Justice and Liberty for all?

Is there really Justice and Liberty for everyone?

Or is it just for the few that can afford to have armed guards follow them around everywhere they go?

Should Americans be forced to submit to subjective criteria on who is deserving of constitutional and legal protections?

Should we say that based on what we believe is a risk you will be required to turn in your guns because we have determined that you may be a risk.   WE do not have to prove that you may be a risk we just have to believe it might be possible.

WE might even begin to say that you fit into a certain group or class of citizens that might one day become a risk…

You can see where this is headed…

It is not inconceivable that in the very near future we might see a government that is interested in subjective assignment of risk regardless of any evidence of risk.

When anyone decides to make a subjective determination that a class of people might not be allowed to own a gun then that is a problem.

The reason why this is so important is that one word.

Subjective.
source

sub·jec·tive
s?b?jektiv
adjective
  1. 1.
    based on or influenced by personal feelings, tastes, or opinions.
    “his views are highly subjective”
    synonyms: personal, individual, emotional, instinctive, intuitive

    “a subjective analysis”

When you begin to make a statement such as the elderly that are taking mental health type drugs do not need to have guns.

Then you have a serious problem.

Many different types of drugs are used in many different ways and as such you cannot just make a blanket statement that a certain drug deprives that citizen of the right of protection under the law.

WE the people will not concede that authority.

Period.

I would rather see the democrats win in 2020 than to allow gun control measures that will effectively begin a door to door campaign of taking guns and all our rights away.   One misguided bill at a time.

Sure it sounds good to say that some people should not have guns.

Perhaps some people really should not have guns but how do you assign that kind of risk based on subjective evidence?

Once you begin to say that only certain classes of citizens should be allowed to have a gun then you have lost the battle before you started fighting the war.

We know from OBJECTIVE evidence that gun control does not work.

We have thousands and thousands of laws that protect citizens from unlawful actions of criminals.

Passing laws does not protect those citizens that already are responsible in their lives and actions.

Today it appears that we have a situation where a subjective blanket has been thrown upon all classes of people who might be in counseling or might one day go to a therapist.

This should scare all the people of California …

Anyone that has ever gone to a grief counselor or couples counselor or any derivative of such a broad subjective classification as mental health.

Might be said to be a risk, well you remember that time 30 years ago that you lost your family member and you talked to a kind therapist to help you with your grief?

Well, that falls under the new gun control law and well were here for your guns all of them.

Sorry, we know that this law was never meant to be applied this way but congress should have thought about that before passing that law.

Since they did not see that far into the future or perhaps they did not care to see anything beyond that nice steak dinner after the vote, you are going to pay the price for the short sighted elitist attitudes of congress.

Think its not possible?

Think again.