Red Flag

Discussion in 'Politics | Firearms | Religion' started by Grintch, Aug 22, 2019.

  1. Grintch

    Grintch Well-Known Member

    Vehicle(s):
    2015 GT PP
    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2014
    Location:
    Hunstville
    Posts:
    1,326
    Likes Received:
    430
    0   0   0
    For me it is a red flag to take an oath to support and defend the constitution, and then proceed to attack and undermine the constitution.

    The various red flag laws & proposals may be the worst example of this.

    1st amendment - "Congress shall make no law... abridging the freedom of speech...". But if you say the wrong thing, we break down your door and seize your property.

    2nd amendment - "... the right to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed." Unless you say the wrong thing, and we don't like you.

    4th amendment -" The right of the people to be secure in their person's, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated... ". How do you justify searching for and sizing legally owned guns? Well they MIGHT do something bad with them. Can we take guns from the Police because they MIGHT kill a black person with it?

    5th amendment -"... nor shall any person... be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law..." Unless it's a gun (and the associated liberty to keep and bear it), and anyone makes any sort of unsubstantiated accusation against you.


    Violating 4 of the 10 amendments of the bill of RIGHTS, a new record for a single bill ?

    Better not piss off your spouse, ex, girl/boy friend, or neighbor or they can screw you over big time by just saying you threatened to kill someone (that slow driver in the fast lane we all threaten to kill).

    The are many things that will disqualify you from ever owning or possessing a gun again. All the government has to do is do their jobs and prove those cases and the problem is solved without taking a crap on the Constitution and American legal principles.
     
    Hack, Timeless and Stage_3 like this.
  2. rebellovw

    rebellovw Well-Known Member

    Vehicle(s):
    2018 Mustang GT Premium PP
    Joined:
    May 23, 2018
    Location:
    Florida
    Posts:
    481
    Likes Received:
    318
    0   0   0
    Are you writing this because the Police arrested the guy at the Long Beach Marriott that threatened to shoot and kill people - didn't' do it - but had guns etc taken and house broken into?

    I'm absolutely OK with that.
     
  3. OP
    OP
    Grintch

    Grintch Well-Known Member

    Vehicle(s):
    2015 GT PP
    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2014
    Location:
    Hunstville
    Posts:
    1,326
    Likes Received:
    430
    0   0   0
    No, more the whole anti gun bandwagon that now features red flag confiscation as one of the top features.

    The key words in that news story was "allegedly". I allegedly said something, or had something is not good probable cause.

    But this guy was held for possessing assault rifles (illegal in California). Charge and convict him, and bam, proper basis for seizing all his guns. Even better, enforce the existing law and put him away for a good long while.

    Or do you want to replace the inoccent until proven guilty standard in American justice with guilty until proven innocent? We already have that unconstitutional mistake with asset forfeiture policies.

    Many of the so many red flags we hear about with mass shooters were actual crimes, that the police/courts never bothered to charge & prosecute them for. It they did thier job properly, many would already have been in jail.
     
  4. rebellovw

    rebellovw Well-Known Member

    Vehicle(s):
    2018 Mustang GT Premium PP
    Joined:
    May 23, 2018
    Location:
    Florida
    Posts:
    481
    Likes Received:
    318
    0   0   0
    I want to see more done with "assault rifles" along with background checks and flagging individuals - understanding many have a problem with the definition of assault rifle (my def: any rapid fire, multi round rifle used in a previous mass shooting) - along with more strict policies on how people can obtain guns - there are some damn nut jobs - terrible people that have no business legally getting a gun. Slippery slope or not - if, for example, a kid in school - stabs someone - they should never ever be allowed in their life to buy a gun - sorry no exception - kid blew it.

    Things have to change.

    Your comment:

    "But this guy was held for possessing assault rifles (illegal in California). Charge and convict him, and bam, proper basis for seizing all his guns. Even better, enforce the existing law and put him away for a good long while."

    Agreed 100%.

    I don't believe everyone should be entitled to have guns - you do something stupid - darn - you lost your chance - you are psychotic- pretty easy to determine in school - my wife a spec ed teacher - saw many sociopaths - kids that would be happy one moment then threaten to kill a teacher the next, rape other kids - or physically assault a teacher....


