Red Flag laws ... some basic understanding:

[72sofsme]

Here is a very good clip on what they are and how they can impact any citizen of this country ...

Tucker Carlson: Red flag laws will not end mass shootings but will end due process

Tucker Carlson reveals the negative impact red flag laws would have on American gun owners as lawmakers work toward gun control on "Tucker Carlson Tonight."

www.foxnews.com

 

[WRM]

It'll be interesting to see how badly this one gets abused.


Per Polk County Sherriff:

Others have made threats that may not rise to an arrest, or they are charged with a crime that won't result in a loss of gun charges. The risk protection orders, he said, allows law enforcement to focus on prevention instead of reacting to an active shooter when "it's too late."

Polk has issued more risk protection orders than any other county in the state.

Sure, the attached report cites some extreme cases, which are concerning. But this is leaning hard to "Minority Report"--predicting and stopping crime BEFORE it occurs by interdicting the "guilty" party.

Florida's red flag law, championed by Republicans, is taking guns from thousands of people | CNN Politics

Twice a week from her courtroom, Florida 13th Circuit Court Judge Denise Pomponio decides who in Hillsborough County can no longer be trusted with a gun.

www.cnn.com

 

[FLT]

The Clinton news network isn’t a unbiased source .Have they ever air a pro gun point of view?

 

[WRM]

The Clinton news network isn’t a unbiased source .Have they ever air a pro gun point of view?

Did you read it? The point here is NOT "a pro gun point of view". That's already out the window. The entire issue now is anti gun. The article is a good report, for what it is. I feel you have to read what the "left" is saying in order to try and wrap your head around the scope of these problems/issues. Or don't.

And, guess what, every source has a bias.

I also like Communist News Network better.

 

[IronBeard]

The age old question: Constitutional Oath, or pay and benefits?

 

[Carl]

Yeah I guess we are officially at the Thoughtcrime stage. Don’t forget that Trump was also in favor of the red flag bs and claimed that he “likes to take the guns first”.

 

[BluesBrother]

It's past time for 2A advocates to give up nothing. We did nothing wrong. In fact we did everything right. We shared our most private and personal information with a stranger, a government that is not serving us. In every mass shooting the system failed. I didn't fail. You didn't fail. We did and are doing our part. People in the system who's job and responsibility it is to uphold and administer the system and laws that are in place need to be accountable for their inaction not me, not you. Why in the world would we accept a flogging and give up any part of a right granted to us by GOD not man? gavin newsom in a speech on May 24 pointed to the fact that 8 out of the last 10 resent mass shootings took place in red states. What newsome failed to point out was that all, all of the recent mass shootings he speaks of took place in "gun free" zones, hospitals, churches, schools, theaters, subways. After newsome failed California as governor and narrowly avoided a recall he wants to run for president. The system self perpetuates the incompetent and least effective among us.

 

[FLT]

Just think, if trump and biden teamed up they could alienate the entire voting population of the united states. Just saying————-

 

[Carl]

Just think, if trump and biden teamed up they could alienate the entire voting population of the united states. Just saying————-

Imagine that!

 

[RickG]

The purpose of Red Flag Laws is:

a) to intimidate the Left's political opponents away from public speech lest they draw attention to themselves for red flag raids.
Arguably this is likely the primary reason.
How many people on this board already take care to minimize doxing? This makes us less effective at organizing.
How many folks hold back with speech? This makes us less effective at messaging.
Now image that times ten.. this is what red flag laws are intended to accomplish for team Tyranny
b) to motivate their political base by giving them a sense of empowerment to terrorize their fellow citizens.
c) And being as rsiky as SWAT raids are to the target, for those times when Red Flags laws DO result in the murder of a citizen by LEOs they can point to it and say "See we told you he was dangerous. That means these Red Flag laws work!"

 

[FLT]

The temptation to abuse this law , should be enough to prevent it from being passed. Park in front of a disgruntled neighbors drive way, she calls 911 and says you have guns and she’s in fear for her life. No due process, and you are out thousands of dollars in attorneys fees just to get your property returned to you. Karen will have a fornicating field day. Karen will drop a dime on anyone that irritates her in anyway.

 

[Duckyou]

I’m as pro gun as they come and I would have used “red flag laws” when a family member wanted (and threatened in writing and verbally) to kill me and my kids - on multiple occasions.

 

[IronBeard]

Yeah I guess we are officially at the Thoughtcrime stage. Don’t forget that Trump was also in favor of the red flag bs and claimed that he “likes to take the guns first”.

