Calguns.net  

Home My iTrader Join the NRA Donate to CGSSA Sponsors CGN Google Search
CA Semiauto Ban(AW)ID Flowchart CA Handgun Ban ID Flowchart CA Shotgun Ban ID Flowchart
Go Back   Calguns.net > POLITICS, LITIGATION AND ACTIVISM > National 2nd Amend. Political & Legal Discussion
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Mark Forums Read

National 2nd Amend. Political & Legal Discussion Discuss national gun rights and 2A related political topics here. All advice given is NOT legal counsel.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 08-06-2019, 12:54 PM
dchang0's Avatar
dchang0 dchang0 is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 2,772
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default Supposedly Republicans are coalescing around "red flag" gun control

The NY Times says Republicans are coalescing around "red flag" gun control laws.
I figure the NY Times is purposefully lying and pushing this propaganda to change the narrative in favor of more gun control, but we still need to talk about what they wrote in order to head it off at the pass even if it is all lies.

If red flag laws pass, you can bet that some leftists will weaponize it and use false accusations of mental illness to cause some gun owners to have their guns confiscated. And there are some on the left evil enough to want there to be a shootout between these gun owners and the cops.

At the very least there will be accidental deaths, such as with the Maryland man whose anti-gun relative called a red flag confiscation in on him. We don't know how that anti-gun relative feels about it--she might be secretly rejoicing or self-righteous about having indirectly killed him or she might feel terribly guilty about having gotten him accidentally killed.

If the Republicans are determined to pass this stupid law, then at the very least they need to build in a severe penalty for false accusations of "red flag" warnings. For instance, a felony and mandatory prison time of 6 months. This won't be enforced often because it will be hard to prove in court that somebody knowingly lied to get a red flag confiscation order, but it will serve as a deterrent.

Otherwise, you can absolutely be sure that wives will call red flags on their gun-owning husbands in some of the more bitter divorces. This will absolutely be widespread. We know this because many wives already falsely accuse their husbands of domestic violence or sexual assault (the intention of the wife to lie has been captured on camera by some clever husbands). We don't read about these in the news because they often never get outside the courtroom; the husband is simply not believed by anyone.

Keep in mind that these women are willing to lie to the divorce court to destroy their husbands, so the claim that having to go through the court system to get a red flag confiscation order is sufficient to prevent abuse is not enough. There has to be a strong penalty IF the law passes at all.

Of course, the Republicans will refuse to install any penalty for false red flag reports; it will be later, after abuses are revealed and lives are ruined that some reform might occur.

Our best option is to pound on our Republican reps and remind them not to give an inch, no red flag laws at all.
But it's hard to do when Republicans have often blamed mental illness for these mass shootings in the past. They're trapped now rhetorically, and the NY Times is pushing on that weak point.

All three of my US congress-turds are rabidly anti-gun, but hopefully some of you living in free states or in Republican districts can contact your legislators and tell them to reject red flag laws HARD. Cite the Maryland accidental killing.

https://www.thenewamerican.com/usnew...fiscation-raid

Last edited by dchang0; 08-06-2019 at 12:59 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 08-06-2019, 1:04 PM
Jwalt Jwalt is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2017
Posts: 551
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Torching the 4th Amendment won't save the 2nd.

If someone is judged a prohibited person, I don't have any problem with proactively seeking to seize any weapons they may have.


The 'Red Flag' laws proposed are nothing but a sick opportunity for people to SWAT anyone they have a grudge against.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 08-06-2019, 1:17 PM
Offwidth Offwidth is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2018
Posts: 1,212
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

I do not think false filing is a problem. False reports are a crime, and can be written as such. And if there are clear mechanisms to return property, that is better than many other laws they can come up with.
For every falsely accused of domestic violence there are many many women saved from raging *******s husbands.
Yeah, slippery slope.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 08-06-2019, 1:23 PM
DB> DB> is online now
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2017
Posts: 772
iTrader: 26 / 100%
Default

Weren't we just discussing "Minority Report" style "pre-crime" prosecutions as the next thing in "gun control"???

The theory is sort of clever - somehow if we can identify criminals BEFORE they commit the crimes, we've solved the problem... and arguably, how often do we hear "I wasn't surprised when I heard he was the shooter".