    Your other comment:

    "Or do you want to replace the inoccent until proven guilty standard in American justice with guilty until proven innocent? We already have that unconstitutional mistake with asset forfeiture policies."

    Of course not. And Asset seizures - are absolute bullshit.
     
    1blkpny likes this.
  5. OP
    OP
    Grintch

    Grintch Well-Known Member

    Vehicle(s):
    2015 GT PP
    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2014
    Location:
    Hunstville
    Posts:
    1,326
    Likes Received:
    430
    0   0   0
    We have background checks. And even when the government determines you lied on the form, a felony, they prosecute less than 1% of them. As long as that is the standard, no change that they make to background checks will make much difference.
     
  6. rebellovw

    rebellovw Well-Known Member

    Vehicle(s):
    2018 Mustang GT Premium PP
    Joined:
    May 23, 2018
    Location:
    Florida
    Posts:
    481
    Likes Received:
    318
    0   0   0
    As you point out current background checks are not working - and with that something has to change. And goodbye to assault rifles and their manufacture.


    I myself have no fear of stricter laws as I know I'd be able to get a gun if I needed one being a law abiding and high tax paying individual.
     
    1blkpny likes this.
  7. rebellovw

    rebellovw Well-Known Member

    Vehicle(s):
    2018 Mustang GT Premium PP
    Joined:
    May 23, 2018
    Location:
    Florida
    Posts:
    481
    Likes Received:
    318
    0   0   0
    I see now what you are referring to - I see a story regarding Ohio trying to pass this - from the article:

    "
    What DeWine has proposed
    One of DeWine's proposals was to establish a "safety protection order" that could be granted by a court to remove guns from individuals deemed an "imminent" risk to themselves or others because of a mental health issue, alcoholism, drug dependency or criminal history.

    Seventeen states and the District of Columbia have some sort of "red flag" or "extreme risk" law on the books, but they differ in who is eligible, how protective orders are granted and how they are enforced. President Donald Trump has said he supports such laws, and U.S. Senate Republicans plan to discuss a red flag bill in the coming months."

    I agree with this "somewhat" - I'm sure there is more to this which could be troubling - but it seems very common sense to me - to a point. The part that is unsettling is: alcoholism, drug dependency - something like that would only be known about if someone was cited. So that is a bit extreme - it should be alcoholism, drug dependency felony citation in the act of a violent crime. Some average Joe that goes to AA to quite drinking should have no problem getting a firearm as long as they haven't committed any crimes.

    I agree - it is a bit troubling - but like I said - there are known bad people out there - and they shouldn't have any guns or access to buy guns legally - and they should be flagged.
     
  8. OP
    OP
    Grintch

    Grintch Well-Known Member

    Vehicle(s):
    2015 GT PP
    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2014
    Location:
    Hunstville
    Posts:
    1,326
    Likes Received:
    430
    0   0   0
    Yes because if you don't enforce the current laws changing them is the solution.

    And the assault rifle ban worked so well before, and is working in Californina, Connecticut, etc. Almost as well as the gun free zones work.
     
    Timeless likes this.
  9. rebellovw

    rebellovw Well-Known Member

    Vehicle(s):
    2018 Mustang GT Premium PP
    Joined:
    May 23, 2018
    Location:
    Florida
    Posts:
    481
    Likes Received:
    318
    0   0   0
    #9 rebellovw, Aug 22, 2019
    Last edited: Aug 22, 2019
    "Yes because if you don't enforce the current laws changing them is the solution." I never said that - so don't throw that crap at me.

    There is no legit reason for civilians to have those guns - so just eliminate them. Two news sources I quickly found (NY Times one) site that most of the mass shootings - the guns were legally obtained - so there's that.

    I'm not sure why folks get so bent out of shape and have a legit need for these guns. And that ban could have worked - it certainly wasn't in place with the latest rounds of mass shootings.

    Typical argument response - we want our guns (nothing works so do nothing) - but we have no solutions for idiots getting their hands on them.

    Also - there isn't enough data to determine how well that ban worked - and if anything - just shows the first time something is implemented - it is never the best version - weapons ban version N (changed ongoing as loopholes found/bugs found) - would likely have been much more successful - especially with all the years that have gone by.

    Partisanship prevents improvement (there seems to be no learning from mistakes in government) - it simply faults a first iteration "anything" and simply spins it and attempts to kill it.

