I’m a huge gun rights supporter and have been my entire life, but I also understand that there are some people in the United States that should not be allowed to own or even just possess a firearm. Among those are convicted felons. No convicted felon should be allowed to own a gun. That’s a right you forfeit when you choose to break the law.
But what about those people that appear to pose a danger to others or themselves? I don’t think they should have access to firearms, but this issue also has a dangerous side.
It seems Vermont is joining other states in preparing to pass a law that will allow the confiscation of firearms from anyone deemed to be a danger.
(Rutland Herald) – Vermont ended the week with broad agreement on a gun control bill, but final approval eluded lawmakers and controversy over the issue continues to loom on the horizon.
The Senate unanimously approved S.221 Thursday, a bill allowing family court judges to forbid a person from owning firearms if a petition shows the person “poses a significant danger of causing injury to himself or another person.”
A similar bill cleared the House, making a conference committee likely when the Legislature returns March 13. The Senate bill won the endorsement of firearms rights advocates.
The same day, however, the Senate took up a measure those groups roundly condemn: universal background checks. Around the state, the recent school shooting in Parkland, Florida has many people and groups — particularly school boards — calling for outright bans on high-capacity semiautomatic rifles like the AR-15…
The problem with kind of law is when a couple experience a bad break-up and one of them owns a gun. The other can claim violence or threats enough to get the authorities to use this kind of law to confiscated the other person’s guns, even if there really wasn’t any good reason and you know this will happen.