- Messages
- 17,471
- Reactions
- 36,483
CIVIL RIGHTS UPDATE: Second Amendment and people who had been committed to a mental institution 28 years ago. An episode of situational depression isn't enough to overcome the right to arms, according to a new Sixth Circuit decision. -- Via Glenn
http://pjmedia.com/instapundit/199874/
By Eugene Volokh
"Under federal law, people who have been involuntarily "committed to a mental institution" — however long ago — are barred from possessing guns. Congress agreed that people with long-past mental problems might now be sane, and thus not especially dangerous, and provided for a means to apply for restoration of gun rights. But then in 1992 Congress ordered ATF not to spend any money applying the restoration program. And while it provided, in 2007, that people could get their rights restored by applying to a state that has a qualifying program for evaluating applicants' mental fitness, many states have no such program."
This also brings up the issue of judging scientific data in a court. How do ordinary people - the jury, or even educated - the judge, do that when they are not scientists?
http://pjmedia.com/instapundit/199874/
By Eugene Volokh
"Under federal law, people who have been involuntarily "committed to a mental institution" — however long ago — are barred from possessing guns. Congress agreed that people with long-past mental problems might now be sane, and thus not especially dangerous, and provided for a means to apply for restoration of gun rights. But then in 1992 Congress ordered ATF not to spend any money applying the restoration program. And while it provided, in 2007, that people could get their rights restored by applying to a state that has a qualifying program for evaluating applicants' mental fitness, many states have no such program."
This also brings up the issue of judging scientific data in a court. How do ordinary people - the jury, or even educated - the judge, do that when they are not scientists?
