Should be a rhetorical question, but it’s not!

Should the blind, allegedly alcoholic, and depressed gun collector who shot himself in the shin while cleaning his gun be able to keep his guns?

I pose this to the Posse:

According to this report :

A blind Rockaway Township man who is fighting to keep his gun collection defended himself Monday against allegations he abuses alcohol and said he drinks perhaps a six-pack of beer a week.

The Morris County Prosecutor’s Office wants Superior Court Judge Thomas V. Manahan in Morristown to take away 49-year-old Steven C. Hopler’s firearms purchase identification cards and end his ability to possess and buy weapons.

Assistant Prosecutor Catherine Broderick on Monday urged the judge to rule that Hopler is unfit to have firearms because he allegedly abuses alcohol, was arrested three times between 1984 and 2003, and was taking Zoloft for depression in October 2008 when he accidentally shot himself in the shin while lubricating his .357-Magnum Smith & Wesson firearm.

A Superior Court judge ruled the fact he has been blind since the early 1990s because of complications from diabetes is not a factor; and that Hopler could buy and discharge firearms under responsible supervision.

When Hopler shot himself in 2008, responding police found unsecured guns around the home, including one under a cushion and one in an oven mitt.

Though there is no law on how guns should be stored in a private home, police removed six firearms for safety reasons. Hopler, who is unmarried and has no children, currently has six guns in a safe he owns.

The story continues that while he was being treated for the wound to his leg, his former tenant, Kenneth Struck, admittedly burglarized Hopler’s home. Hopler said that 12 weapons were stolen, but Struck did not specifically admit to stealing any guns.

The state used the information from Struck, who claimed that Hopler was routinely intoxicated, left empty beer cases and 30-packs of beer in a Dumpster, and could be heard shouting at night at his television.

While he has yet to make a ruling, the judge early in Monday’s hearing said he had “substantial concern” about “compelling” remarks made by Struck that indicate Hopler abuses booze.

Hopler's lawyer contends that Struck, besides being a convicted burglar, should not be believed.

Should he own firearms….given all that?

Little hard to get past the blind thing, no?

Outside of the fact that he may be a drunk, on Zoloft, careless with storing his guns according to the testimony of a convicted thief....and, oh yes, BLIND! I say, let him keep them!

I'm sorry....I'm laughing my ass off as I write this.

As a noted New York Times bestselling author friend of mine would say, " can't make this stuff up!"

Comment as you see fit!