But the risk of false accusations is SO high, particularly in a society that persecutes a kid for taking a bite out of a Pop Tart and pretending it vaguely resembles a "gun"....
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 08-06-2019, 1:28 PM
dchang0's Avatar
dchang0 dchang0 is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 2,772
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

Part of the danger is that the definition of mental illness can be expanded later or abused.

We know that the gun control freaks are already trying to reframe gun violence as a public health problem via the CDC and American Medical Assoc.

And we know that Sen. Feinstein already addressed mental illness when it came to assault weapons and veterans with PTSD.

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/vi...apons_ban.html

On top of that, we know that the 3rd-wave feminists are trying to define "toxic masculinity" as a mental illness.

The left will not be able to resist labeling gun owners as mentally ill if it advances their agenda.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 08-06-2019, 1:29 PM
hermosabeach's Avatar
hermosabeach hermosabeach is offline
I need a LIFE!!
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: South Bay of Los Angeles
Posts: 18,386
iTrader: 12 / 100%
Default

When will the Republicans pass and enforce FEDERAL gun laws-
Felons with Guns

When will Republicans propose more laws punishing true criminal use of guns
__________________
Rule 1- ALL GUNS ARE ALWAYS LOADED

Rule 2 -NEVER LET THE MUZZLE COVER ANYTHING YOU ARE NOT PREPARED TO DESTROY (including your hands and legs)

Rule 3 -KEEP YOUR FINGER OFF THE TRIGGER UNTIL YOUR SIGHTS ARE ON THE TARGET

Rule 4 -BE SURE OF YOUR TARGET AND WHAT IS BEYOND IT
(thanks to Jeff Cooper)
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 08-06-2019, 1:30 PM
71MUSTY's Avatar
71MUSTY 71MUSTY is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 7,026
iTrader: 17 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by dchang0 View Post
The NY Times says Republicans are coalescing around "red flag" gun control laws.
I figure the NY Times is purposefully lying and pushing this propaganda to change the narrative in favor of more gun control, but we still need to talk about what they wrote in order to head it off at the pass even if it is all lies.

If red flag laws pass, you can bet that some leftists will weaponize it and use false accusations of mental illness to cause some gun owners to have their guns confiscated. And there are some on the left evil enough to want there to be a shootout between these gun owners and the cops.

At the very least there will be accidental deaths, such as with the Maryland man whose anti-gun relative called a red flag confiscation in on him. We don't know how that anti-gun relative feels about it--she might be secretly rejoicing or self-righteous about having indirectly killed him or she might feel terribly guilty about having gotten him accidentally killed.

If the Republicans are determined to pass this stupid law, then at the very least they need to build in a severe penalty for false accusations of "red flag" warnings. For instance, a felony and mandatory prison time of 6 months. This won't be enforced often because it will be hard to prove in court that somebody knowingly lied to get a red flag confiscation order, but it will serve as a deterrent.

Otherwise, you can absolutely be sure that wives will call red flags on their gun-owning husbands in some of the more bitter divorces. This will absolutely be widespread. We know this because many wives already falsely accuse their husbands of domestic violence or sexual assault (the intention of the wife to lie has been captured on camera by some clever husbands). We don't read about these in the news because they often never get outside the courtroom; the husband is simply not believed by anyone.

Keep in mind that these women are willing to lie to the divorce court to destroy their husbands, so the claim that having to go through the court system to get a red flag confiscation order is sufficient to prevent abuse is not enough. There has to be a strong penalty IF the law passes at all.

Of course, the Republicans will refuse to install any penalty for false red flag reports; it will be later, after abuses are revealed and lives are ruined that some reform might occur.

Our best option is to pound on our Republican reps and remind them not to give an inch, no red flag laws at all.
But it's hard to do when Republicans have often blamed mental illness for these mass shootings in the past. They're trapped now rhetorically, and the NY Times is pushing on that weak point.

