>>>>The SAFE Act, the gun control law hastily passed by the New York legislature in January, included a provision requiring physicians, psychologists, registered nurses, and licensed clinical social workers to report any patient they deem "likely to engage in conduct that will cause serious harm to self or others." The report goes to a county mental health official, who, assuming he agrees with the clinician's assessment, passes it on to the New York State Division of Criminal Justice Services (DCJS), which determines whether the patient holds a firearms license. If he does have such a license, which is required to legally buy a handgun in New York, the DCJS must notify the local licensing official, who must suspend or revoke the patient's license and instruct him to surrender all of his firearms, including rifles and shotguns. If he fails to do so, police are authorized to seize them.
>>>>
>>>>Which is how David Lewis, a 35-year-old Amherst librarian, was stripped of his guns and his Second Amendment rights.
>>>>...
>>>>
>>>>http://reason.com/blog/2013/04/11/take-xanax-lose-your-guns
>>>>
>>>>Background checks database IS registration which leads to confiscation. Whether directly like during Katrina or "accidently" in this case or indirectly through changes in the defitition of mental capacity.
>>>>
>>>>When one combines the idea of a national background database with the looming national medical record database from Obamacare it's not too hard for even the most innocent of believers in "common sense" to connect the dots. There are only 2 dots!
>>>>
>>>>Have a great weekend all!
>>>
>>>The problem here is that the law was misapplied. If everyone involved would of been doing their job correctly this never would of happened.
>>
>>In the meantime a law-abiding citizen's rights were taken away as he was guilty until proven innocent. If humans are involved the human error or deliberate malfeasence will occur. There have been several cases recently of databases being made public. Be it the hacking by Wikileaks & anonomous or the more aggregious cases where the data was just handed over by authorities to a news organization who published it. Cases like this serve to prevent people with perfectly treatable mental issues from accurately reporting their condition for fear of their rights being trampled. The idea of a national medical database is even more frightening than the gun registry, and make no bones about it, it IS a registry. Again, there's only 2 dots.
>
>Nothing is 100% perfect. For example, innocent people are arrested every day - that is why we have this thing called a 'court system'.
>Most Americans, at this point, feel that background checks should happen. As matter of fact I think the latest polls on that are showing something like 94% feel this way. There is a national database of automobiles and you don't seem to have a problem with that - so why not have a database of guns?

"Most" Americans supported the Patriot Act. "Most" americans supported invading Iraq. "Most" colonists didn't support the American Revolution. I find that given the proper "crisis", "most" Americans are willing to exchange nearly any liberty for the mere appearance of security. I am reminded of this everytime I enter an airport.

Update : As for the "court system", what happens while you wait for your day in court?
http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/345714/free-cj-grisham

"I still don’t have my guns back and they took my concealed-carry license. I’m not accused of a gun crime, so there’s no reason for them to have my guns right now and the problem is that, what’s happened in the past with other soldiers is that the prosecutors will try and get the soldiers to agree to the police dropping the charges if they confiscate the gun — to have the charges dropped at the expense of their gun. This is a workaround loophole for gun confiscation.”

Reminds me of Katrina. The seizures were ordered 9/8/2005. They were ordered halted on 9/23/2005. The city didn't admit to seizing any firearms until March 2006 under threat of contempt. They were to return the firearms in April 2006. That's 7 months that lawful gun owners were unconstitutionally stripped of their protection, during the very breakdown of society scenario in which protection is most warranted.

I know all about getting "one's day in court" when one's rights are violated. If they weren't still pending I'd bring up a couple of cases close to me where the citizens' rights were violated in a malicious manner. The violations occurred between 2008-2010. The days in court have been numerous yet there is still yet to be a resolution. It's not expected before 2014.