Reply to Thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="gerhard1" data-source="post: 2798706" data-attributes="member: 5391">The problem with your proposal is that it paints with too broad of a brush.&nbsp; It looks good on paper, but in real life I could see it being abused, especially by an anti-gun government.&nbsp; This will prohibit anyone on these medications from purchasing firearms when the effect of suicidal ideation occurs sporadically. Not everyone who takes a particular drug experiences these negative side-effects. But anyone who is prescribed these drugs loses their firearms rights. The problem with this idea is that any such restriction on the media would never pass constitutional muster.&nbsp; The media have the right to publish and prior restraint, which is what you are suggesting, would never be upheld.&nbsp; I distrust and despise the media as much as anyone, but I am also a realist.&nbsp;&nbsp; Courts would not go along with such an idea. </blockquote>

[QUOTE="gerhard1, post: 2798706, member: 5391"] [B]The problem with your proposal is that it paints with too broad of a brush. It looks good on paper, but in real life I could see it being abused, especially by an anti-gun government. This will prohibit anyone on these medications from purchasing firearms when the effect of suicidal ideation occurs sporadically. Not everyone who takes a particular drug experiences these negative side-effects. But anyone who is prescribed these drugs loses their firearms rights. [/B] [COLOR="#FF0000"]The problem with this idea is that any such restriction on the media would never pass constitutional muster. The media have the right to publish and prior restraint, which is what you are suggesting, would never be upheld. I distrust and despise the media as much as anyone, but I am also a realist. Courts would not go along with such an idea. [/COLOR] [/QUOTE]

Verification