Should Blind People have a right to Own Firearms?

[Ben Segrest]

You're not punishing them for a crime they didn't commit

Yes you are.

 

[Guate_shooter]

As interesting as this post has been we continue to not be on the same page.

NOLA clearified that in fact eventhough it was wrote out as should they own the intend was more for self defense purpose like most of us carry everyday, other than actually being able to go to "Academy" and buy a gun should they wanted to, it is their RIGHT.

Some people say well with supervision they can do whatever they want even hunt which I agree, but the point was that if the SHTF and they needed to make use of deadly force to stop and agressor or agressors, what if, good - bad - hope for the best and hide.

Then again I doubt we will ever get an answer.

 

[Gus McCrae]

Your not punishing them for a crime they didn't commit, it is an attempt to stop it from happening. Potentially not allowing someone to carry firearms outside of their home or without supervision is not the same as placing them in prison for the same amount of time as negligently killing someone.

Well, should we take your guns since there is the possibility of you hurting someone with them? If we did, would it be punishment for something you haven't done or are we just trying to stop it from happening?

 

[Gus McCrae]

As interesting as this post has been we continue to not be on the same page.

NOLA clearified that in fact eventhough it was wrote out as should they own the intend was more for self defense purpose like most of us carry everyday, other than actually being able to go to "Academy" and buy a gun should they wanted to, it is their RIGHT.

Some people say well with supervision they can do whatever they want even hunt which I agree, but the point was that if the SHTF and they needed to make use of deadly force to stop and agressor or agressors, what if, good - bad - hope for the best and hide.

Then again I doubt we will ever get an answer.

In my mind, the blind would only be able to use a firearm in SD in a severely limited scenario without endangering others. It probably wouldn't be practical.

 

[spanky]

Maybe we should stop all .mil returning from over seas from owning guns bc they might have ptsd and, thus, might kill someone.

 

[Morgan Allison]

In my mind, the blind would only be able to use a firearm in SD in a severely limited scenario without endangering others. It probably wouldn't be practical.

And if it's not practical, it should be illegal?

Maybe it IS stupid. I don't think it is, but so what if it is? What is freedom if it isn't the right to be stupid? If you aren't allowed to ruin your life because of "the greater good of the whole," you aren't really free, you're a cog.

With freedom comes responsibility. If a blind man acts in a way that is irresponsible with a gun, he suffers the same penalty anyone else would. I know that's already been said a dozen times in this thread, but I felt it should be said again. We shouldn't stick our noses in and substitute our judgment for his over what is or is not reasonable for him to own, and certainly not tell him his rights should be limited because exercising them would be "impractical." I do a dozen impractical things every day and would not like someone sticking their nose in my business.

 

[kcinnick]

In my mind, the blind would only be able to use a firearm in SD in a severely limited scenario without endangering others. It probably wouldn't be practical.

A blind person being raped would know exactly where the target is.

 

[Nolacopusmc]

Maybe we should stop all .mil returning from over seas from owning guns bc they might have ptsd and, thus, might kill someone.

Maybe having ptsd and definitely BEING BLIND are two different things.

Good try though.

I realize it is kind of a non-issue since most blind people are probably smart enough on their own to know carrying a gun around is not the smartest thing. Kinda like MOST blind people probably choose not to drive.

However, while we all have a right to own and "bear" arms, sometimes life throws a monkey wrench into it.

 

[Gus McCrae]

And if it's not practical, it should be illegal?

Maybe it IS stupid. I don't think it is, but so what if it is? What is freedom if it isn't the right to be stupid? If you aren't allowed to ruin your life because of "the greater good of the whole," you aren't really free, you're a cog.

With freedom comes responsibility. If a blind man acts in a way that is irresponsible with a gun, he suffers the same penalty anyone else would. I know that's already been said a dozen times in this thread, but I felt it should be said again. We shouldn't stick our noses in and substitute our judgment for his over what is or is not reasonable for him to own, and certainly not tell him his rights should be limited because exercising them would be "impractical." I do a dozen impractical things every day and would not like someone sticking their nose in my business.

If you read my previous posts, I'm not against blind people owning firearms.

 

[sylvest]

yes as long as its an AK-47 loaded with cop killer burrets

 

[Nolacopusmc]

would it change anyone's answer if the question was should Blind people have the right to "carry "firearms?

You can stop trying to add in all other kind of ailments and conditions. That is not the point. I think we understand the slippery slope concept.

Looking just at blindness and the issues being blind presents, is it enough of a public safety issue to make it illegal?

EVen if it is not illegal, do you think they "should" do it?


Once more, I am talking about someone who is 100% blind, not varying degrees of blindness. Imagine that they have no eyes?

General consensus is of course they can own. COmpletely my fault, but I was looking more for feelings about their use. If you were in a grocery store, and three dudes rolled in firing AK's in the air saying it was a robbery, would you feel safe with a guy with no eyes whipping out his 10mm SW to start blasting away?

