I have a right

[Nuclear Unicorn]

207. True but you're disingenuously looking for reasons to exclude when you know

that those who would be exempt are a miniscule percentage for a law intended to cast as broad a net as possible. Moreover, you seem to be operating under the assumption your disingenuous effort to exclude would have interdicted the killers about whom this debate centers.

Even if your effort to exclude were in effect would any of the killers A) be unfit for military service or B) not already detected by other healthcare professionals? Killers like Loughner, Cho, Holmes, Rogers, Alexis, Lanza, etc. already had histories of mental illness and were believed to be dangerous and yet authorities (those charged with enforcing gun control) failed to act.

Your dishonest effort to harass good people would have brought nothing of value to the effort to stopping rampage killers.