California SWAT Teams Confiscating Guns

California SWAT teams are collecting guns from any home that houses a person with mental issues. And who did the SWAT teams originally practice on for decades? Dopers. You can’t say I didn’t warn you.

Well it looks pretty reasonable for now. If you or some one in your house has had a mental problem you will not be allowed to own a gun to defend yourself. Legally.

Who will be next? Well military veterans have been mooted. Possible PTSD dontcha know. Yeah. I know a drug that is good for PTSD. Alcohol. Except some people get violent on that stuff. So add alcohol drinkers to the mix. I look forward to the day when SWAT teams show up at a bar and check your ID and gun registration against a list. Alcohol purchase will eventually be enough evidence. Pay cash. To avoid leaving a trail.

Some police officers have an idea that might reduce gun violence.

Update: 18 March 2013 0814z

Commentary from The Truth About Guns.

I liked this comment:

JPT says:

March 14, 2013 at 11:28

Gotta keep showing some of my friends these stories. Unfortunatly some still have their blinders on. A few are just to stubborn to realize the direction things are going but stories like this help out big time. Keep em comin RF.

This was good too:

Skyler says:
March 14, 2013 at 12:36

The first step is to target weak, non-ideological gun owners who give in very peacefully. Once the public is used to that, then target the extreme ideological gun owners that can be counted on to resist and make dilute they are shot very publicly and very dead.

Then all the middle of the road gun owners will fall in line to voluntarily surrender their weapons.

And this:

Chris says:
March 14, 2013 at 13:26

Why is a law prohibiting those with mental illness from owning a firearm bad? Because all it takes is on decision from HHS to say wanting to own a gun is a mental disease. If you want them you are sick. If you have them you are even sicker. We must make you and everyone safe and “healthy”, take your guns and then “rehabilitate” you.

This was the Soviet Method:

scooter says:
March 14, 2013 at 17:18

Denying rights based on a diagnosis? Maybe someone could be too unstable to vote? Too dangerous to pen an editorial? Slippery slope. Take away the voice of those deemed defective and quickly the definition of defective becomes any who disagree. We need to be public and vocal, so any actions taken by the authority is public and worthy of coverage. Media can be our friend, if it is an issue of civil liberties.