The closest analogy I can give you has to do with drivers losing their license to operate vehicles. It varies from state to state, but basically, repeated DUIs lead to suspension and further violations lead to revocation of the license. The underlying principle is that driving is a privilege, not a right. However, when it comes to say, mental illness (like dementia) or physical illness (such as loss of eyesight due to macular degeneration), in my state, it is up to a treating physician to notify the state that a patient is not capable of safely operating a vehicle and that their license should be revoked. I don't know any physician to have ever taken that step. They may advise a patient to stop driving, but won't push on it. Some doctors simply don't give a shit, and others are afraid that if word got out in the community, they'd lose all their senior patients (which I think they would).
The obvious solution would be to require licensed drivers to retake their drivers' tests (written, eyesight & road test, every couple of years - say, once every 5 years until age 65, and then every 2 or 3 years. If auto insurers made this a requirement, it would take the cowardly state legislators off the hook. However any attempts at passing such a law is met with great agita from the AARP and senior citizens.
Consequently, my area is rife with really old people, many of whom are driving really big old cars. I'm in my 70's myself, and I am horrified at the dangerous driving of many seniors. Earlier this summer I was at my neighborhood mini-mall/grocery store, when one elderly woman hit the gas instead of the brakes and slammed into the front wall/window of the grocery store. Damn lucky no one was killed. I had a neighbor who was legally blind from macular degeneration in both eyes. She drove one of the aforesaid oversized cars. Her husband, even older than her, and too physically weak to drive, would sit next to her and tell her when to turn and when to brake. I urged her to stop driving, and she kept promising she would, or rationalizing that she only drove to the store and church. I finally told her 3 out-of-state kids that not only was she risking her and their dad's life, but if she should hit and kill anyone, that the resulting lawsuit would wipe out the parents' assets and the kids' inheritances. At that point they sold the car.
So, turning to the question of firearms, since there is no license or insurance required to purchase/own a gun, there's no leverage to force gun owners to surrender their weapons. And then you get into the whole complicated issue of determining the appropriate level of physical or mental fitness. If that is not required as a prerequisite to purchasing a firearm, the govt. cannot be heard to revoke what it has never granted in the first place.
Wise and personally responsible of you to turn over your guns voluntarily. Take care.
= new reply since forum marked as read