All three of my US congress-turds are rabidly anti-gun, but hopefully some of you living in free states or in Republican districts can contact your legislators and tell them to reject red flag laws HARD. Cite the Maryland accidental killing.

https://www.thenewamerican.com/usnew...fiscation-raid
Good, as long as the Progressives see this as a win for Trump they will not support it.
__________________
Only slaves don't need guns

Quote:
Originally Posted by epilepticninja View Post
Americans vs. Democrats
We stand for the Anthem, we kneel for the cross


We already have the only reasonable Gun Control we need, It's called the Second Amendment and it's the government it controls.


What doesn't kill me, better run
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 08-06-2019, 1:35 PM
71MUSTY's Avatar
71MUSTY 71MUSTY is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 7,026
iTrader: 17 / 100%
Default

When I kicked the first wife out after catching her in bed with the neighbor she went straight to my parents house and told them she was leaving me because she thought I was suicidal. My parents already suffering from the loss of my sister in a murder suicide showed up at my house with the Police to save me.

Fortunately it only took me about 5 minutes to convince everyone she was wack.

If that had happened under out red flag laws my guns would have been confiscated and i probably would have been refereed for 5150 evaluation.

Red Flagged is going to be the new SWATTED.
__________________
Only slaves don't need guns

Quote:
Originally Posted by epilepticninja View Post
Americans vs. Democrats
We stand for the Anthem, we kneel for the cross


We already have the only reasonable Gun Control we need, It's called the Second Amendment and it's the government it controls.


What doesn't kill me, better run
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 08-06-2019, 1:41 PM
dchang0's Avatar
dchang0 dchang0 is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 2,772
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by 71MUSTY View Post
Good, as long as the Progressives see this as a win for Trump they will not support it.
I hope you're right, but the Progressives were happy to take the win from Trump on bump-stocks.

This isn't something I'd like to leave up to hope or luck. Man, I wish I could write other Congressmen, but they (rightly) only answer to people in their own districts.

I'd like to remind them that the 2nd Amendment doesn't say "shall not be infringed, except for those considered mentally ill by medical professionals." The Founding Fathers had their town nutters and drunkards but didn't deny them the right to self defense.
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 08-06-2019, 1:44 PM
dchang0's Avatar
dchang0 dchang0 is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 2,772
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by 71MUSTY View Post

Red Flagged is going to be the new SWATTED.
Good point. SWATting was growing in popularity until someone actually got prosecuted and thrown in prison for it:

https://www.foxnews.com/us/2-suicide...ms-family-says

Now it seems to have leveled off, at least in the gaming community.
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 08-06-2019, 1:49 PM
BobB35 BobB35 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 779
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Offwidth View Post
I do not think false filing is a problem. False reports are a crime, and can be written as such. And if there are clear mechanisms to return property, that is better than many other laws they can come up with.
For every falsely accused of domestic violence there are many many women saved from raging *******s husbands.
Yeah, slippery slope.
The current overturn rate is around 1/3 or 33%.(see wikipedia for stats...it varies but averages to about that) so we are willing to accept that 1 out of 3 "Red Flags" is a false alarm. Seems a tad high to me and the cost of dealing with this is quite substantial. Without consequences for filing false reports the abuse will be rampant. Think about the hoops you will have to jump through in CA to gets your guns back...what if some "walk" off? What if they are damaged? This is a nightmare waiting to be implmented

In divorce the rate of false claims against husbands is even higher and nothing is done there....

Last edited by BobB35; 08-06-2019 at 1:54 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 08-06-2019, 2:09 PM
SimpleCountryActuary's Avatar
SimpleCountryActuary SimpleCountryActuary is offline
Not a miracle worker
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 2,953
iTrader: 9 / 100%
Default

The Devil will be in the details of due process. Republicans should throw in massive due process protections and Federalize these laws so that California's law becomes preempted by Federal law just as in the pension/401(k) area.

Due process protections being included would sink the legislation because Dems want confiscation at whim, but the delay would allow emotions to calm down because something else would seize the attention of cable news.

If anyone can delay something, it's Mitch McConnell who kept Scalia's seat open for Gorsuch.
__________________
"The most hated initials in America today ... TSA."

Said by yours truly to an audience of nodding IRS employees.
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 08-06-2019, 3:46 PM
bruss01's Avatar
bruss01 bruss01 is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 5,315
iTrader: 25 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SimpleCountryActuary View Post
The Devil will be in the details of due process. Republicans should throw in massive due process protections and Federalize these laws so that California's law becomes preempted by Federal law just as in the pension/401(k) area.