Trump: ‘Take the guns first, go through due process second’

President Trump on Wednesday voiced support for confiscating guns from certain individuals deemed to be dangerous, even if it violates due process rights. “I like taking the guns early, like in thi…

thehill.com

 

[IronBeard]

It's past time for 2A advocates to give up nothing. We did nothing wrong. In fact we did everything right. We shared our most private and personal information with a stranger, a government that is not serving us. In every mass shooting the system failed. I didn't fail. You didn't fail. We did and are doing our part. People in the system who's job and responsibility it is to uphold and administer the system and laws that are in place need to be accountable for their inaction not me, not you. Why in the world would we accept a flogging and give up any part of a right granted to us by GOD not man? gavin newsom in a speech on May 24 pointed to the fact that 8 out of the last 10 resent mass shootings took place in red states. What newsome failed to point out was that all, all of the recent mass shootings he speaks of took place in "gun free" zones, hospitals, churches, schools, theaters, subways. After newsome failed California as governor and narrowly avoided a recall he wants to run for president. The system self perpetuates the incompetent and least effective among us.


View attachment 170605

I for one will not negotiate, so don't want to hear any of it. It ends here. I will particpate in the repeal of infringements. I will have nothing to do with advancing more infringements on those who have done NOTHING wrong.

 

[IronBeard]

The temptation to abuse this law , should be enough to prevent it from being passed. Park in front of a disgruntled neighbors drive way, she calls 911 and says you have guns and she’s in fear for her life. No due process, and you are out thousands of dollars in attorneys fees just to get your property returned to you. Karen will have a fornicating field day. Karen will drop a dime on anyone that irritates her in anyway.

I get what you are saying, but it has nothing to do with temptation. Unless you mean the temptation for enforcing agents to conduct themselves in an unconstitutional manner?

Broadly, these laws are written to allow law enforcement to make a snap decision and confiscate firearms, all in the name of "safety." Yes, some states may require a court order prior to confication. I also believe there exceptions written into the laws to allow "the guy on the scene" to "do the right thing," without a court order, and there go your arms.

Haven't looked at it in a while, but I believe FL's red-flag provision also had a "for any other reason." line in there somewhere. Maybe that was just in the draft and never made it. Don't know, and there is another problem in itself, IMO. Those who know the law, feel free to correct.

Simply, the "laws" are written to allow confiscation prior to due process. Thanks trump. After that, it is a civil matter. Why does that matter, because if it were criminal matter "the system" would be obligated to ensure you were fairly and legally represented. In a civil matter, it's all on you and your lawyer, if you can afford one. You PAY, and use YOUR TIME, to petition the court in an effort to convince them you are worthy of getting your property back.

Just how much are your firearms worth? Yeah, that's what they are counting on. And even if you "win" there is no penalty built in for wrongful confiscation. Just, OK, you can have 'em back, maybe. This is right out of the playbooks of some of the worst regimes in history, but the children...

 

[M60Gunner]

Four Troublesome Provisions in the Senate Gun Bill - and a 'Be on the Lookout' Warning

Take it from a Californian... this isn't our first rodeo.

redstate.com

 

[Longtooth]

 

[Rockola2004]

I’m as pro gun as they come and I would have used “red flag laws” when a family member wanted (and threatened in writing and verbally) to kill me and my kids - on multiple occasions.

Yeah but I’m pretty sure it was already illegal to make those kinds of threats - before red flag laws.

 

[DAS HUGH!]

Florida already had laws in place that can fix all this and didn't even touch on guns and politics. It's called the Bakers act. And I wished every state had a similar law. I fought for years to get my ex help before she killed herself right in front of me. But in Alabama you can't do crap unless you're still married or an immediate relative. And even then it's a huge hassle and it never happens. All a person has to do in Florida is call the police and they'll take them away if they're a threat to themselves or others and force them to get help. The "red flag" laws only take guns away and is just a political tool that fixes nothing. A dangerous person can still get guns or whatever else they choose in 1000 different ways. This law does nothing to actually "help" a person in need either. I'm pro gun as it gets. But some folks need to be locked up for their own good and the safety of others. But for their own good also. And only if they're actually mental. Plus this process don't leave a criminal paper trail either. No arrest records etc. It's one of the few laws I agree with that I think are actually meant tor a person's own good. It's harder to abuse also because if the cops show up and all is fine they just leave. Red flag laws to appear as if once cops are called they "must" act. I think a law like this is some sort of common ground many can agree with tho

Sent from my SM-G988U using Tapatalk

 

[BluesBrother]

Red Flag law a person is guilty until they can prove at their own expense they are not. In california if police are called to a domestic dispute someone is leaving or going to jail. The police as judge, jury, and executioner will determine that at the scene. Do they get it right 100% of the time?