FL lawmaker: People wanting to purchase ammo should probably take anger management classes first

posted at 2:01 pm on March 9, 2013 by Erika Johnsen

I threw this story up in the Green Room during the week, but here’s some video with a few more details about the Florida state legislator proposing that law-abiding citizens seeking to purchase ammunition for their firearms should have to take an anger management program first. I repeat, we’re not even talking about a gun safety program — we’re talking about an anger management program. The mind reels:

 

Two hours and twenty dollars every ten years may sound like a relatively innocuous imposition on upstanding citizens’ lives (although, don’t forget the significant added costs of the extra bureaucracy and enforcement the law would need to have any teeth), especially if it ostensibly means we can “save even just one life.”  There are a billion and one other things in this world we could try and pass laws around that would also “save just one life,” but don’t — it’s far too slippery of a slope that comes with way too many costs and unintended consequences.

Even if the ostensible idea behind the proposal is really just to “get people to be more introspective,” doesn’t it feel an awful lot like a suggestion that gun owners are just more inclined to fits of violent outrage and are probably in need of counseling? And even if a state-run anger management course could get most people to “be more introspective” for a hot second (which I wildly doubt, and sounds mighty unconstitutional anyway), would doing so actually  accomplish any kind of effective deterrence on this supposed plague of gun violence? Also wildly doubtful.

It doesn’t look like the proposal is destined to go anywhere, thank goodness, but Florida gun-rights advocates were rightly in an uproar this week.

“When I first saw it, I thought it had to be a joke,” said Sean Caranna, executive director of Florida Carry, a nonprofit group championing the right to bear arms. … “We’ve got a lot of issues that should be the focus of these bill slots with limited filing, but instead we put in something as ridiculous as this,” he said. “I don’t see a planet where this passes. This is an attempt to grab attention – it has to be. And that’s really disappointing.”

Jon Gutmacher, an Orlando attorney and author of “Florida Firearms: Law, Use & Ownership,” told FoxNews.com that the bill would almost certainly be found to be unconstitutional based on prior restraint.

“It has no reasonable relationship to anything,” he said. “There has to be a reasonable basis to believe that a person had a substantial anger problem that could cause public harm. … That’s the kind of bill that doesn’t even get past committee.”


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2

This insanity should not even make it to print media, never mind digital like this site.

It’s like printing a story that a homeless man in NYC said it instead of some idiot elected official in FL. Its just as insane and whoever said it should be fired and committed to the local hospital for a mental evaluation. This may have prevented a mass murderer, maybe this FL elected official is asking for help by being obviously psychotic?

TX-96 on March 9, 2013 at 8:19 PM

Ok how about also before you start dating, getting married and having kids too.

Tasha on March 9, 2013 at 7:56 PM

.
Especially having kids !

It appears to me that half of the children in my vicinity are born to “living-together-couples”.

An absolutely unimaginable, heinous act took place in the small town I use to reside in, this past October.

I don’t know that it was the result of “anger”, but the young parents certainly didn’t qualify to have custody of their baby.

listens2glenn on March 9, 2013 at 8:39 PM

How ’bout we sent Sen. Gibson (D – of course) to a stupidity management course …..

BD57 on March 9, 2013 at 10:10 PM

NEVER trust ANY liberal because they ALWAYS speak with forked tongues.

Where is the proof of my assertion, you ask. Look below:

Gabby Giffords’s Husband Buys AR-15

DannoJyd on March 10, 2013 at 4:18 AM

A woman came up with this harebrained idea, naturally.

Nomennovum on March 10, 2013 at 8:23 AM

IOW, simply owning a gun is in and of itself evidence of a mental disorder.

This is the propaganda meme the lefties want to drum into the sheep electorate.

It has many precedents in history, mostly in the Soviet Union and in Mao’s China. Where, for example, simply wanting to own private property was in and of itself evidence of a mental disorder that required the state to act to protect the people. Likewise wanting to earn more than one’s “fair share”. And so on and so forth.

farsighted on March 10, 2013 at 10:58 AM

I’d wager any amount of money that by speaking calmly to the Senator, I could make him angry in a much shorter amount of time than he could me. I’m pretty sure I could do it in well under 5 minutes and only have to state things that are true, but contrary to his blind, Party loyalty.

TugboatPhil on March 10, 2013 at 12:07 PM

No female should be able to possess a firearm and/or ammunition for same, because she is subject to menstruation.

Further proof that the 19th Amendment needs to be repealed.

Twana on March 9, 2013 at 6:25 PM

I was being facetious, when I posted that – equating “anger management” with the trials and tribulations associated with “menstruation,” to point out the buffoonery of this buffoon. Also, I try to be as snide and sarcastic as possible, when I’m confronted with the policy aspirations of legislative rejects, like this imbecile.

I am a huge proponent of women being armed.

OhEssYouCowboys on March 10, 2013 at 12:36 PM

*I* think all blacks should be required to take an Anger Management Class before entering any Wendy’s, McDonald’s or Dunkin’ Donuts.

Czar of Defenestration on March 10, 2013 at 12:40 PM

listens2glenn on March 9, 2013 at 8:39 PM

Absolutely sickening. These people are predators.

avagreen on March 10, 2013 at 1:30 PM

Testifying to the Senate Judiciary Committee Jan. 30, Kelly had urged senators to restrict sales firearms based on their lethality–a common refrain with other witnesses that day, who argued that semi-automatic weapons, which chamber subsequent rounds as bullets are fired, and other guns with military-style features level the playing field against law enforcement.

