Inside the minds of those who would see you disarmed

[BjornF16]

I've been reading for months about several Vets who went to the doctor and ended up having their guns confiscated. Its already happening.

I'm afraid it will happen more…and it should be a court fight.

I struggle with this. There are those who should have, at least temporarily, access to firearms removed. But I don't want any mere bureaucratic maneuver to be the vehicle. This needs to be adjudicated and not the whim of some anti-2A physician.

The D.C. Navy yard shooter, Alexis, and the Aurora shooter are examples of those who don't need access to guns. Loughner was another. Loughner and Alexis both had run-ins with local law enforcement and I'm not sure why their names weren't put on NICS due to those encounters alone.

This will consume the debate for a while after the dust settles from D.C. a bit. I'm open to ideas. I absolutely lean towards protecting rights, particularly combat vets rights.

In the end, I'd like to see non-MP/SP military members able to carry on military installations. I'd like to know the real history of disarmament on military installations (I seem to remember it was always that way during my career at stateside bases).