Due process protections being included would sink the legislation because Dems want confiscation at whim, but the delay would allow emotions to calm down because something else would seize the attention of cable news.

If anyone can delay something, it's Mitch McConnell who kept Scalia's seat open for Gorsuch.
Agree with this...

Putting focus on crazy people is a lot better than banning whole classes of arms and more likely to pass constitutional muster.

Something's going to be done... you know it, I know it. Let's help keep the focus where it belongs - people who have lost control of their minds or emotions.

Red flag laws can be done well, or done poorly. Let's see that they're done WELL and have massive protections against abuse built in, especially providing structure that is binding or highly motivating on the states to fall in line with similar standards.

You and I aren't the problem. Assault weapons aren't the problem. High capacity magazines aren't the problem. Keeping crazies and guns separate from each other - THAT'S the problem, and it's one the Red Flag idea addresses distinctly.
__________________
The one thing worse than defeat is surrender.
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 08-06-2019, 8:50 PM
Hornman Hornman is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Long Beach
Posts: 30
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Depends on what gets flagged. You would think having a “kill” list on you in high school would get you on somebody’s list. I’m still trying to wrap my head around that one.
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 08-06-2019, 8:53 PM
eagershooter's Avatar
eagershooter eagershooter is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 148
iTrader: 8 / 100%
Default

It's a terrible idea! Writing bad laws and chasing bad policies just to appease the emotional response.... taking away our God given rights little by little. I'm an immigrant to this wonderful country and the question I can't wrap my head around is this: what do the words 'shall not' mean?
I'd like to see this country uphold the supreme law of the land. Shall not be infringed. Thank you and good night
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 08-06-2019, 9:02 PM
flyer898's Avatar
flyer898 flyer898 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Limbo
Posts: 1,937
iTrader: 39 / 100%
Default

In order to pass constitutional muster, it is my opinion that Red Flag laws must provide for a pre-deprivation hearing. So far, none of them do.
__________________
Never argue with a fool, onlookers may not be able to tell the difference. Mark Twain
"One argues to a judge, one does not argue with a judge." Me
"Never argue unless you are getting paid." CDAA
"I learned long ago, never to wrestle with a pig. You get dirty, and besides, the pig likes it." George Bernard Shaw
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 08-06-2019, 9:40 PM
uscscjohn uscscjohn is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Posts: 156
iTrader: 2 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by dchang0 View Post
The NY Times says Republicans are coalescing around "red flag" gun control laws.
I figure the NY Times is purposefully lying and pushing this propaganda to change the narrative in favor of more gun control, but we still need to talk about what they wrote in order to head it off at the pass even if it is all lies.

If red flag laws pass, you can bet that some leftists will weaponize it and use false accusations of mental illness to cause some gun owners to have their guns confiscated. And there are some on the left evil enough to want there to be a shootout between these gun owners and the cops.

At the very least there will be accidental deaths, such as with the Maryland man whose anti-gun relative called a red flag confiscation in on him. We don't know how that anti-gun relative feels about it--she might be secretly rejoicing or self-righteous about having indirectly killed him or she might feel terribly guilty about having gotten him accidentally killed.

If the Republicans are determined to pass this stupid law, then at the very least they need to build in a severe penalty for false accusations of "red flag" warnings. For instance, a felony and mandatory prison time of 6 months. This won't be enforced often because it will be hard to prove in court that somebody knowingly lied to get a red flag confiscation order, but it will serve as a deterrent.

Otherwise, you can absolutely be sure that wives will call red flags on their gun-owning husbands in some of the more bitter divorces. This will absolutely be widespread. We know this because many wives already falsely accuse their husbands of domestic violence or sexual assault (the intention of the wife to lie has been captured on camera by some clever husbands). We don't read about these in the news because they often never get outside the courtroom; the husband is simply not believed by anyone.

Keep in mind that these women are willing to lie to the divorce court to destroy their husbands, so the claim that having to go through the court system to get a red flag confiscation order is sufficient to prevent abuse is not enough. There has to be a strong penalty IF the law passes at all.

Of course, the Republicans will refuse to install any penalty for false red flag reports; it will be later, after abuses are revealed and lives are ruined that some reform might occur.

Our best option is to pound on our Republican reps and remind them not to give an inch, no red flag laws at all.
But it's hard to do when Republicans have often blamed mental illness for these mass shootings in the past. They're trapped now rhetorically, and the NY Times is pushing on that weak point.

All three of my US congress-turds are rabidly anti-gun, but hopefully some of you living in free states or in Republican districts can contact your legislators and tell them to reject red flag laws HARD. Cite the Maryland accidental killing.

https://www.thenewamerican.com/usnew...fiscation-raid
Please don't be too hasty about attacking "red flag" laws because they can make sense if well written enough to require real red flags.

There are two important legal issues your thoughtful analysis overlooks. First, there is a huge gap between institutionalization and safety. It is very difficult to prove a person enough of a risk to have him or her institutionalized. If anyone knew how hard it is, they would not demand guns should be kept away from a person only if the burden of forced institutionalization is met. People are forced to turn in guns while on bail. Guilt has not been adjudicated. I have no problem with that. A well crafted red flag law could create a similar "bridge" between clear threat and proof of deadly crazy.

Second, a wife's accusations can already cause guns to be taken from a husband. A restraining order is fairly easy to get in a bitter divorce case. Once issued the restrained party can and is dispossessed of firearms. In other words, the dread result you fear is already here and it is not sufficiently dire that people are even aware of it.
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 08-06-2019, 9:47 PM
wpod's Avatar
wpod wpod is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Arizona
Posts: 2,394
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

"I don't need a gun so you must be CRAZY to think you do need a gun".
RED FLAG!

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 08-06-2019, 9:47 PM
Jwalt Jwalt is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2017
Posts: 551
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

A judge has to issue the TRO. You get a hearing. You have a chance to provide witnesses, including character witnesses.

Yes, the judges tend to lean very heavily toward the woman in a male/female situation, but that bias doesn't destroy all substantive due process.

That's not comparable to the way these red flag laws are actually being written.
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 08-06-2019, 10:59 PM
Offwidth Offwidth is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2018
Posts: 1,212
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by BobB35 View Post
The current overturn rate is around 1/3 or 33%.(see wikipedia for stats...it varies but averages to about that) so we are willing to accept that 1 out of 3 "Red Flags" is a false alarm. Seems a tad high to me and the cost of dealing with this is quite substantial. Without consequences for filing false reports the abuse will be rampant. Think about the hoops you will have to jump through in CA to gets your guns back...what if some "walk" off? What if they are damaged? This is a nightmare waiting to be implmented

In divorce the rate of false claims against husbands is even higher and nothing is done there....
Overturn rate does not mean there was no reason. Means it was not up to a crime level.

We do have involuntary mental hold laws. Such laws can be done properly. Family, coworkers are actually the best people who would know signs of real trouble. Shootings are rare - even a few prevented would help our cause overall.

Yes, the devil will be in due process details, but that can be done. Now, I do not think that is what Bolsheviks have in mind. But that is a different issue.

Your CA example is a good reason to have federal preemptive law.

Last edited by Offwidth; 08-06-2019 at 11:03 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #21  
Old 08-07-2019, 2:11 AM
DB> DB> is online now
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2017
Posts: 772
iTrader: 26 / 100%
Default

I'm guessing that no one has considered that a truly "crazy" individual might well realize that their evil plans could be thwarted by a "red flag whiste blower" and be motivated to eliminate that risk early in their killing spree?

While people closest to a lunatic are most likely to see warning signs, that's true NOW, and they don't typically raise the issue. A law that paints a target on their back is not likely to increase the motivation to turn in the nut job.

Laws are funny things, they often have unexpected results.
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 08-07-2019, 2:17 AM
Ugly Hombre Ugly Hombre is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Banned from O.T. Territory.
Posts: 1,191
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

The "Red Flag" law is a false flag. Enacted it will have no effect on crime.