Of course they can shoot with assistance, aids, and in controlled environments. How do you feel about someone with no eyes being armed next to you and the possible issues that could entail if they decided to start shooting in a public setting in what they perceived as a legit SD situation.

 

[Nolacopusmc]

yes as long as its an AK-47 loaded with cop killer burrets

In "high capcity" banana clips too!

 

[Guate_shooter]

General consensus is of course they can own. COmpletely my fault, but I was looking more for feelings about their use. If you were in a grocery store, and three dudes rolled in firing AK's in the air saying it was a robbery, would you feel safe with a guy with no eyes whipping out his 10mm SW to start blasting away?

My answer is still NO, and that is the way I was looking at this post ever since it started but people were fast to throw stones but I guess they would be just as fast to duck for cover if it would happen next to them and their 4 year old kid.

 

[spanky]

The blind people I know and know of are the most responsible people I know. You guys act like, just because they cant see, as soon as they get spooked they are going to dump a mag in random directions.

 

[spanky]

Maybe having ptsd and definitely BEING BLIND are two different things.

Thanks. I thought it was the same thing. Whatever would i do without you?

 

[fastmover]

Shall Not be Infringed.

Rule #4 - Be sure of your target and what is beyond it.
You would never shoot at anything until you have positively identified it. You would never fire at a shadow, or a sound, or a suspected presence. You would shoot only when you know absolutely what you are shooting at and what is beyond it.

If a blind person or a seeing person breaks Safety Rule #4 and ends up breaking a law and/or injuring someone there will be consequences (criminal, civil and moral) just as if seeing person did the same.

You yourself maybe blinded, wounds, shrap, lazed, NVD flareout, painted by high intensity light...rule #4 or consequences.

It is unfair to assume a blind person will fire blindly, any more than would a seeing person if blinded or unable to see.

 

[Nolacopusmc]

Obviously some people on here are blind too....Turn in your firearms.

While the fault probably lies with me and the way I worded the question, though I thought I was clear, I think everyone knows they DO HAVE THE right.

WHat I am referring to is SHOULD they have the ability maybe, to wantedly go around carrying the firearm the same as you and I?

Blind is the handicap of the day on this one, and I think when it comes to shooting, there are some obvious differences in potential issues with a blind guy shooting a gun and a deaf guy doing the same.

What if he has narcolepsy or asbergers, or any other impairment where he temporarily loses control of his mental and / or physical control. Does this not present issues for weapon retention and security? It is not that I think a blind guy is going to wildly shoot into a crown or someone with epilepsy will whip it out and start randomly firing like a retard, but certain conditions present certain realistic problems for the consistent safety and security of firearms.

I KNOW THEY HAVE THE RIGHT AND BELIEVE THEY SHOULD!

I agree 100% with what DZelenka and others have posted.

However, the topic of discussion, is that grandmother or grandfather with dementia, god bless them, have issues beyond all their noble intentions.

What do you think about that? It is not as much a possession issue as a use issue.

The blind people I know and know of are the most responsible people I know. You guys act like, just because they cant see, as soon as they get spooked they are going to dump a mag in random directions.

Thanks. I thought it was the same thing. Whatever would i do without you?

Not this guy...

if you know they are not the same thing, why would you even introduce it into the discussion since it bears no relativity? It appears you were trying to illicit a response with a charged comment. Without me you would not get as many PM's, sleep better at night, and have one less assclown to talk about at the secret squirrel lunches.

 

[Morgan Allison]

If you read my previous posts, I'm not against blind people owning firearms.

I read every post, but with with 9 pages of them, I didn't keep track of exactly who said what. I apologize.

 

[Fisherman]

I've been mulling this over ever since i posted and the only reason I can give to back my argument is "but they're blind". Would I want an elderly blind relative leaving loaded guns around their house? NO!

However, there are several arguments that have been presented to counter mine. I'm still on the fence. This is a hard one. Would I like to see a blind person at the range? Absolutely! It's amazing to watch people overcome their disabilities. But hell... The only argument I have boils down to I don't like the thought of an armed blind person. I'm also well aware the constitution doesn't acknowledge personal opinion.

So I guess I'm saying that dzlenka has a much more solid argument than mine. I don't like the idea but that wasn't the question. Also owning doesn't mean necessarily shooting. And I'd be pissed as hell if I had to give up heirlooms because of a disability.

Still. I'm going on record i think it's a potential safety hazard if they use it for personal defense.

I have to agree with you but it should be decided on an individual basis by family members and not the government. If grandpa is getting to senile to handle a gun, then a friend or family member should take it away and let him live with them. Not stow him away in a nursing home. Man! Some of those places...

 

[spanky]

Not this guy...

if you know they are not the same thing, why would you even introduce it into the discussion since it bears no relativity? It appears you were trying to illicit a response with a charged comment. Without me you would not get as many PM's, sleep better at night, and have one less assclown to talk about at the secret squirrel lunches.

You guys does not equal nolacopusmc.

While they are not directly similar, you are still talking about infringing upon someones rights because of potential issues.

The last part is true.