Red Flag Laws

Discussion in 'Gun Control' started by Chester_Murphy, Aug 7, 2019.

  1. JakeStarkey

    JakeStarkey Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2016
    Messages:
    25,747
    Likes Received:
    9,526
    Trophy Points:
    113
    It's OK, rahl.

    And it is not dishonest to not quote a poster, when it is not necessary.

    You clearly do not understand these laws, and time will show you are wrong, rahl.
     
    Last edited: Aug 12, 2019
  2. Nightmare515

    Nightmare515 Ragin' Cajun Staff Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2011
    Messages:
    11,132
    Likes Received:
    4,899
    Trophy Points:
    113
    As far as I understand they can't actually do that. From what I'm reading it's basically they can ping you as being a nutcase and then you get brought before a judge who will determine whether you are or are not one before they actually take your guns.
     
    JakeStarkey likes this.
  3. rahl

    rahl Banned

    Joined:
    May 31, 2010
    Messages:
    62,508
    Likes Received:
    7,651
    Trophy Points:
    113
    It won’t stand up to a constitutional challenge.
     
    Last edited: Aug 12, 2019
  4. Nightmare515

    Nightmare515 Ragin' Cajun Staff Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2011
    Messages:
    11,132
    Likes Received:
    4,899
    Trophy Points:
    113
    We'll see how it goes. As with any controversial proposed law like this it's being hailed as both Constitutional and Unconstitutional by various lawyers, judges, courts, etc.

    But as you said if they make this federal law then yeah it's going to be on the Supreme Courts desk within days and we'll see what they say.
     
    Chester_Murphy likes this.
  5. JakeStarkey

    JakeStarkey Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2016
    Messages:
    25,747
    Likes Received:
    9,526
    Trophy Points:
    113
    It will stand up to all challenges just so easily, and then those who get to yelling mad and making threats and wearing soup pots on their head can get 'pinged' and go explain themselves.
     
  6. Doofenshmirtz

    Doofenshmirtz Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2016
    Messages:
    28,019
    Likes Received:
    19,307
    Trophy Points:
    113
    So you agree with Trump? Take the guns first and then due process second?
     
  7. JakeStarkey

    JakeStarkey Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2016
    Messages:
    25,747
    Likes Received:
    9,526
    Trophy Points:
    113
    If there were solid probable cause (beating up one's family, screaming and threatening your child's teacher, a spouse's quiet description of how scared people are at home of Homer Rambo, etc.), of course remove the weapons first.
     
  8. Galileo

    Galileo Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2015
    Messages:
    2,860
    Likes Received:
    481
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Red flag laws are needed now more than ever.

    "On Saturday, a terrorist who, according to a federal law enforcement official, wrote that he feared a 'Hispanic invasion of Texas' was replacing white Americans opened fire in a Walmart in El Paso....

    "While its modern roots predate the Trump administration by many decades, white nationalism has attained a new mainstream legitimacy during Mr. Trump’s time in office.

    '"Discussions of Americans being 'replaced' by immigrants, for instance, are a recurring feature on some programs on Fox News. Fox hosts Tucker Carlson and Laura Ingraham, for example, return to these themes frequently. Democrats, Ms. Ingraham told viewers last year, 'want to replace you, the American voters, with newly amnestied citizens and an ever-increasing number of chain migrants.'....

    "Those who sympathize with the white nationalist ideology but who deplore the violence should work closely with law enforcement to see that fellow travelers who may be prone to violence do not have access to firearms like semiautomatic assault-style weapons that are massively destructive."
    https://www.nytimes.com/2019/08/04/opinion/mass-shootings-domestic-terrorism.html
     
    Last edited: Aug 14, 2019
    JakeStarkey likes this.
  9. Xenamnes

    Xenamnes Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2015
    Messages:
    23,895
    Likes Received:
    7,537
    Trophy Points:
    113
    The mother of said individual had previously reported her son to law enforcement out of fear that he might do something. But even with such a report, just as was the case with Nicholas Cruz, law enforcement ultimately decided to not investigate the matter. So-called red flag laws would not change such.
     
