Posted on 08/11/2019 7:19:55 PM PDT by SanchoP
“Someone needs to ask Rep Crenshaw if Red Flag laws would make it less likely that fellow vets would seek help for mental health issues.”
I concluded about 20 years ago that NO ONE in my family, particularly my children would EVER see a shrink, and no one has...given that it would likely haunt them the rest of their lives (the writing was on the wall, even back then)
And that approach is fine for me and my family - I’ve never been in combat, so I admit that I have no clue as to what people coming home go through and how much help they really do need.
...and like you say, now they won’t get it, and that totally sucks.
If a mental health psychologist or psychiatrist says the person needs to be committed to a facility and a judge orders that, then the person would be in a facility and then would not be able to access their firearms.
Then if the psychologist or psychiatrist says the person has been treated and is no longer a threat to himself/herself or to others, then the firearms do not need to be removed.
So, there is no need for taking those weapons. Taking them would violate the 2A.
Bump
Due process is the government bringing a taxpayer paid expert to court to tell a judge why you should not be allowed to possess a firearm. Due process requires you to hire an attorney and their own expert to try to impeach the government’s expert so you can keep your firearms. A person in this position is essentially being prosecuted for a crime he did not commit.
What they NEED to be investigating are YOUNG MEN prescribed anti psychotic and anti depressant drugs these drugs are having an effect on YOUNG MEN and their thought process!!! ALL of these shooters have been YOUNG MEN (except San Bernadino) on these prescriptions!!! I think that the combination of these drugs and violent video games are depleting the empathy in these YOUNG MEN!!! In the 70’s and 80’s there were firearms everywhere AND we had archery and fire arms in school YET no problems!!! Teachers AND parents are so easily putting hyper active kids on meds it is sickening!!!
Legal gay marriage did not make them happy. They sued bakers and photographers and now Warren wants reparations for deductions that were missed. Abortion was not enough. They claim rights to kill a born alive baby. And then there is FISA which, like other laws applies selectively. To think this is the end point would be foolish. It would be only a start and they will never accept a win. They push harder and harder every time.
The best way to kill this law is to include lots of delicious “poison pills” in it. For example:
1) If convicted of a felony or misdemeanor crime while demonstrating while wearing a mask, you would be subject to having your guns confiscated.
2) Membership in an organization that advocates violence against United States government elected officials, or advocating such violence on a public forum.
3) Offering support and or encouragement to international organizations or individuals that advocate violence against Americans.
3) Membership in a BDS organization directed at Israel.
4) Offering sanctuary or employment to foreign nationals unlawfully residing in the United States.
“If a guy participates in an armed robbery, are you against taking his weapons away?”
In the thinking world, that is a felony, and the convict would lose his right to posees a firearm.
Marco Rubio with an eye patch.
New Study
People who own guns that _________ are more likely to commit gun related crimes.
Wait and see, but at the worst, it won’t hurt long.
The point of this push is to prevent Trump from getting reelected. Establishment GOP is spreading the “wisdom” that Trump just has to do something because of THE WOMENZ, but it knows darn well that if he supports any anti-gun legislation, he will lose a lot of pro-gun support and won’t be reelected in 2020. That, of course, is exactly what they want. They’ve hated him from day one and would prefer a Democrat in office. Any claims otherwise are just cover.
This do something disease has to be cured.
Perfect GOPer schlub. Shut up, Crenshaw.
If capitulating to the left is a position of strength, we need to fight from a position of weakness.
Background checks should be done away with. Background checks haven’t stopped any of the mass shootings and don’t appear to have done much to keep guns out of criminal hands. Every legal gun purchaser at a licensed dealer has to undergo a background check but that doesn’t seem to lessen the number of people being shot in liberal hell holes like Baltimore, Detroit, Chicago, etc. Background checks are just an inconvenience to discourage law abiding people. You can tell that is the case because the feds prosecute way less than 10% of the prohibited criminals who try to buy guns and are denied.
I really like Crenshaw but he has been in Congress long enough to know the road to where we are now was paved with good intentions. If he could write the perfect law, and get it passed the socialists would figure out a way to pervert it to their agenda. He has had them play games with other issues so he should be well aware of that.
With the shootings the focus has to be on the shooter in order to make a difference. The fact is if a person has mental issues that make it unsafe for them to have a firearm that person should not have access to any weapons. No knives, rocks, vehicles, baseball bats, crowbars, explosives, ETC. An infinite number of deadly weapons are out there so taking their firearms does not solve the real problem. If a person is indeed an imminent danger to others, that person needs to be detained either in a jail cell or mental hospital.
Theoretically the law does allow for people who are considered a danger to themselves or others to be detained at least for mental evaluation. The problem is in the real world there is so much concern about Constitutional Rights and due process for the mentally ill it really is not always possible to lock someone up for being a danger- and keep them locked up. Family and/or law enforcement have a difficult time getting mentally ill people detained against their will, just getting them to the door is hard enough with all the hoops but that door is a revolving door. With drugs, and counseling most people calm down pretty quickly and at that point many are no longer considered a danger to themselves and/or others and are regularly allowed to sign themselves out! Often this happens and no serious evaluation of their mental health has even been done.
It is too bad people don’t worry about the Constitutional Rights and due process of owners of firearms as much as they worry about that concerning the mentally ill.
As much as I hate to say it and I know there were a lot of issues with locking up large numbers of mentally ill in the past...I do think we are going to have to do that again.
I think to solve these issues we will have to lock up the seriously mentally ill, and we also need to arm up in large numbers to civilize this country again.
Don’t forget John F’n Kerry, USN.
Those people all need to be immediately incarcerated. When they are arrested they of course will be disarmed. If released on bail not having a firearm will be a condition of bail.
Where is the need for the red flag law?
The focus needs to be on the person, not the firearm. The person that is a danger needs to be locked up in jail or a mental hospital. There are an infinite number of things available to use as a deadly weapon; the person is the issue.
It’s not just red flag laws that the Left will abuse to disarm law-abiding Americans, but Crenshaw’s support for huge increases in our visa programs like H1-B that tick me off.
He’s in effect an open borders guy.
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.