Judge Jeanine Pirro - "get a gun" - and also no fly list

[jimnyc]

I love this woman!!

<script type="text/javascript" src="http://video.insider.foxnews.com/v/embed.js?id=4955809233001&w=466&h=263"></script><noscript>Watch the latest video at <a href="http://video.foxnews.com">video.foxnews.com</a></noscript>

[Elessar]

Holy Cow!

She definitely throws strikes!

[namvet]

im looking for a hot Glock. no paper trail no serial nr and no questions asked. let me know

BTY I think this Orlando incident was faked.

[Gunny]

I love this woman!!

<script type="text/javascript" src="http://video.insider.foxnews.com/v/embed.js?id=4955809233001&w=466&h=263"></script><iframe src="//video.insider.foxnews.com/v/video-embed.html?video_id=4955809233001&loc=debatepolicy.com&ref=about%3A%2F%2F&_xcf=" marginwidth="0" marginheight="0" scrolling="no" frameborder="0" height="263" width="466"></iframe><noscript>Watch the latest video at video.foxnews.com (http://video.foxnews.com)</noscript>

I can't stand her. She may make some good points sometimes, but I just can't look at her. She's beyond fake. To be fair, I dislike all of Fox's female pundits. If you could ask the most irrelevant questions to a topic, they know them all.

[fj1200]

So innocent until proven guilty is no longer a good thing? Pirro and Lynch; interesting bedfellows.

[jimnyc]

So innocent until proven guilty is no longer a good thing? Pirro and Lynch; interesting bedfellows.

I suppose they could take gun rights away from folks in the "mental health" arena for no reason and no due process - like Gary Johnson would like. How much of a stink did you raise about that one? Hell, I don't even think you addressed the topic when it was brought up.

[fj1200]

I suppose they could take gun rights away from folks in the "mental health" arena for no reason and no due process - like Gary Johnson would like. How much of a stink did you raise about that one? Hell, I don't even think you addressed the topic when it was brought up.

Not sure how I feel about it. As Kathianne points out there is more due process in mental health evaluations than getting on a no-fly list.

[jimnyc]

Not sure how I feel about it. As Kathianne points out there is more due process in mental health evaluations than getting on a no-fly list.

What is the due process, letting the government decide who is mentally ill? Based on what? I guess my point is, regardless of what due process is available, this candidate has no issue with the mentally ill, at whatever level who knows, should have those rights potentially taken away.

[fj1200]

What is the due process, letting the government decide who is mentally ill? Based on what? I guess my point is, regardless of what due process is available, this candidate has no issue with the mentally ill, at whatever level who knows, should have those rights potentially taken away.

So you're equating him suggesting that a law be written codifying any restrictions that someone suffering from mental incompetence* is the same as the Executive branch just extending an already questionable list to cover restricting 2A rights is the same? One of those in a Constitutional process and one is not IMO.

*And of course government is the vehicle that would decide such a thing if rights are to be restricted.


The legal procedure for declaring a person incompetent consists of three steps: (1) a motion for a competency hearing, (2) apsychiatric or psychological evaluation, and (3) a competency hearing. Probate courts usually handle competencyproceedings, which guarantee the allegedly incompetent person Due Process of Law (http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/due+process+of+law).
http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Mental+Incompetency

[jimnyc]

So you're equating him suggesting that a law be written codifying any restrictions that someone suffering from mental incompetence* is the same as the Executive branch just extending an already questionable list to cover restricting 2A rights is the same? One of those in a Constitutional process and one is not IMO.

*And of course government is the vehicle that would decide such a thing if rights are to be restricted.


http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Mental+Incompetency

Yes, I am. Simply fix the "due process" portion of it. But working off of a no fly list and terror list makes sense to me. Fix the way they handle who gets on the list, and allow for folks to reasonably get off the list if on there wrongly. Outside of that - absolutely no problem with this whatsoever.

[fj1200]

Yes, I am. Simply fix the "due process" portion of it. But working off of a no fly list and terror list makes sense to me. Fix the way they handle who gets on the list, and allow for folks to reasonably get off the list if on there wrongly. Outside of that - absolutely no problem with this whatsoever.

Those are worlds different Constitutionally speaking. But it seems you agree that there are Constitutional concerns regarding the current methodology.

[jimnyc]

Those are worlds different Constitutionally speaking. But it seems you agree that there are Constitutional concerns regarding the current methodology.

Bottom line - I have no problem with the way it's currently being handled, as I think those lists are a great way to find people. If folks are wrongly being rounded up, there most definitely should be a way for them to file a grievance, go to court perhaps, and get removed.