    I'm out of this thread as I was trying to have a civil conversation - but the OP had to get derisive.
     
    1blkpny likes this.
  10. Interceptor

    Interceptor Daily Driver

    Vehicle(s):
    2017 Eco boost manual 202A
    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2018
    Location:
    Low country South Carolina
    Posts:
    515
    Likes Received:
    228
    0   0   0
    These auguments are useless from both sides. Most older Americans have a big distrust of our government , most younger Americans look to the government to save them from everything.
    I fall into not trusting our government. I know that this country will be a socialist country (aka Democratic socialist government) in the future depending on election results. I also know Hillary Clinton signed the United Nations bill that among other socialist regulations states no American citizen can own a gun. Next step is ok vote from Senate.
    So I know this gun control talk is a deception. The Democratic socialist party wants no one to have a gun. When they move from socialism to communist they want no resistance.
    Please before either one youof you call me a nut in your educated way do the research.
    That is what gun control is. Controlling guns.
    If they were really worried about loose guns why not do something about the worst offenders first? Criminals?
     
    Strokerswild and Stage_3 like this.
  11. Timeless

    Timeless Well-Known Member

    Vehicle(s):
    2019 Mustang GT / CS
    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2014
    Location:
    South Carolina
    Posts:
    868
    Likes Received:
    345
    0   0   0
    Maybe I missed it but where was the op so derisive? He presented another side that you do not agree with. Safespace?
     
  12. vernonator

    vernonator Well-Known Member

    First Name:
    Mark
    Vehicle(s):
    2016 Mustang GT w/PP - Race Red
    Joined:
    Mar 21, 2016
    Location:
    Des Moines, IA
    Posts:
    465
    Likes Received:
    118
    0   0   0
    Who gets to decide who is "bad"? You? Me? The Gov't?....the 2nd Amd does not require a "legit need for these guns". You have a God given right to defend yourself from both criminals AND an oppressive government - THAT is what the 2nd is about, not hunting, not target shooting, but defense against a Gov't that becomes too powerful and oppressive. Look at what the founders had just done - rebelled against a Tyrannical Gov't that arbitrarily seized life and property including privately held MILITARY weapons (remember the "British are coming" were marching to seize rifles AND cannon from the colonists). Look at Venezuela - less than 10yrs ago they outlawed ALL private ownership of firearms and went out and grabbed them. Now their military is gunning them down in the streets.....and yes it CAN happen here.
     
  13. OP
    OP
    Grintch

    Grintch Well-Known Member

    Vehicle(s):
    2015 GT PP
    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2014
    Location:
    Hunstville
    Posts:
    1,326
    Likes Received:
    430
    0   0   0
    Hard to show the full story in with the formun automatically parsing the quotes to just the last one. So I will have to summarize:

    You - we need background checks
    Me - we have background checks, and the government only goes after people who violate the law 1% of the time.
    You - we need better background checks (presumably Universal Background Checks per the current gun banners playbook)
    Me - If you don't enforce the law more than 1% of the time, changing (expanding?) the law won't make much difference.

    I find in funny that I started the thread with a rant on how red flag laws/proposals are unconstitutional, but despite a couple of people defending them, no one seems to dispute that they are unconstitutional. And no government that doesn't even follow thier highest laws can be trusted to have a monopoly on force.
     
    Hack likes this.
  14. OP
    OP
    Grintch

    Grintch Well-Known Member

    Vehicle(s):
    2015 GT PP
    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2014
    Location:
    Hunstville
    Posts:
    1,326
    Likes Received:
    430
    0   0   0
    As for Assault Rifles, we had 10 years of data at the federal level. And two different government studies found it didn't do much, which is why the law was allowed to expire .

    California and Connecticut both had state assault weapon bans in place when a mass shooter used an "assault weapon" in a mass shooting in their state (California has had multiple incidents, but I am not sure how long the ban has been in place - definitely was in place for the most recent event) . So obviously they didn't stop them.

    According to FBI Uniform Crime Report data (not NRA data or We Hate Guns Inc data), you are almost twice as likley to be killed with "hands, fists, feet, etc." as by a rifle of any type, and more than 4 times more likely to be killed with a "knife or cutting instrument". So shall we ban hands and feet? Maybe I should make a red flag report that you have an arsenal of knives in your kitchen.

