Who needs protecting from who..

So you are happily sitting at home, maybe this evening, enjoying a nice bottle of red, watching Dancing with the Stars, and you get a knock at the door. Strange you think, but it could be a neighbor looking to borrow some sugar, so you open the door. Standing there are the Police, all sorts of things rush through your head, has a family member had an accident, is there a situation and you need to be evacuated? After a few seconds the cop says he's there for your guns!!

Think that sounds like an alarmist scare story, it isn't! It seems that up and down the country, errors are being made which result in people ending up on lists that they really should not be on. The SAFE act 2013 contains a provision that allows health care providers to report patients they believe could be a danger to themselves or others.

On the face of it, that sounds like a great idea right? You would think so, but then good intent is always the mother of all F ups I believe the saying goes. There have been numerous incidents of people having their firearms seized when they have not even visited a facility, or where they are demonstrably not a danger to themselves or anyone else, and the 1st they know about it is when the police are knocking on their door!

.

That, although bad, would seem easily corrected when the error is discovered. But it would seem that even that can be an issue. In a case in New York, a Mr Hall had to hire a lawyer, and obtain a number of affidavits to confirm he had not been treated for mental illness! Now not withstanding the obvious problems with trying to prove something didn't happen, how many of us have the time, money and ability to resort to law to ensure our rights are not infringed?

Think that's bad, it gets worse. It seems that not only can errors be made, and you can lose your guns without without warning, but it seems that the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals has decided that it's also now acceptable, without a warrant or charges, for the police to smash down your door, search your property, and take your guns if they deem that it's in an individuals best interests!

Now where do you start with that! If there is no warrant or charges required, who decides who is a danger to themselves, and on what basis? Could I call the police and settle a score with my neighbor having told the police I thought he was depressed and had spoken about harming myself? How about if someone has one of those times in their lives when a little help is required. Bereavement, divorce & job loss are 3 things that a lot of us suffer through our lives, and some need a little temporary assistance from the medical profession, with maybe anti depressants, sleeping pills or maybe counselling.

Does that now mean that seeking a little temporary assistance will cause people to lose their guns and 2nd amendment rights? Is there a set route back from losing your guns to regaining them, or does a person have to resort to no doubt expensive and difficult litigation?

Possibly most worrying of all, if someone is in a situation where the assistance of the medical world would help them through a tough time, will they seek that help, if they know or suspect they could end up having the police storm their house?

Do we really need protecting from ourselves for our own good?

Police take veterans firearms

No warrant required to seize guns