NIU shooting reaction...

Just a guess, mind you, but since the info has come out that the shooter "stopped taking his meds" (presumably some sort of anti-depressants, and isn't that a HIPAA violation to release that information, Chief Grady?), we will now hear a suggestion from the VPC and/or other anti-gunners that no one on anti-depressants should have 2A rights, maybe unless they "prove" that they are still on their meds.

You won't turn blue holding your breath to see if I'm right, I promise.

Let's see, that would rip off 2A rights from how many citizens? 10 million? 20 Million?

That would set back treatment for this usually-mild condition 30 years? 50 years?

OTOH, I noted that Obama was quick to re-affirm that there IS a Second Amendment, and that it is an INDIVIDUAL right, but subject to "reasonable" restrictions like "background checks"? Hmmm, one could drive the USS Nimitz though that little crack in the door of the Constitution as he views it, but let's cut him a break, he cut the VPC off at the knees by connecting the NIU shooting and the Second Amendment's right.

Comments

[Jerry the Geek]

I don't think we'll see a groundswell of objections from folks who "stop taking their meds."

If the average gun-owner needed medication to control his aggression, there would be no justification to defend the 2nd amendment.

In my experience, firearms owners are among the sanest of citizens. On the day when this has been proven to be false, it might be a good idea for crazed firearms owners to quietly give up their guns.

Since we're not a bunch of nuts, I don't see this happening in the near future. And I don't see any reason why (anyone) should suggest the possibility.