    As for the "massive public health issue" of "assault weapons", the CDC data shows that is total BS.
    Compared to the FBI reported murder with rifles (assault and otherwise) rate,
    Heart disease 1600x
    Drugs 103x
    Suicide 88x
    Poison (not the band) 87x
    Cars (including the Mustang) 73x
    Medical errors 67x (a John's Hopkins study suggests this could be as high as 500x)
    Falls 66x


    Damn gravity, we need to ban it, given it is 66 times more likely to kill you than a rifle.
     
    Timeless likes this.
  15. cosmo

    cosmo Well-Known Member

    Vehicle(s):
    2005 Mustang GT
    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2014
    Location:
    Michigan
    Posts:
    1,719
    Likes Received:
    718
    0   0   0
    There's a marked difference between speaking about how much you dislike the slow guy in the left lane versus having a history of documented issues. Like having a list of who you'd like to rape and/or kill in your graduating class at high school like the kid in Dayton. Or having a record of domestic abuse. Are you saying he should have had no problem purchasing a weapon? What happened to consequences for your actions? If you do something violent or have violent tendencies, you don't get guns.

    Murders will never go to 0, gun deaths will never go to 0, assault rifle deaths will never go to 0, but to be defeatist and not even try to improve the situation is cowardice. There is a problem in America with gun violence. Much of it involves cities like Baltimore or Chicago (which is its own discussion), but there are many problems elsewhere as well that should be looked at and improved.
     
    1blkpny likes this.
  16. HoosierDaddy

    HoosierDaddy Well-Known Member

    Vehicle(s):
    2016 GT Premium PP and a few others
    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2016
    Location:
    Winchestertonfieldville (ok, Scottsdale), AZ
    Posts:
    4,513
    Likes Received:
    2,022
    Rating:
    100%
    2   0   0
    Already happened. Police shot a homeowner who answered the door with firearm in hand at 0 dark 30. IIRC news report said the police were there because of a false red flag report by an angry relative.
     
  17. HoosierDaddy

    HoosierDaddy Well-Known Member

    Vehicle(s):
    2016 GT Premium PP and a few others
    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2016
    Location:
    Winchestertonfieldville (ok, Scottsdale), AZ
    Posts:
    4,513
    Likes Received:
    2,022
    Rating:
    100%
    2   0   0
    Doesn't make sense. Even if you take someone's guns, there are other guns within short walking distance or are we to believe someone who would shoot up a school/mall/etc. wouldn't break a neighbor's window to "borrow" their guns (see video below).

    And I'm pretty sure there is not a part of the brain that causes someone to kill or maim but only with a gun.

    If someone is dangerous enough to not have a gun, they are dangerous enough to not be running around loose where they can get another gun, or rent a big truck to mow down people, or make a pressure cooker bomb, etc, etc..

    A federal judge needs to have them committed.

     
  18. cosmo

    cosmo Well-Known Member

    Vehicle(s):
    2005 Mustang GT
    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2014
    Location:
    Michigan
    Posts:
    1,719
    Likes Received:
    718
    0   0   0
    So because other options are available, we should do nothing. Got it.

    On that note, we shouldn't ban abortion. Many options to do it, so why even try?
     
  19. HoosierDaddy

    HoosierDaddy Well-Known Member

    Vehicle(s):
    2016 GT Premium PP and a few others
    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2016
    Location:
    Winchestertonfieldville (ok, Scottsdale), AZ
    Posts:
    4,513
    Likes Received:
    2,022
    Rating:
    100%
    2   0   0
    No, As I said, we should hospitalize people who are psychotic. Taking a gun doesn't stop a psychotic person from mass killing. But taking a gun is an almost pointless thing that people who haven't thought things thru might buy into. Committing people who are psychotic is a harder sell. All part of the "just do something that enough people might support despite it being ineffective rather than something that will help but would take precious legislative time away from banning straws or renaming criminals "Justice involved persons."
     
  20. cosmo

    cosmo Well-Known Member

    Vehicle(s):
    2005 Mustang GT
    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2014
    Location:
    Michigan
    Posts:
    1,719
    Likes Received:
    718
    0   0   0
    Agreed, I fully advocate everyone to speak to a therapist, whether they believe they have an issue or not. More people should, and the stigma of talking to a therapist is slowly being whittled away.

    Doesn't mean this shouldn't be worked from both avenues.
     
Loading...

Share This Page