GrumpyOldMan
08-12-2019, 04:34 AM
There is another thread about how many people in TV carry guns.
I thought a more interesting (to me) subject, since we are mostly all seniors, would be how many should carry.
This can be generalized to ask, should "rights" of seniors diminish as their abilities diminish?
A little background:
After the crash of 2008 being 58 and out of work suddenly from a downsizing I became homeless for a while and then got a job driving a cash register at a local convince store for a couple years. During that time I witnessed many seniors coming in for gas. Without any exaggeration, some of those seniors would take 15 minutes to get out of their car and struggle to get to the pump. They were often shaking so badly from tremors that they would need help to get the pump nozzle into the fill pipe on their car. Some were regulars and they would stay in their cars and blow their horn, and we would go out and pump their gas for them.
After seeing this repeated over and over, I began to wonder if everyone should have the right to drive. Slowed reactions, declining hearing, declining sight, tremors - and a 4 thousand pound car going 45 MPH past a shopping center seems to be a disaster waiting to happen. (Soon autopilot cars will help solve this problem) Loss of mobility (not being able to drive) is certainly a scary possibility for many seniors. But, when do people's right to walk down a sidewalk safely outweigh a seniors right/need to drive?
The same question can be applied to seniors and guns. (This should light a fire in the conversation!)
Take two 91 year old TV residents.
One is able to play below their age on the golf course, and has excellent mental facilities, hearing, sight and coordination. (Sometimes referred to as "super agers" by researchers in geriatrics.)
A second 91 year old is mostly confined to a motorized cart in grocery stores, has severe tremors, never had their cataracts removed and so has limited visual acuity and field of view, poor hearing and can't afford hearing aides, and is into the first symptoms of dementia.
Most would agree the first should be able to carry if they want, but how about the second? Should a person be allowed to carry if they can not hold a pattern at 20 feet of less than 10 feet diameter?
My personal feeling is that at some point a persons right to carry is outweighed by my right to be safe in public places.
I have NO problem with people that are mentally and physically able to safely carry and use weapons to be carrying, but at what point does a person become a hazard, and should we (the people) have the right to deny that person the right to carry?
Assuming most agree there are some people that should not be able to carry, where do we draw the line? What is the criteria? Is saying a mentally ill person can't carry an acceptable form of gun control? Is not allowing a person with Parkinson's that literally can't hint a barn from 10 feet acceptable gun control?
(Any predictions on how many posts before this thread gets locked - I hope it can remain civil, I think this is a real life issue that people need to think about and discuss.)
I thought a more interesting (to me) subject, since we are mostly all seniors, would be how many should carry.
This can be generalized to ask, should "rights" of seniors diminish as their abilities diminish?
A little background:
After the crash of 2008 being 58 and out of work suddenly from a downsizing I became homeless for a while and then got a job driving a cash register at a local convince store for a couple years. During that time I witnessed many seniors coming in for gas. Without any exaggeration, some of those seniors would take 15 minutes to get out of their car and struggle to get to the pump. They were often shaking so badly from tremors that they would need help to get the pump nozzle into the fill pipe on their car. Some were regulars and they would stay in their cars and blow their horn, and we would go out and pump their gas for them.
After seeing this repeated over and over, I began to wonder if everyone should have the right to drive. Slowed reactions, declining hearing, declining sight, tremors - and a 4 thousand pound car going 45 MPH past a shopping center seems to be a disaster waiting to happen. (Soon autopilot cars will help solve this problem) Loss of mobility (not being able to drive) is certainly a scary possibility for many seniors. But, when do people's right to walk down a sidewalk safely outweigh a seniors right/need to drive?
The same question can be applied to seniors and guns. (This should light a fire in the conversation!)
Take two 91 year old TV residents.
One is able to play below their age on the golf course, and has excellent mental facilities, hearing, sight and coordination. (Sometimes referred to as "super agers" by researchers in geriatrics.)
A second 91 year old is mostly confined to a motorized cart in grocery stores, has severe tremors, never had their cataracts removed and so has limited visual acuity and field of view, poor hearing and can't afford hearing aides, and is into the first symptoms of dementia.
Most would agree the first should be able to carry if they want, but how about the second? Should a person be allowed to carry if they can not hold a pattern at 20 feet of less than 10 feet diameter?
My personal feeling is that at some point a persons right to carry is outweighed by my right to be safe in public places.
I have NO problem with people that are mentally and physically able to safely carry and use weapons to be carrying, but at what point does a person become a hazard, and should we (the people) have the right to deny that person the right to carry?
Assuming most agree there are some people that should not be able to carry, where do we draw the line? What is the criteria? Is saying a mentally ill person can't carry an acceptable form of gun control? Is not allowing a person with Parkinson's that literally can't hint a barn from 10 feet acceptable gun control?
(Any predictions on how many posts before this thread gets locked - I hope it can remain civil, I think this is a real life issue that people need to think about and discuss.)