I think it was a good article and right on the money. For those that are saying that he is trying/wanting to deny someone 2nd amendment right, I don't agree. He never said "These people should not be allowed to carry guns", he said "These people should not carry guns". Big difference.
I have the same thoughts about some people and their right to vote. Too many idiots out there voting that know nothing about anything and will vote for whomever is running for their party (remember the 2004 elections in Fla?). Just because I think they should not vote does not mean the I think they should not be allowed to vote. Again, big difference.
He may not be trying to carve the statue of David out of marble, but he is chiseling at the stone. It's not like this is a blog or a conversation piece - this is a published article, directed at the masses. By targeting a mass crowd and "stating his opinion", the author is, in fact, implying something should be done about these people that he feels should not own firearms.
Originally Posted by JJVP
It is a slippery slope when we start trying to determine who should own a gun or not based on someones feelings. Our current system does the best it can to ensure malfactors don't get a gun in their hands. What this author is saying would require an idiotic amount of legislation and subjective screening. I say to the author, shut up and write about knitting or basket making.