Posted on 08/07/2019 9:34:01 PM PDT by familyop
LaPierre told Trump that endorsing tougher background checks--which the president has reportedly done in private since the February 2018 massacre in Parkland, Fla., that left 17 dead, would not be popular with his voter base...Trump told an audience in Dayton on Wednesday that there is an “appetite” for such checks...if Trump supports his bill that expands these checks — and red-flag laws...Republicans who otherwise would not support the legislation, would be covered politically by the president.
(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...
Trump probably listens to Ivanka more than Don Jr.
I think that’s short sighted BS. A lot of these shooters were on the radar of local LEO’s then ignored due to SJW concerns and other crap. The culture is so corrupted a Fed law won’t fix it. Hell that’s what messed it up. The government is not here too or gonna help. IMO
Trump is a great President.
Obama sucks.
Yet Obama was better with the 2a.
Darn!
State of mind background checks are likely to divide into two different categories — the genuinely mentally unstable young adults known to family and friends as potentially violent, and men involved in marital breakdowns with vindictive spouses. So any legislation should be carefully crafted to keep the second group out of the purview.
With all or most of these recent mass shootings involving mentally unstable young men (over two or three decades now), it appears that many lived with one or both parents, and that said parents (as well as siblings) would surely have been aware that (a) the perpetrators were obsessed with violent fantasies, and (b) that they had access to a weapon, in particular, they would have known (b) in the day or two leading up to the event. And that is where a legal mechanism is needed for said parent(s) to bring in law enforcement and neutralize the situation.
I see there being a valid legal responsibility involved in that, and perhaps legal sanctions could alter behavior of these family members who are naturally going to be inclined to look the other way and hope for the best.
At the same time, I see a danger of any poorly designed legislation becoming another weapon in the already unbalanced situation confronting men in marital breakdown situations. Perhaps a clause in the legislation that prohibits a warrant in any marital context where legally valid threatening type orders have not preceded, in other words, onus of proof on accuser.
“I think he might resort to violence” is not a high enough standard, there needs to be some pattern of actual behavior to support any intervention.
I am a firm believer that anti depressents or drugs such as ritlin are tied directly to this behavior as well and needs to be looked into!!!
If they are so dangerous you want to seize their guns why not commit them?
So you take their gun and they are now pissed and hop in the car and take out a dozen on the sidewalk. If suicidal, maybe they OD deliberately.
The red flag is a tyranny. There are other laws on the books to allow temporary commitment. Red flag focus on guns and not the person should be telling.
The guy in MD that was killed was animated over a political argument with family. Those that knew him best said he was always like that. The aunt that complained just disagreed with him and was “frightened”. Gary Willis.
"Red Flags" are mostly called in by anonymous persons, relatives, or "friends."
Those subject to the SWAT raids have their guns taken from them, and to hell with due process. They are guilty, and have to prove their innocence and competence against a system that has already taken violent, drastic action to deem them neither.
You may be a "nutcase." Post your home address.
And he's taken the bait.
Correct. I am amazed that some here do not see it.
Once "Red Flag" become codified nationally (and providing funding for ALL 50 states to enact "Red Flag" laws is what Trump is backing) - then the Left has the knife to the throat of everyone it wants to destroy.
It won't stop with "crazy" gun owners. It will expand: "White Supremacists", Christians, "Haters", those who hold "Dangerous Views", those who posted the "wrong" thing.
I have read some of the Left's postings. This is EXACTLY what they have in mind.
The Rats are lining-up their martyrs for Election Eve.
DJT was a Concealed Carry in NYC!! He’s not weak on the 2nd, but two mass killings in the same day rocked him!
And we are reaping the whirlwind of letting GOD and His SON, Jesus, being kicked out of our country!!P>Next time the ANTI CHRISTIAN ACLU sues to take a cross off of something, WE ALL NEED TO PUT SOME MONEY IN TO STOP IT!
IF libbies could stop the carnage in Chiraq we could begin to have a conversation.
It's the perfect lab to try out all of their ideas.
Oh, wait.....those ideas have failed.
Even if every gun is confiscated....the bad guys are going to find a way to get a gun....that's why they're the bad guys.
A socialist president that might actually get resistance from the RINOs in congress. Trump’s RINOs will fight him when it’s good for the country and join him when it’s bad.
Really? It sounds like you’ve bought into the idea that the gun is the problem not the person.
If they’re dangerous lock them up. That would be the law we need.
You are so right. We have seen so much due process lately. IRS targetting didn’t happen because there is no abuse of power.
Loretta blood in the streets lynch, Epstein, hillary and her immunity staff and all the others had due process applied, and we can trust our government to do the same.
Just like our founders trusted them
momincombatboots wrote:
“You are so right. We have seen so much due process lately. IRS targetting didn’t happen because there is no abuse of power.
Loretta blood in the streets lynch, Epstein, hillary and her immunity staff and all the others had due process applied, and we can trust our government to do the same.
Just like our founders trusted them”
????
Wayne will likely agree to whatever Trump asks in an effort to keep his ass out of jail.
I am going to go with the Limbaugh Theory that in the end Democrats will blow this up rather than cross the aisle and work with him, so it’s a no-risk strategy.
“The democrats have had that appetite for years. I have been impressed with trump as president, but I don’t trust him on the 2nd amendment.”
*
Yeh, I’m in the wait and see category. But, I think there will probably be some legislation passed. My guess it will the Red Flag law and maybe legislation to close the so called Gun Show Loophole.
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.