I’m not buying it.
I wish the Poll would have identified the ages of those in the poll. You can bet the snowflakes were well represented.
No problem so great that government can’t make even worse.
What’s next, if you don’t cry and wail sufficiently when a Democrat Politician Dies, you will be hauled before The Red Flag Court of Justice?
I would imagine the ‘jackpot’ question of the pole went something like.
“Lets say your Uncle Jim got drunk, beat up his wife and kids, went to another relatives house and beat up the husband and wife and called to tell you he was on the way to deal with YOUR family”
WOULD YOU
A. Call Uncle Jim and try to reason with him?
B. Send Uncle Jim to his room for a time out?
C. Ignore the whole situation?
D. Hope for a system like the Red Flag Law so LEO could be called and ALL his guns confiscated so he is unable to come to your house and execute your family?”
...
Also notice these ‘Hate does not live here’ sprouting up on front lawns in the area.
I snicker and am tempted to knock on the door and ask their opinion of PDJT....if favorable, I will ask their opinion of BO.
I am fairly well certain I will get a HATE message flung at one or both, thereby negating and rendering useless the feel good sign.
The Hill is yet another Propaganda Wing of the soon to be Communist Party of America.
All we need is another hockey stick graph to prove it.
...support ‘red flag’ gun laws...
It’s the genius of Obama offering “hope and change”. A white guy that hates Hispanics can interpret it to mean the change is to get rid of Hispanics, while the Hispanic guy can interpret it to mean change is to get rid of whites. So they both vote for him.
A more reasonable poll would be to describe a PARTICULAR “red flag” law and then ask people if they are in favor of it. But even that is questionable because they are making a snap decision based on how, on the surface, something sounds like it could be a good idea.
Oh red flag... that’s where you take the guns, and leave the now further enraged psycho out on the streets.
Real bright.
“Red flags” have an inordinate possibility, no, PROBABILITY of being abused. When a “red flag” is to be applied to a person, the subject should have the right to review and even challenge that judgment, and those that come from anonymous sources should be scrutinized carefully. There are those who are pre-judged as guilty, regardless of the circumstances, and those who really and truly SHOULD be red-flagged. There should be reasonable room to resolve the differences between the two.
But the red flag, just like so many other gun-control laws, can be circumvented with relative ease, because there is no basic appreciation of just what the possession of a personal weapon actually involves. The greater majority of people have the moral fiber to understand what is involved in the care, grooming, feeding and proper and safe handling of firearms, and a much smaller number that either uses the weapons as another means of coercing others to submit to their bullying tactics, or those who are just so pathologically afraid of guns or weapons of any kind, they go into a mental paralysis at the very thought.of being in the presence of such a device.
These groups can and should be sorted out beginning in the primary grades in school, where it becomes part of the curriculum to KNOW what the various kinds of sidearms are and how to identify them. This is followed up in the middle school years with a hands-on demonstration of the explanation of how these weapons work, and evaluating the reaction of the individual child to the now demystified secrets of touching and holding such devices. The responsible child will take to this instruction like a duck to water, while the perpetually timid and the potential abusers of weapons make themselves much more prominent. The pathologically fearful should be given additional training in how to avoid, evade, or escape those who would carry weapons with malice intent, and also get their name and Social Security number tattooed somewhere on their bodies, for identification if the worst should come to pass. The potential troublemakers should be steered into some kind of further evaluation or counseling, to prevent further descent into the depths of soul darkness, or to prepare for the day when such efforts do not work any further.
The more mentally healthy youngsters should be encouraged to take up the basics and advanced training in upkeep of a weapon, cleaning, maintenance, storage, and firing of the weapon, with emphasis on selection of appropriate targets, framing the shot, aiming, and firing the weapon with a degree of accuracy in hitting that target. This training in marksmanship is great preparation for later service in either the military, or in law enforcement, and is a mainstay of home defense.
Every elementary and secondary school in America should have some form of this training as part of the curriculum, right along with history, mathematics, grounded scientific inquiry, and literacy in the meanings of patriotism and national interests.
I just took a poll myself. I found 100% of people polled thought this crap was Fake News.
added keyword.
Yup, the usual bias is in place:
Republican 253
Independent 352
Democrat 364
Independents are usually Democrats. But let us assume only 66% are.
You would have
Republican: 253+116 = 369
Democrat: 364+235 =599
BTW: the numbers only add up to 968, not 1000 as they claimed. SO:
Republican = 369/968 = 38%
Democrat = 599/968 = 62%
YEEEEEAHHHHHH
With a 62% Democrat load, you THINK MAYBE they could generate a 66% gungrab statistic????!
I question whether a survey of a whopping 1000 can make the leap claimed in the article, also how many of the thousand that responded were republicans? A conclusion of 70% could be meaningless if say there were only 10 people who identified as republican and what kind of push questions made up this ‘poll’.
The red flag laws could easily be abused. Is there any due process or would law enforcement just show up at your door to confiscate your guns based on an acusation? I could see in some areas annoymous tips might be used as a basis of a red flag confiscation. If proprty is seized by the government aren’t there guarantees in the Constitution for just compensation? Could a red flag seizure be challenged in the courts? While these red flag laws may seem like a good idea would they really address the problem? How many of the mass shooters if late have been prevented by red flag laws..my bet is not very many
Anyone watching Fox last night would have seen Chris Hahn actually state what the Left is after-a registry of who has what gun. Given the opportunity, they WILL come for your guns.
I don't believe this poll for an instant.
On the other hand, I could find myself looking with favor on laws that would prohibit Democrats from possessing firearms and forcible confiscation any that they might have. Perhaps we could automatically "Red Flag" Democrats.
I guess I am as bad as they are. I suppose I will have to behave.
Everybody is going to hate the new rules.
The lie is built into the first sentence. Red Flag laws are advertised as being for "family members", but they are invariably written so that anyone - sometimes even anonymously - can call for forced disarmament.
Further, they allow the state - including police, teachers, the dog catcher, the garbage collector (where applicable) - to forcibly disarm an individual without prior due process - which means without due process at all.
While the reported percentage of support is disheartening, the premise of the poll itself, as reported here, is a complete and utter lie.
One again, no one asked me. Can’t these RINOs see how this can be abused??? Hey, I don’t like Billy Bob so I’ll call in he’s a mental case and then pop some popcorn to see how fast his basement gets raided.
I don’t believe these polls.
Only people who have given no thought to Red Flag laws and how they have been and can be abused could support them in good faith.