« Environment - More on: Groundwater "dries up in Benton County: Irrigator may be liable if town's residents have to dig deeper for water, state official says" | Main | Ind. Decisions - "Judge rules DNA in Camm case is admissible"; trial begins Monday in Lebanon [Updated] »

Sunday, August 11, 2013

Ind. Decisions - "Court of Appeals [was] right to place safety of public above right to weaponry"

So wrote the Bloomington Herald-Times Saturday in an opinion piece ($$) about the Aug. 6th COA decision in Robert E. Redington v. State of Indiana. Some quotes:

Under a state law called the “Laird Law,” a person who is diagnosed with mental illness or who is thought to be a danger to himself or others can be stopped from owning guns. Monroe Circuit Court Judge Mary Ellen Diekhoff ruled that way, and two of three appellate judges agreed with her.

In dissent, Judge Patricia Riley wrote “it is undisputed that Redington broke no law, committed no violent act, responded peacefully when confronted by police officers and did not threaten to harm himself or anyone else. His comments to the police, though alarming, erratic and delusional, do not evince violence or emotional instability.”

The fact he was scoping out — literally — people coming and going from a bar; that his comments were “alarming, erratic and delusional”; and that police said he seemed obsessed with Spierer and her case should be reasons enough to keep him from possessing firearms. And they do “evince emotional instability.”

Even those who otherwise staunchly support the Second Amendment have suggested more must be more done to address mental health issues that can lead to violence. This is an example of that happening.

The judges were right to interpret Indiana law in this case as protecting the well-being of other citizens over Redington’s individual right to have access to an arsenal.

Posted by Marcia Oddi on August 11, 2013 01:00 PM
Posted to Ind. App.Ct. Decisions