Kelly and Giffords founded their own advocacy group to restrict gun rights, Americans for Responsible Solutions, in January. On its website, ARS wrote: “High capacity magazines are a deadly factor in gun violence.” A 30-round magazine is considered a high-capacity magazine.

excerpt: AWR HAWKINS @Breitbart.com

.
From the link by: DannoJyd on March 10, 2013 at 4:18 AM

.
To the esteemed Mark E. Kelly, and Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords:

Number 2 - Restricting American citizens to “lower physical capabilities” than what they (the citizens) agree to IS NOT “RESPONSIBLE”.

Number 1 - American law enforcement was NEVER intended to have a “leg-up” on American citizens, as regards weapons capabilities.

.
Advancements in weapons technologies since the Constitution was ratified (and the Bill Of Rights added), does NOT justify a rethinking or reinterpretation of the Second Amendment, by our elected government officials.

listens2glenn on March 10, 2013 at 1:49 PM

listens2glenn on March 9, 2013 at 8:39 PM

.
Absolutely sickening. These people are predators.

avagreen on March 10, 2013 at 1:30 PM

.
A predatory society, is what “urbanites” have evolved to.

Neither of these “kids” had any sense of “real life” responsibility, as parents. I don’t know that they had sense of ANY responsibility, period.

The Lancaster Co (PA) District Attorney called it “the worst, most horrible thing I’ve ever seen”, and hopes he never has to see another one like it.

listens2glenn on March 10, 2013 at 2:04 PM

Let’s alter that by a couple of letters.

A predatory society, is what “urbanites” have DE-evolved to.

listens2glenn on March 10, 2013 at 2:04 PM

.
That’s better.

listens2glenn on March 10, 2013 at 2:07 PM

Advancements in weapons technologies since the Constitution was ratified (and the Bill Of Rights added), does NOT justify a rethinking or reinterpretation of the Second Amendment, by our elected government officials.

listens2glenn on March 10, 2013 at 1:49 PM

IMHO, those working to disarm law enforcement officials are taking the right track.

If these Communists don’t like us owning guns, let’s see how they like having an UNARMED GUARD protecting them.

I love delivering payback. BWAHAhahahaha….

DannoJyd on March 10, 2013 at 3:29 PM

I need some anger managements since I’m pissed I can no longer find 9mm or 5.56 ammo any more…

Wyznowski on March 10, 2013 at 4:36 PM

If you think that guns are scary and you want others to change so you can feel better, then you must really hate seeing gun violence in movies, on TV, and in video games (especially first person shooter games).

You really cannot ban these shows, movies, and games (first amendment versus second amendment), but you can tax them. Sin tax, baby. Tax ‘em hard and tax ‘em good.

You want to watch a Quentin Tarantino movie? Pay the Excessive Violence Tax (EVT) of $25 per movie or episode per watcher.

But first, you need to take and pass a required anger management class for $50.

And, you will need to wait for thirty days while the government performs a background check to see if you have, or someone thinks you might have, a history or an incident of violence in your behavior. Fee: $100. Renewable and payable annually.

Of course, you local paper will be required to post your name and address on a Google map with a pushpin at your address. In case that’s not enough, you must have a sign in your yard saying that a person of violent persuasion lives in the house. When a member of your family, especially a spouse, sustains an injury, then the police will come to you for answers and will stop looking anywhere else or to anyone else. $5,000 to expunge your name and address in private.

Oh, yes, you will not be able to live within three miles of a public school, playground, or a fast food restaurant with playground equipment. You will not be allowed to be a scout leader, a Sunday School teacher, participate in the boys and girls club, or be anywhere near, say, a 711 store where one might find kids. We don’t want your polluted ideas soiling young, impressionable minds. All moving expenses are on your dime.

I had this idea as a tongue-in-cheek spoof, but, you know? I like it. I believe that it has a kind or ironic justice to the ideas behind it.

Please write Senator Feinstein and ask her to amend he gun ban to include these fines and requirements for excessive violence. Who knows? With all the TV shows and movies produced in Hollywood, maybe Jerry Brown can raise enough cash to balance California’s budget?

Nah, Jerry will just spend it.

billrowe on March 10, 2013 at 6:08 PM

People don’t kill people….ANGRY people kill people. Since our tax dollars are going to study Tai Chi, perhaps we should make THAT mandatory for anyone wanting to buy ammo as well?!

easyt65 on March 11, 2013 at 11:33 AM

How anger management for drivers first? Everyday someone is killed or injured over a road rage incident.

johnnyU on March 11, 2013 at 1:24 PM

Obvious projection, it is her who needs it and it is because of her raging on this issue.

jake49 on March 11, 2013 at 7:51 PM

What? No party affiliation is mentioned? Neither the politician’s name, their party affiliation nor their district were mentioned in the article.

Since when has Hot Air become a Mainstream Media outlet shilling for the LibTard cause?

My money says it’s a Democrat politician from St Lucie County. And the politician is a carpetbagger from either New York City or North Jersey (home of New York’s rejects)

CatchAll on March 11, 2013 at 10:07 PM

Here they come ! !

California Seizes Guns as Owners Lose Right to Bear Arms

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-03-12/california-seizes-guns-as-owners-lose-right-to-bear-arms.html?cmpid=yhoo

Texyank on March 11, 2013 at 11:19 PM

Comment pages: 1 2