Can anyone Anti-gun control answer this?

Okay, it can effect me because ALL laws are interpreted differently. What constitutes "crazy" ??? lets say someone has a heart attack and they are put on medication that may cause "irritability", will they now have to choose whether they die or give up their guns? What if somebody is a racist? sure their racist views are wrong, but that doesnt mean they dont have a right to own a gun. What if somebody is just having a shitty day the day of the evaluation and happen to fail? what if someone is just a damn good actor? What if they just decide to call every gun owner "crazy" as a form of confiscation? You are operating under the idea that the gov. operates in our best interest, and that all people will be honest on their evaluation. want to know how much they made last month in background checks alone? over $20 Million. and at whos expense? who will pay for the psych evaluation? will the well off have to pay out of pocket while the poor are subsidized? Also, your proposition would encourage MORE people to obtain guns illegally. if they fear they may fail the psych evaluation, they will instead buy a gun illegally. Guns are not an issue in this country. statistically ZERO percent of guns owned are used in crimes. (less than half a half a percent).

I've been diagnosed with anxiety and depression that I take medication for, and there's a possibility I have a personality disorder, so I might not pass such a psych evaluation. However, it would still be nice to have a gun to protect myself so I could have the upper hand against someone trying to victimize me.

Mentally ill people are actually more likely to be the victims of a violent crime than the perpetrators. A mentally healthy person using a gun to rob or rape someone happens far more often than a mentally ill person going on a shooting spree.

For instance, in your recommendation, I will have to visit with a psychiatrist annually. This will most likely cost me out of my own pocket to have others feel comfortable with me keeping and carrying a firearm. Of course, peoples attitudes and emotions are fluid and they vary over time; however, this does not make them incapable or any less responsible to keep or carry a firearm.

Further, you wish to subject me to a background check (probably annual) another expense which comes out of my pocket. I'm already subject to a background check for every firearm that I buy, even if I buy multiple firearms at the same time all of which I have to pay for at my own expense.

Following this, I also think its unconstitutional to deprive someone of property based on psyche. Yes, I understand your intention but where does it end? If I have a child with autism does it affect it? What if I have my mother whom is getting older and is on anti-depressants will this affect my eligibility. Right based on conditions are not rights at all, just merely privileges.

Because I don't trust liberals calling the shots for who can and cannot own a gun. I'm a conservative and a OIF combat veteran. I'm sure they would say I'm insane.

This would obviously discriminate against the poor and minorities who could not afford the cost of these background checks and psychological exams to exercise their constitutional right to own a firearm. Also your poor old grandmas with no means of transportation could not get to the screening locations.

Does this sound a bit familiar?

democrats won't allow a law to stop mentally ill from owning guns

they have blocked all attempts to pass such a law

Where they give you a psych evaluation! Who is they, the government? You are an idiot. The purpose of the second amendment is make sure the people aren't subjected to authority.

> Who ELSE is it going to impact? If you look at the proposals, LITERALLY ALL OF THEM are directed against ONLY LAWFUL citizens.

> Since you are unable to cite even one category of product with a safety record AS GOOD as Americans' guns, it is likewise impossible for you to justify singling-out guns to require "psych evaluation."

Yep. Look at data from the Violence Policy Center (a leading pro-ban group) about how many of us are "killed by guns" every year vs the BATFE's estimate of how many times we FIRE them and you see Americans - including our violent felons - FIRE our guns moire than a million times PER "gun death." the CPSC is unaware of ANY product AS SAFE as Americans' guns.

If you intent to look at the question in a way that includes honesty, you need to replace the phrase "gun-control" with "balking LAWFUL citizens access to guns."

Exactly what problem is THAT supposed to solve?

Better still, explain the public safety imperative in balking YOURS personally. Tell us about how important it is that Emily Bennett PERSONALLY have her access to firearms controlled by law.

Simple. I don't trust the government.