Community Chat

[Stray]

---

@Maudelyn wrote:

@QueenDanceALot there is never going to be a way to predict who is non-violent until they're not.  But we can reduce the risk by taking a really close look at those who have proven to not be operating rationally or realistically.  I think if you have cops come to your house because your bf/gf/so  breaks down the door, slams things, destroys things, any guns should be removed until that person is able to prove they deserve them back.

I think we make it far too easy for disturbed people to hurt themselves and others.

---

@Maudelyn- so true and this incident is a perfect example. 

[SahmIam]

@Stray @QueenDanceALot @Maudelyn   All the reasons you have listed are exactly why I have no issue with the FBI background check AS WELL as a local background check by the police that my state requires to obtain a LICENCE for a firearm. In addition, there IS a competency part of the test where you must show the licenced individual that you can use a weapon correctly. This is part of a 2 week class you MUST attend to obtain said licence. The instructor then decides to grant it or not.

Once you have this, you can then purchase a gun from a LICENCED gun shop but you can't pick it up for 2 weeks because you go through ANOTHER background check. Being real, things can happen so the police do a background check in addition to EIGHT PAGES of questions you must answer honestly regarding mental health, crimes, etc. If you lie regarding ONE question, it's a federal offense and off to prison you go.

Very few states have laws like mine and CA. Should this be the way it's done in every state? I think so as do many I hunt and shoot with.