Skip to comments.Trump: 'Take the guns first, go through due process second'
Posted on 02/28/2018 2:10:16 PM PST by RevelationDavidEdited on 02/28/2018 2:25:41 PM PST by Admin Moderator. [history]
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 this crazy mans case that just took place in Florida ... to go to court would have taken a long time, Trump said at a meeting with lawmakers on school safety and gun violence.
Take the guns first, go through due process second, Trump said.
Again unnamed sources putting out supposed words of Trump
Lordy this is tiring
States that report mental health records to the FBIs National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS), especially with respect to people prohibited from possessing guns for mental health reasons:
Well, opposition to Communism was considered a mental illness. Cross the Atlantic, or Pacific, how many times have you had the sanity of Trump supporters and the President questioned. Think there aren't dems who'd love to find a way to confiscate weapons from conservatives. To protect the gays. Or protect abortion. No, we're not close to that, but the mindset is here.
Two cases of mentally ill people not having guns with which I am familiar.
In the 1950`s certain gentleman was observed to being going a little nuts by his neighbors, relatives and the townsfolk. They complained that this guy was acting weird and threatening people as they walked by. The cops knew who he was and promptly came by and disarmed him. The fellow was sent to the state mental hospital for observation. They later deemed him totally crazy. The local townspeople said, “Thank God they got him put away before he killed someone as he was a danger to everyone here.” I knew this guy personally and I can say that good thing the cops got him before he really did some damage.
Another case I know well. A local fellow was shot by accident in a hunting accident, accidental discharge of another person`s rifle as the local fellow sat down next to it, bumped it and it discharged, wounding him in the stomach. He was rushed to the hospital, healed and was released. Soon thereafter he went completely nuts, threatening to kill an attorney, his relatives, and the hunters. He was promptly arrested, disarmed by the local police and thrown into jail overnight for observation. They let him out with the legal sentence that an FBI agent would be assigned to watch him wherever he went. He was forbidden to ever own guns again and never to set foot back into the state. It worked; he never returned and the local cops in another state watch him all the time and know exactly where he is all the time and tell his family in timely reports.
Arrest first, disarm him, get him off the streets, ask questions later. It saves lives.
This is how it was done 50 years ago.
Of course..he should never have gotten a gun to begin with..but he had no criminal history..but after 39 visits to his house and countless threats they should have taken his gun..so I Guess in a way Im making Trump’s argument for him arne’t I
Concurring bump...as long as we can all agree on what crazy means.
This right here is what people need to read - thanks CTDonath2. BTW I think it’s been a while since you’ve been around ? Good to reply to one of your posts again.
The police ... right now .. have the ability to take your guns and then make you go and get them back. You need to appear before judges and prove why you should have them back.
This happens now. And of course, all of my stories happened in CT and one in the Florida Panhandle. in FL my friend had a class 3 firearm and he forgot to comply in his yearly or 3 yearly or whatever. They came and took them. And others. His whole small collection it turned out. he had to appeal (Although not officially.. just before a court in a small room) to get them back.
In CT during routine traffic stops a cop will take your gun and tell you “Come down to the barracks and you can get it back”. Happens all the time in that backwards state. And that was before Sandy hook too.
All around the country your guns can be taken for many reasons. And they don’t need to submit any proof that you’ll do harm. They’ll take them and then kindly ask you to come and get them back. Which means asking. Or begging. Or whatever.
Donald Trump is a New Yorker. There are no conservatives in NYC and there are no pro-gun people there at all. Period. Don’t kid yourselves.
Nobody “seized” them because he was never put in the No-Buy list and got through a legal background check.
Had MULTIPLE people done their jobs - INCLUDING the asshat Broward sheriff, he never would would have gotten the rifle in the first place.
Trump is on very, very thin ice.
The NRA is on thin ICE. Trump is only trying to help them out. The NRA for all your chest thumping, is going to have a lot less money in 3 months than they do now. They are going to help far fewer politicians in the next election than they did in the last. And gun sales will be down even as the threat of gun laws come into play. Wise up and act responsible before you do lose us the rights to carry. Maybe with a new law written by republicans you can get a few things in there that we want. Like the ability to carry across state lines. If dems take congress in 6 moths there will be laws written by dems coming at Trump every week. So you should reconsider how strong you think your position is. Because its getting worse by the moment. And Trump can save it.
All states do. Interesting they're referred to as Baker hearings, after the Florida law. Whole country uses the Florida term, no one in Broward apparently heard of it.
Sure Trump. In a third world country.
You can’t pick and choose what part of the constitution and law you will follow.
This demonstrates a fundamental misunderstanding of the role of our government. Hasn’t Trump been quoted as correctly stating our rights are granted by God? How does he then think he can just willy-nilly deprive citizens of their RIGHT to arms and self defense?
Very unwise. VERY foolish. The precedent will be set and then enemies of the state will become elected and re-define who is dangerous. This type of ignorance was one of the reasons I was very hesitant at first to support Trump. He is fast losing my support.
Then we will see a 2nd revolutionary war.
Can you think of any other incidents perpetrated by a legal purchase by someone under 21? It's a straw man. Kids under 21 kill people almost daily in Chicago and other major cities. They aren't purchased legally. When that doesn't work, take the next step, recognize that handguns kill more than long arms, ban all semi automatics and confiscate what's out there.
“”Again unnamed sources putting out supposed words of Trump
Lordy this is tiring””
Not time time....go to the link..watch the video. President Trump does not just say it once....but twice.
Hope he walks it back...quickly.
I took heat for the following comment last year.
Nothing has happened to change my mind.
People who collect SSI for being mentally disabled
should not be allowed to own guns.
1. Either they’re scamming SSI or ...
2. They’re crazy.
Glad I kept reading this thread. You said that far better than I almost did.
The demodummies are going to love that, first step at overriding the 2nd Ameendment. Next thing we know, all gun owners will be considered crazy.
Wow, he is making Obama look like a centrist on guns.
Dear God, save us from this insane man! If I had known Trump was so weak on due process, if I had known he supported gun bans (which he LIED about), I certainly wouldn’t have voted for him. And I sure won’t vote for him in 2020.
Is he flipping out?
Maybe ‘chumming up’ the libturds.....
We wont agree if it becomes a federal issue. But at the local level, as in family and the local sheriff, it could be done and has been done. In my state a person who has a compete break down as in barking at the moon, literally, crazy gets decide if they should be committed to a psych hospital.
Should the cops be able to wear those guns with no due process. Absolutely yes.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.