    Chester_Murphy likes this.
  10. Nightmare515

    Nightmare515 Ragin' Cajun Staff Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2011
    Messages:
    11,132
    Likes Received:
    4,899
    Trophy Points:
    113
    In places without "Red Flag" laws can law enforcement actually do anything? I'm not well versed on the legal matters of things like this.
     
  11. rahl

    rahl Banned

    Joined:
    May 31, 2010
    Messages:
    62,508
    Likes Received:
    7,651
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Not only is it dishonest, but it’s quite cowardly.
     
    Jarlaxle likes this.
  12. Doofenshmirtz

    Doofenshmirtz Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2016
    Messages:
    28,019
    Likes Received:
    19,307
    Trophy Points:
    113
    As of today, he is right.
     
  13. mtlhdtodd

    mtlhdtodd Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2012
    Messages:
    1,170
    Likes Received:
    238
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Gender:
    Male
    Unless that person is in a life or death situation after the fact and can't effectively defend him/herself.
     
  14. mtlhdtodd

    mtlhdtodd Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2012
    Messages:
    1,170
    Likes Received:
    238
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Gender:
    Male
    He doesn't understand how the Constitution works or doesn't care. His personal feelings on the issue are all that maters.
     
    Jarlaxle likes this.
  15. JakeStarkey

    JakeStarkey Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2016
    Messages:
    25,747
    Likes Received:
    9,526
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Any who think amendment is the only why Red Flag laws can be enacted clearly not explain why we have Red Flag laws in several states.

    Personal opinion about the 2dA means nothing. Only what SCOTUS opines means anything.
     
  16. APACHERAT

    APACHERAT Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2013
    Messages:
    38,026
    Likes Received:
    16,042
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male

    I don't carry more than $9,995 on me at any time while out in public unless I'm in Vegas.

    I don't like making a financial transaction of $10,000 or more because the IRS and LE come snooping around.

    Why don't they figure in inflation ???
     
  17. Chester_Murphy

    Chester_Murphy Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Oct 2, 2017
    Messages:
    7,503
    Likes Received:
    2,227
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Once a law is on the books, they don't review it. It's part of the reason for so much confusion and hate in the U.S. today.
     
    Jarlaxle and APACHERAT like this.
  18. 10A

    10A Chief Deplorable Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jan 10, 2013
    Messages:
    5,698
    Likes Received:
    1,006
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    No, what the States and counties say mean a lot more than SCOTUS. SCOTUS has no power to enforce its decisions. It cannot call out the troops or compel Congress or the president to obey.


    More Than Half Colorado Counties Say WE WILL NOT COMPLY

    https://www.rallyforourrights.com/colorado-counties-say-we-will-not-comply-to-red-flag-law/



    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Amendment_sanctuary

    Colorado: 38 out of 64 counties, 3 cities, and 3 towns have adopted Second Amendment sanctuary resolutions
    Illinois: 66 out of 102 counties, 2 cities, and 3 townships have adopted Second Amendment sanctuary resolutions
    Maryland: 3 out of 23 counties have adopted Second Amendment sanctuary resolutions
    New Mexico: 25 out of 33 counties, 6 cities, and 1 town have adopted Second Amendment sanctuary resolutions;[Taos initially passed a resolution but later repealed it. 30 out of 33 county sheriffs have signed a letter by the New Mexico Sheriffs Association vowing to not assist in enforcing certain gun control
    Nevada: 5 out of 16 counties have adopted Second Amendment sanctuary resolutions.
    Oregon: 13 out of 36 counties have adopted Second Amendment sanctuary resolutions.
    Washington: 24 out of 39 counties and 1 city have sheriffs that have vowed to not enforce I-1639 while it is being challenged in court
     
