be locked up in a loony bin until cured. Not out freely roaming around waiting to explode.
Click to expand...
How many dangerously nuts people you have known that were just talk and no walk? That is the hard part as I have known nuts but they never harmed anyone.

Kind of like some of the internet tough guys who have never been in a single fistfight their whole lives.
 


:unsure:
 
swing_voter said:
What do you do if your brother, who you know to be severely paranoid decides to buy an AR15?

Let me introduce to you the "gun restraining order".

A family member can go before a judge and request a gun restraining order.

If it's granted, the restrainee has to give up his firearms, the family can keep them safe, and can't be anywhere within a 100 yards of a firearm or ammunition.

The restrainee also goes on a list that prevents him from buying firearms or ammunition.

Like all court decisions, this can be appealed.
.
Click to expand...

If the family is unified behind this, then they've likely already applied as much pressure as they can bring to bear outside the courtroom. If you can't convince your relative to see things your way by kicking them out and cutting off all support, what chance does the court have?

I could support something like this if they lived together, but isn't the simpler solution to kick them out?

If they live separately, then they aren't directly endangered by the presence of the guns in the home.
 
swing_voter said:
What do you do if your brother, who you know to be severely paranoid decides to buy an AR15?

Let me introduce to you the "gun restraining order".

A family member can go before a judge and request a gun restraining order.

If it's granted, the restrainee has to give up his firearms, the family can keep them safe, and can't be anywhere within a 100 yards of a firearm or ammunition.

The restrainee also goes on a list that prevents him from buying firearms or ammunition.

Like all court decisions, this can be appealed.



.
Click to expand...

Colorado already has a red flag law.
 
TurtleDude said:
what do you think the fall out would be and the body count if the government actually tried to ban all guns and confiscate those currently owned?
Click to expand...
Is that a threat? Serious question. Will all those "law abiding" gun owners suddenly begin snuffing cops the minute one knocks at the door?

If so, then maybe they are too unhinged to own guns after all.
 
Rich2018 said:
So are you proposing that a person looking to buy a gun, nominates several family members to counter-sign an application to buy a gun ?
Click to expand...

I'm proposing that background checks into gun purchases are a lot more stringent across the board, possibly including things like medical history and the like.

I know there is zero chance of that becoming a reality anytime soon, but we have many examples of disturbed young men who obviously should not have been able to buy a gun, yet were. There are greater protections put in place for getting a loan than buying something capable of killing a roomful of people in seconds.
 
calamity said:
Is that a threat? Serious question. Will all those "law abiding" gun owners suddenly begin snuffing cops the minute one knocks at the door?

If so, then maybe they are too unhinged to own guns after all.
Click to expand...
the real threats seems to be gun banners who hope the government send jack booted storm troopers to seize guns from those who owned them legally for decades, and now refuse to give them up
 
Excast said:
I'm proposing that background checks into gun purchases are a lot more stringent across the board, possibly including things like medical history and the like.

I know there is zero chance of that becoming a reality anytime soon, but we have many examples of disturbed young men who obviously should not have been able to buy a gun, yet were. There are greater protections put in place for getting a loan than buying something capable of killing a roomful of people in seconds.
Click to expand...
remind me how the war on drugs has been going?
 
Women get restraining orders against their ex's all the time.

It's similar what is being done in every state in the union right now.
 
Colorado already has a red flag law... Fought vehemently by the gun crowd but it is on the books...
 
Rich2018 said:
Unless you made the background check period something like 60-90 days.
Click to expand...
That might help for suicides but not for someone who needed a gun to protect themselves from an imminent threat such as a deranged boyfriend or husband.
 
It is a typical liberal thing to expect the government nanny state to handle everything and think for them. If the brother of this guy really thought the shooter was insane, then why didn't HE do something himself? What part of "see something say something" has to be explained to people?

If family are usually the best people to know when something is wrong, then JUST DO IT, take charge. How many times to we have these mass shooting incidents and then find out later that family members knew about mental illness, knew about odd and hostile behavior; teenagers wearing black clothes and into all kinds of creepy images and stuff. And then suddenly everyone is shocked when the kid goes to school and kills people?

These incidents are NOT gun problems. But you liberals constantly pounding the drum of fear of guns actually INSPIRES these people to use a tool which in their mind represents the very THING you fear the most.
 
swing_voter said:
What do you do if your brother, who you know to be severely paranoid decides to buy an AR15?

Let me introduce to you the "gun restraining order".

A family member can go before a judge and request a gun restraining order.

If it's granted, the restrainee has to give up his firearms, the family can keep them safe, and can't be anywhere within a 100 yards of a firearm or ammunition.

The restrainee also goes on a list that prevents him from buying firearms or ammunition.

Like all court decisions, this can be appealed.



.
Click to expand...
Family members that REASONABLY believe another member of the family should not be in possession of firearms should do what they can to secure those firearms. I have no problem whatsoever in taking firearms or other potentially dangerous weapons from people that express intent for self-harm, highly irrational behavior or violent behavior. Pursuant to such action there also be a mental health evaluation if the behavior appears to be persistent. That being said, ANYONE that abuses the "reasonable belief" standard should be subject to civil penalty and, perhaps, mandatory mental health evaluation on their part. The LAST thing we need is vindictive ex-partners calling the cops to have guns taken away or nosy neighbors doing the same.
 
Crosscheck said:
How many dangerously nuts people you have known that were just talk and no walk? That is the hard part as I have known nuts but they never harmed anyone.
Click to expand...

Wouldn't a psychologist examining the patient be able to figure that out?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom