A Red Flag Law On Steriods, CA Govenor Signed Today

This is so bad even the ACLU is against it.

Sacramento, CA – California Governor Gavin Newsom signed legislation on Friday to expand the state’s so-called “red flag” laws into the broadest in the nation.

The new laws will allow employers, co-workers, and teachers to seek gun violence restraining orders against other people, KNSD reported.

It will also allow police, immediate family members, and roommates to ask a judge to temporarily confiscate guns and ammunition from anyone they think could be a danger to themselves or someone else, the San Francisco Chronicle reported.

"California has outperformed the rest of the nation, because of our gun safety laws, in reducing the gun murder rate substantially compared to the national reduction," the governor bragged as he signed 15 gun-related pieces of legislation. "No state does it as well or comprehensively as the state of California, and we still have a long way to go."

The new laws also expanded the length of time that gun violence restraining orders could remain in effect, from one year to five years, and gave judges the power to issue search warrants at the same time they issue the restraining orders, the San Francisco Chronicle reported.

The ACLU called the bill “a significant threat to civil liberties" because restraining orders can be requested before gun owners have a chance to contest them, KNSD reported.

https://defensemaven.io/bluelivesma...laws-in-united-states-oOtkB7aMAEWoZBH2rmJSOA/

 

Violent gun crime numbers have been falling since the early 1990's, and are roughly inversely proportional to increases in gun ownership. This claim by the California governor is a lie. The truth is that democrats do not have your best interest at heart.
https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo...gun-violence-has-fallen-since-1993-study-says
https://www.pewsocialtrends.org/201...1993-peak-public-unaware/5/#chapter-5-context

 

Keep in mind this law will go beyond just confiscation, individuals who are the target of this can be held in prison (civil contempt) if they do not comply.

All it takes is someone in the workplace who does not like you.

 

In other words, search warrants when the level of evidence has not risen to the level to indicate a crime.

Oh, did I mention that state has also made nunchucks a felony crime?
That means if they find nunchucks, you permanently lose civil rights forever.
Could even just be a broomstick that was cut in half and tied together with a piece of string.

 

Progressive liberals and Democrats have only a single goal, total takeover and total control of all liberties, and to achieve that requires disarming the law abiding including law enforcement.

 

That's the goal of progressive liberals, eliminate due process and take out anyone they don't like.

 

The fact the state has been flooded with illegal aliens has enabled the most radical among them to come in and hold office.

Not counting the population over 45 years of age, Whites would probably only make up 35% of the population in the state now. Huge change in just a single generation. The majority of that didn't happen from legal immigration.

Soon the old haggard white liberals are going to finally be pushed out of office, and it will be interesting to see which direction Hispanics decide to take this issue. Some of them have told me that their culture doesn't like being told what to do, and feel like things in America are more strict and restrictive than they are in Mexico (like what they are allowed to do in public places).

 

Correct, if a progressive liberal Red Flags you, it's over with off, your home is ransacked, your property is confiscated, and it's off to jail with you.

California is clearly demonstrating what is coming forth if Conservatives do not begin pushing strongly back against such trampling of not only Constitutional Rights, but Human Rights.

 

Incorrect- the best evidence available indicates that the gun ownership rate has fallen (General Social Survey).

 

Don't know what you mean by "best evidence available". Link?

 

Totally false.

 

When the so-called "best evidence available" is nothing more than a mere survey, which cannot even be verified in a scientific manner, there is no evidence whatsoever.

 

Both homicide and gun ownership rates declined significantly between 1980-2010.

 

"RESULTS:
Higher levels of firearm ownership were associated with higher levels of firearm assault and firearm robbery. There was also a significant association between firearm ownership and firearm homicide, as well as overall homicide.

"CONCLUSIONS:
The findings do not support the hypothesis that higher population firearm ownership rates reduce firearm-associated criminal perpetration. On the contrary, evidence shows that states with higher levels of firearm ownership have an increased risk for violent crimes perpetrated with a firearm. Public health stakeholders should consider the outcomes associated with private firearm ownership."
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26091930

So much for the theory that gun violence is inversely proportional to increases in gun ownership. The fewer people owning guns the better.

 

You can't enjoy much liberty when you're lying in a pool of your own blood with several bullets in you.

 

What you have is a survey, a survey which has not been proven to be factual, get back to us when you actually have some actual numbers from a reputable source such as the DOJ or BATF.

 

And that is what happens when people are disarmed and cannot defend themselves, however if one is armed it is the bad guy lying in a pool of his own blood not the other way around.

Which is the undeniable reason why GCA's are evil to the core, their only goal is to turn people into helpless sheep.

 

Fortunately, actually, there are no reliable numbers on gun ownership -- well, at least that I'm aware of, nor should there be.

Galileo is using fictional information from an organization of sociologists, and sociologists are typically left-leaning communist radicals, especially when it comes to guns. They started out on the wrong foot with incomplete data in the 1960's, took their incorrect position on very shaky ground politically, and for whatever reasons, have found need to defend it ever since.

 

I've often wondered if there is any kind of limit to what the governor of California would sign- and I think that limit could be defined by factors of common sense and public good. If the legislation serves either of those goals, I don't think it will get past him.

 

Where is the data demonstrating conclusively, beyond reasonable doubt, that legal firearm owners are overwhelmingly the ones who are directly responsible for instigating firearm-related crimes or other types of violent acts?

 

I think it's easy to understand why the government of California does not feel comfortable with the people of California having guns.

 

Red flag laws are the firearms equivalent of the so-called "me too" movement.

 

Trump was the one that came up with the idea... take the guns first, due process second

 

There are now about 400 million guns in the USA. Not by registration, but by reality. Guns don't die of old age, and people don't throw them away like old computers. About 25 million background checks were run in 2017, which mean 25 million gun purchases were made. The numbers continue to grow- and those numbers do not include some kinds of legal guns.

The number of purchases slowed when Trump came to office... which would say people had more trust in the future; felt safer.
As the dems fan the fires of hate and blow everything out of proportion when there is a group shooting, the sales of guns go up- for self defense, and as a buffer against the possibility that some wacko will insist they will protect you if you can't protect yourself. That's high on the list of biggest lies, right up there with "I'll still respect you in the morning" .

 

And of course, you have documentation of that?
Perhaps it was preceded by "The democrats say-"
and you kind of forgot that part......