However-

The Republicans will cave. Almost certainly... The Democrat New Bolsheviks will then jump for joy. Its a ancient tactic of Communists to mark their political enemies as mentally ill people and then purge them. The Red Flag law gives the Socialist/ Communist/Democrats that power

In the future (2020?) when the Neo- Communist Democrats gain power again in all three branches, they will use it in a totally ruthless manner, to disarm those that resist them and/ or those that they perceive will resist them. That is their plan- count on it. It has nothing to do with public saftey, as we all know, only to well- that they do not give a damn about that.

Sad times for our Republic ahead..

Last edited by Ugly Hombre; 08-07-2019 at 2:33 AM..
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 08-07-2019, 5:54 AM
BobB35 BobB35 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 779
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by H0rnman View Post
Depends on what gets flagged. You would think having a “kill” list on you in high school would get you on somebody’s list. I’m still trying to wrap my head around that one.
The dirtbag in Florida was reported to multiple Law enforcement groups, was on search lists, etc. They could have taking his guns at any time. This will not do anything except end in more Maryland outcomes.
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 08-07-2019, 5:56 AM
BobB35 BobB35 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 779
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jwalt View Post
A judge has to issue the TRO. You get a hearing. You have a chance to provide witnesses, including character witnesses.

Yes, the judges tend to lean very heavily toward the woman in a male/female situation, but that bias doesn't destroy all substantive due process.

That's not comparable to the way these red flag laws are actually being written.
No actually you don't get a hearing until after the fact..they kick your door in and take your guns then you go to court...
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 08-07-2019, 5:59 AM
BobB35 BobB35 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 779
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Offwidth View Post
Overturn rate does not mean there was no reason. Means it was not up to a crime level.

We do have involuntary mental hold laws. Such laws can be done properly. Family, coworkers are actually the best people who would know signs of real trouble. Shootings are rare - even a few prevented would help our cause overall.

Yes, the devil will be in due process details, but that can be done. Now, I do not think that is what Bolsheviks have in mind. But that is a different issue.

Your CA example is a good reason to have federal preemptive law.
Don't disagree, but the concept is easy to understand from a statistical prospective...what is the acceptable false positive rate (alpha)? In our criminal justice system we are very intolerant of false positive (Innocent until proven guilty)...these laws flip that around and it's guilty until you prove innocent and you have to pay to prove that. Is that a precedent that should be set? What level of deaths will be created with a higher level of false positives...already one in MD.

If they are serious about these make it a felony to file a false red flag report, don't allow anonymity and make the accuser prove they have evidence for the report or they are assumed to be filing a false report. See how that works...

For those willing to sell liberty for false security, you deserve neither.

Last edited by BobB35; 08-07-2019 at 6:04 AM..
Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old 08-07-2019, 6:12 AM
dogrunner dogrunner is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: E/Central Fl
Posts: 269
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Any way you slice that red flag pie, it remains a presumption of guilt statute..........forcing the accused into a defensive posture with all the attendant cost and disruption.

Gentleman, there IS a reason we have an innocence presumption in our legal structure!
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 08-07-2019, 7:37 AM
ja308 ja308 is offline
I need a LIFE!!
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 12,660
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

The patriot act according to its author was well written to protect Americans. Enter the democrat admin and all the safeguards built in were dismissed, violated and ignored.
Same with the FISA safeguards, they supposedly had safeguards built in too.

I say we bring our objections and concerns to Mitch and the White House. Hopefully the NRA has not been neutered by the democrat party and its media henchmen. We need the weight of 6 million members!

I see these red flag laws as a state issue anyway !
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 08-07-2019, 7:58 AM
32spoke 32spoke is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2019
Posts: 367
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

After kicking my ex wife out for having an affair, she had two 5150 holds, two suicide attempts, destroyed property of a neighbor, stalked me, physically attacked me...it sucks to think someone could be waiting outside the house to cause harm
If she owned firearms, I certainly would have done everything to prevent her access to them.
If someone chooses to own firearms, the accept the responsibility that accompanies that choice. I do t feel that I should have to ask for a CCW, just make the other threat less lethal.
I am also a firm believer in strong consequences for people that lie in an effort to wrongfully take another person’s access to firearms.
Can abuse occur with red flag laws? Certainly, a local range safety officer had their firearms taken away after heated argument with a neighbor, and the neighbor called the police. I don’t know where the truth lies, because both sides of the disagreement will most likely have different versions of what transpired. But in this case, firearms were removed and returned later.
Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old 08-07-2019, 8:13 AM
Jimi Jah's Avatar
Jimi Jah Jimi Jah is online now
I need a LIFE!!
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: North San Diego County
Posts: 16,466
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

Just a bit of dog yapping to quiet the media down. Sure, we will talk all day, that's all they do is talk.