    Last edited: Aug 28, 2019
    Jarlaxle likes this.
  19. An Taibhse

    An Taibhse Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 10, 2016
    Messages:
    7,238
    Likes Received:
    4,819
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I used to carry btwn 3-5k on a regular basis because of inconvenience for going to bank and prefer cash to debit or credit card, but stopped doing so because of the frequency of the reports of the abuse of civil forfeiture in traffic stops. Such amounts are good targets because the legal costs/time/effort to recover the funds may be more than someone is willing expend.
    The 10,000k as the trigger for attracting the IRS’s attention is something of the thinking prior to 9/11. Since then and with the policy changes focusing on potential fund transfers for terrorism, the IRS monitors for ‘structured’ cash deposits/transfers which can be far smaller amounts if they appear to follow a pattern. Google, ‘IRS seizures’, ‘structured’ and ‘dairy’ to see what was done to a dairy farmer who did periodic cash deposits from money received from providing milk at farmer’s markets.
    Neither practice has been reviewed by the SCOTUS and on it’s surface appears to me to violate the Constitution, and the Civil Forfeiture abuse by some LE agencies appears to me to be nothing less than institutional theft.
     
    APACHERAT likes this.
  20. JakeStarkey

    JakeStarkey Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2016
    Messages:
    25,747
    Likes Received:
    9,526
    Trophy Points:
    113
    If SCOTUS says they are legal, Red Flag laws are legal.

    The US Marshals will enforce SCOTUS opinions.

    Personal opinion in disagreement of SCOTUS is meaningless.
     
  21. Xenamnes

    Xenamnes Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2015
    Messages:
    23,895
    Likes Received:
    7,537
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Then such would ultimately mean the opinions of those elected officials who are willfully violating the precedent of Heller, McDonald and Caetano are ultimately meaningless, since the united state supreme court has already ruled in favor of the second amendment.
     
  22. Jarlaxle

    Jarlaxle Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2010
    Messages:
    8,939
    Likes Received:
    461
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Gender:
    Male
    That is the intent. The goal behind red flag laws is legalizing SWATting innocent gun owners, no more and no less. If some of the gun owners get killed...feature, not a bug.
     
    Grau likes this.
  23. Polydectes

    Polydectes Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2010
    Messages:
    53,251
    Likes Received:
    18,015
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    This is not really going to fly. It's a violation of the 4th and 6th amendments. In order to seize property from somebody even temporarily you have to first obtain a warrant. That's assuming you know this person has a gun you also have to get a warrant to search all of that property.

    There has to be the due process of law.
     
    Jarlaxle likes this.
  24. therooster

    therooster Banned

    Joined:
    Feb 28, 2014
    Messages:
    13,004
    Likes Received:
    5,494
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Bingo , exactly . Everyone will be trested like justice Cavanaugh, slandered and attacked.
     
    Jarlaxle likes this.
  25. Zorro

    Zorro Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2015
    Messages:
    76,424
    Likes Received:
    51,239
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Well, not EVERYONE!

    Democrats frown on targeting gang databases with ‘red flag’ laws.

    House Democrats this week advanced a new measure to encourage states to pass “red flag” laws, known as extreme risk protection orders, that authorize removing guns and ammunition from dangerous individuals.

    Democrats on the House Judiciary Committee amended the measure during a Wednesday mark-up to authorize the federal government to issue extreme risk protection orders in some instances, but they rejected an amendment that would have red-flagged anyone who law enforcement lists as a gang member.

    “The majority of violent crime, including gun violence, in the United States is linked to gangs,” Rep. Ken Buck, a Colorado Republican who sponsored the amendment, said Wednesday. “My amendment is quite simple. It would allow the issuance of a red flag order against anyone whose name appears in a gang database if there was probable cause to include that individual in the database.”

    Democrats objected.

    Buck pointed out his amendment requires law enforcement to limit red-flagging to only those with probable cause to be included on the list, which is a stricter criteria.

    Democrats kept objecting.

    Buck said police have to meet a much higher threshold to list someone as a gang member.

    “This is a situation where the police officers are trained, and there are very identifiable signs, and it isn't just one sign,” Buck told Nadler.

    Democratic Rep. Eric Swalwell of California offered to support the amendment if Buck agreed to include those listed “individuals affiliated with white nationalism.”

    Buck agreed, but he said the language should include “any type of supremacy.”

    “Let’s add Cosa Nostra to this,” Buck added.

    The amendment ultimately failed 11-21, but not before the top Republican on the panel, Rep. Doug Collins of Georgia, called out Democrats for their hypocrisy.
     
    Jarlaxle likes this.

Share This Page