A liberal judge in MA let a man out of a mental health facility even though his family and doctors disagreed with his release. So now he killed his mother with a knife. The system is broken and the liberal judges are letting too many unstable and violent people back in to society these days.

http://www.capitalbay.com/headline/31204...t-s-wishes.html

That's part of the problem right there, but disarming the American people is the answer.

Judge Diane Rappleye
That is the judge's name who ordered him released. She should be charged with murder by proxy. If judges had to answer for the malpractice they produce, things would be different.

But then they would actually have to interpret the law correctly and be held to the same accountability standards as us lowly citizens are.

You got it all wrong, he didnt kill with a gun so its "all good"...

Liberal judges aren't the only problem. There are conservative judges who have equally tarnished the reputation of those who sit on benches across our country.

Judges like Senators, should not occupy their positions for life. It is evident that as adults age, their wisdom decreases and are prone to make lasting decisions based on emotional arguments rather than factual evidence.

Here's yet another gray area. I hear people saying that mentally ill people shouldn't own guns - but fail to define "mentally ill". Having suffered from panic attacks and depression in my lifetime, I was told that it IS a form of mental illness. Heck, I even admitted myself to a mental hospital when I was 22 years old because I thought I was going crazy. Turns out I was just extremely depressed. A few years later, I entered Law Enforcement and first became a Corrections Officer, and later a Deputy Sheriff. Let me tell you, a good proportion of my fellow officers went to see a shrink at some point in their career and took medication for depression, anxiety, etc...

So, how does one determine which mentally ill people are okay to own/carry a firearm and who can't?

I think an easy definition is the probability to commit harm to yourself or others. medical authorities use that definition to involuntarily hold folks for 3 days when requested by a family member.

The potential for abuse is obvious in that statement. I worked in inpatient "crisis stabilization" psych for 5 years, the amount of abuse is staggering. Say there's a child custody battle, "my ex said she was going to kill herself". Put in for observation, nice little tidbit to tell the family judge at the hearing, doesn't matter that her ex was lying. It doesn't necessarily take the full 72 hours, but you'll wait until a doc shows up to eyeball you.

I absolutely agree that people with certain mental illnesses and behaviors should be prevented from owning weapons, but the standard of proof needs to be very specific with regards to checking that particular box. THEN, in the interest of maintaining confidentiality, that checked box absolutely needs to be nothing more than a checked box, just "denied".