Congress is on strike, no new legislation. The only thing they will pass is another pay raise and to increase the national debt.
Reply With Quote
  #30  
Old 08-07-2019, 12:43 PM
ironpegasus ironpegasus is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 578
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Offwidth View Post
I do not think false filing is a problem. False reports are a crime, and can be written as such. And if there are clear mechanisms to return property, that is better than many other laws they can come up with.
For every falsely accused of domestic violence there are many many women saved from raging *******s husbands.
Yeah, slippery slope.
As one of those who was falsely accused... you. you very much. You have no idea how the ease with which those types of warrants are issued on zero evidence other than an uttered accusation screws people's lives up. I hope you get red flagged one day and get to experience just how uncomfortable a situation it is.

Last edited by ironpegasus; 08-07-2019 at 12:52 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #31  
Old 08-07-2019, 2:37 PM
Jwalt Jwalt is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2017
Posts: 551
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by BobB35 View Post
No actually you don't get a hearing until after the fact..they kick your door in and take your guns then you go to court...
Not the way it's gone for the three people I've known who went through it. But then, all their cases were pretty obviously vindictive and spurious.
Reply With Quote
  #32  
Old 08-07-2019, 2:51 PM
71MUSTY's Avatar
71MUSTY 71MUSTY is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 7,026
iTrader: 17 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by dchang0 View Post
I hope you're right, but the Progressives were happy to take the win from Trump on bump-stocks.

This isn't something I'd like to leave up to hope or luck. Man, I wish I could write other Congressmen, but they (rightly) only answer to people in their own districts.

I'd like to remind them that the 2nd Amendment doesn't say "shall not be infringed, except for those considered mentally ill by medical professionals." The Founding Fathers had their town nutters and drunkards but didn't deny them the right to self defense.
Bump stocks did not take a vote of congress to pass.

Quote:
Originally Posted by H0rnman View Post
Depends on what gets flagged. You would think having a “kill” list on you in high school would get you on somebody’s list. I’m still trying to wrap my head around that one.
Who didn't have a kill list in High School??

But we mainly wanted to kill Mickey Big Mouth and Henry Weinhart
__________________
Only slaves don't need guns

Quote:
Originally Posted by epilepticninja View Post
Americans vs. Democrats
We stand for the Anthem, we kneel for the cross


We already have the only reasonable Gun Control we need, It's called the Second Amendment and it's the government it controls.


What doesn't kill me, better run
Reply With Quote
  #33  
Old 08-07-2019, 3:02 PM
CessnaDriver's Avatar
CessnaDriver CessnaDriver is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 9,454
iTrader: 3 / 100%
Default

Thinking back on high school. This was long before realistic video games. We played "KAOS" (Killing As Organized Sport) with dart guns... at school. Yes at school. We had our randomly assigned "hit" and were to "assassinate" them but only between classes and lunch.



Human sacrifice, dogs and cats living together, mass hysteria!!!!!!! LOL
Not a one of us turned out bad. It was basically a nerd game with friends.
I even carried a pocket knife. Gasp!
I guess all that would cause people to lose their biscuits today pretty good.
__________________
http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/signaturepics/sigpic28512_1.gif

"Yeah, like... well, I just want to slap a hippie or two. Maybe even make them get jobs."

Reply With Quote
  #34  
Old 08-08-2019, 2:02 PM
skilletboy's Avatar
skilletboy skilletboy is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: GP, OR, State of Jefferson
Posts: 2,268
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Here is my main issue with “red flag laws”... beyond the destruction of a person’s due process rights, privacy rights, and treating them like an utter criminal.

It will have the OPPOSITE effect it intends.

