Red Flag law discussion

[Vaquero]

I got nothing.
No ammo for the g-man.

Never.

 

[leVieux]

We must demand “due process” not be violated. That is a core of Constitutional safeguards and the basis of protecting everyone’s “CIVIL RIGHTS”, NOT JUST OF THOSE WHO HAVE ARMS 1

 

[easy rider]

We must demand “due process” not be violated. That is a core of Constitutional safeguards and the basis of protecting everyone’s “CIVIL RIGHTS”, NOT JUST OF THOSE WHO HAVE ARMS 1

Yes, but it's the arms of the people that guarantee that safeguard.

The image of the man with the boot on his head screaming "but my rights" and the answer from above him "What are you going to do about it", comes to mind.

I read a lot about the concentration camps (by definition) Australia set up for people with COVID, the reason they had those and not America was obvious. But if you think our government wouldn't have, I'd say you're naive.

 

[Axxe55]

Yes, but it's the arms of the people that guarantee that safeguard.

The image of the man with the boot on his head screaming "but my rights" and the answer from above him "What are you going to do about it", comes to mind.

I read a lot about the concentration camps (by definition) Australia set up for people with COVID, the reason they had those and not America was obvious. But if you think our government wouldn't have, I'd say you're naive.

Exactly! Mass disarmament of the citizens has never been about gun violence or securing safety for any group of people. Even "Red Flag Laws" have nothing to do with safety, but all in how to get around laws and rights to disarm people without having to observe "due process" in confiscating firearms from citizens.

 

[leVieux]

Yes, but it's the arms of the people that guarantee that safeguard.

The image of the man with the boot on his head screaming "but my rights" and the answer from above him "What are you going to do about it", comes to mind.

I read a lot about the concentration camps (by definition) Australia set up for people with COVID, the reason they had those and not America was obvious. But if you think our government wouldn't have, I'd say you're naive.

Sounds like you misunderstood me.

”From my cold dead hands !”

 

[kbaxter60]

I come back to that quaint phrase, ‘the best laid schemes o’mice and men gang aft a-gley.

Actions to quench a mob mentality to ‘do something’ ensure their thirst is never slaked. Because it will happen again.

Correct.
And when they fail to stop the next one, we will again ask: why don't they enforce the laws we already have ???

 

[Axxe55]

 

[popper]

Gun laws, hmm. Report today, human smuggler (felon US citizen) COULD get charged for gun possession. Could???? Maybe this is one of the problems. Just removing the gun and not convicting the perp??

 

[leVieux]

Gun laws, hmm. Report today, human smuggler (felon US citizen) COULD get charged for gun possession. Could???? Maybe this is one of the problems. Just removing the gun and not convicting the perp??

Our Son, LEO who acts as permanent State Liaison Officer to the ATF, told me that under Obama only 6 or 7 “felon-in-possession” cases were prosecuted nationwide in 8 years. Under Trump, EVERY one was prosecuted. The left just wants more and more laws for their biased “selective enforcement” schemes.

 

[motorcarman]

 

[Axxe55]

Correct.
And when they fail to stop the next one, we will again ask: why don't they enforce the laws we already have ???

Nope, the knee-jerk reaction is always that we need more laws, and especially laws that restrict law-abiding citizens, but never the criminals, or addressing the underlying root cause of the problem.

And it will happen again. It always happens again.

 

[easy rider]

Nope, the knee-jerk reaction is always that we need more laws, and especially laws that restrict law-abiding citizens, but never the criminals, or addressing the underlying root cause of the problem.

And it will happen again. It always happens again.

Death by a thousand cuts.

 

[Axxe55]

Death by a thousand cuts.

Sad, but true.

It's why we have over 22K worth of gun laws, with I'd guess a majority are never enforced.

 

[easy rider]

Every time I hear someone say it's a compromise I cringe. This is not a compromise, it's pleading guilty for a lesser sentence to a crime you didn't commit.

 

[Axxe55]

Every time I hear someone say it's a compromise I cringe. This is not a compromise, it's pleading guilty for a lesser sentence to a crime you didn't commit.

I think the word, "compromise" is used to make it more easy for us to accept.

A true compromise is when all parties meet and come to solutions that benefit all parties involved. With our gun rights and these so-called "compromises", law-abiding gun owners always get the short end of the deal, and we never get anything of substance in return. Never have. Never will.

 

[leVieux]

Every time I hear someone say it's a compromise I cringe. This is not a compromise, it's pleading guilty for a lesser sentence to a crime you didn't commit.

“Compromises” with the DEVIL only go in one direction; TO Hell !

 

[Axxe55]

 

[DougC]

Cornyn’s Folly: Garland DOJ Using BSCA Federal Funds to ‘Strong-Arm’ States Into Enacting Red Flag Laws​

In 2022, Congress passed, and President Biden signed, the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act in response to mass shootings in Buffalo, New York, and Uvalde, Texas, that left dozens dead. The law incentivizes states to pass extreme risk protection laws, also called “red flag” laws, that allow members of the public and law enforcement to petition courts for a civil order to temporarily suspend a person’s access to firearms for fear that person might do violence....But Sen. Roger Marshall, R-Kan., and Rep. Alex Mooney, R-W.Va., say in a letter to Attorney General Merrick Garland that the Justice Department has handed federal funds to states that did not meet the minimum due process criteria.

And what possibly could go wrong, Senator Cornyn? Further details in this Truth about Guns blog.

 

[leVieux]

Cornyn’s Folly: Garland DOJ Using BSCA Federal Funds to ‘Strong-Arm’ States Into Enacting Red Flag Laws​

In 2022, Congress passed, and President Biden signed, the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act in response to mass shootings in Buffalo, New York, and Uvalde, Texas, that left dozens dead. The law incentivizes states to pass extreme risk protection laws, also called “red flag” laws, that allow members of the public and law enforcement to petition courts for a civil order to temporarily suspend a person’s access to firearms for fear that person might do violence....But Sen. Roger Marshall, R-Kan., and Rep. Alex Mooney, R-W.Va., say in a letter to Attorney General Merrick Garland that the Justice Department has handed federal funds to states that did not meet the minimum due process criteria.

And what possibly could go wrong, Senator Cornyn? Further details in this Truth about Guns blog.

<>

John Cornyn was a very popular S E Texas Judge before becoming a Senator, so he should have the concept of “due process” and other Constitutional protections down pat.

<>

 

[DougC]

Same info in case you want to watch a video explanation.

Washington Gun Law President, William Kirk, discusses a recent letter sent from two member of Congress to the Department of Justice as it relates to the implementation of the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act. This piece of legislation was in response to the mass shooting in Buffalo, NY and Uvalde, Tx. Initially, this bill was designed to help fund red flag laws in states that did not have them. However, after significant push back from members of Congress, DOJ has supposedly agreed to demand certain due process protections. But, as it turns out, and to no one's surprise, it appears that the DOJ was up to no good with your tax dollars.