Think about it. If you’re a gun owner and you’re having mental health problems. Are you going to be MORE or LESS likely to ask for help or reach out when you know the first thing that is gonna happen is you’re going to have your rights shredded, guns confiscated, and dragged in front of a judge like a criminal and made to PROVE you’re not a threat to anyone or yourself - on a mere whim of suspicion.

HELL NO!

Gun owners will be far less likely to seek help when they TRULY need it!

Sure there will always be a few that were never going to seek help in the first place but they will be FAR OUT NUMBERED by the group of gun owners who have legitimate mental health needs, who remain hidden and live in the stigma bc they fear this witch hunt against them. And believe me, every little thing that could be considered a “mental heath” diagnosis will be used to take away rights.

So even if I gave them the benefit of the doubt that these laws were well intended, and I don’t, they will have the exact opposite effect. More people hiding their mental health issues and not getting the help they need.
__________________
Quote:
"If the American people come to believe that the government is no longer constrained by the law then they will conclude that neither are they." - Michael Cannon, Cato Inst. 2014
_________________________________________


Last edited by skilletboy; 08-08-2019 at 2:07 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #35  
Old 08-08-2019, 3:16 PM
pacrat pacrat is offline
I need a LIFE!!
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Socialist Republic of SoCal
Posts: 10,220
iTrader: 11 / 100%
Default

Quote:
The NY Times says Republicans are coalescing around "red flag" gun control laws.
And that semi black fella from Kenya. Claimed that 90% of ALL NRA members wanted stricter gun control, and Universal BG checks.
Reply With Quote
  #36  
Old 08-08-2019, 3:23 PM
Fastattack's Avatar
Fastattack Fastattack is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: North Central Arizona (formerly So Cal)
Posts: 1,503
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

Sigh ... the spineless republicans ... sigh.
They've learned nothing from our President.
Reply With Quote
  #37  
Old 08-08-2019, 3:48 PM
ja308 ja308 is offline
I need a LIFE!!
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 12,660
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fastattack View Post
Sigh ... the spineless republicans ... sigh.
They've learned nothing from our President.
Sheesh Brother its the New York Times again ! They are making you dance to their tune !
Mitch and the GOP are solid for RKBA ! What are you talking about ?
Reply With Quote
  #38  
Old 08-08-2019, 4:48 PM
dfletcher's Avatar
dfletcher dfletcher is offline
I need a LIFE!!
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Bay Area
Posts: 14,603
iTrader: 4 / 100%
Default

I also read that "90% of voters" polled support UBC. Correct me if I'm mistaken but votes in WA, NV, OR and one other state I don't recall showed results of about a 50-50 split with two losses for each side. What happened to "the only poll that counts is the one on elections day" and are we to presume that the 40% of the electorate that stayed home would have all voted for UBC? Of course not -

So, as they say in court, that a person is caught in one lie allows us to presume they are lying all the time. Or, should I say, all the Times.
Reply With Quote
  #39  
Old 08-08-2019, 4:59 PM
Hinnerk's Avatar
Hinnerk Hinnerk is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2015
Location: East SF Bay
Posts: 779
iTrader: 3 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Offwidth View Post
I do not think false filing is a problem. False reports are a crime, and can be written as such. ...
Ah, yes, but we are not talking about filing false reports of criminal activity.
Reply With Quote
  #40  
Old 08-08-2019, 5:09 PM
sigstroker sigstroker is offline
I need a LIFE!!
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: not in CA
Posts: 17,344
iTrader: 8 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jwalt View Post
Torching the 4th Amendment won't save the 2nd.

If someone is judged a prohibited person, I don't have any problem with proactively seeking to seize any weapons they may have.


The 'Red Flag' laws proposed are nothing but a sick opportunity for people to SWAT anyone they have a grudge against.
Judged by whom? A jury of their peers, like the Constitution guarantees? Or some opinionated schmuck that just happened to win an election for judge? Anyone can win an election. Imagine judge OAC...
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 7:12 AM.




Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Proudly hosted by GeoVario the Premier 2A host.
Calguns.net, the 'Calguns' name and all associated variants and logos are ® Trademark and © Copyright 2002-2021, Calguns.net an Incorporated Company All Rights Reserved.
All opinions, statements and remarks made by Calguns.net on this web site and elsewhere are solely attributable to Calguns.net.



Seams2SewBySusy