Posted on 12/10/2019 6:49:23 PM PST by dontreadthis
A man from Deerfield Beach, Florida, faces a potential of five years in prison after being convicted for defying the state’s “red flag” law, which allows authorities to confiscate weapons from those deemed to be at high risk of committing a crime. The case is the first conviction under the state’s relatively new gun law, which was passed in part as a response to the horrific mass shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Florida.
Since the red flag law went into effect in March 2018, Florida has seized guns from over 2,000 residents of the state. But while the state has taken thousands of weapons, it has not convicted anyone for violating the law — until this week. As reported by the Sun Sentinel, after being charged in March 2018 under the law for refusing to hand over his firearms, Jerron Smith, 33, was convicted by a Broward Circuit court this week on charges carrying as many as five years in prison.
(Excerpt) Read more at dailywire.com ...
Yes, but “convicted of refusing to comply with a court order and a search warrant” pursuant to what ?
Does not the State of Florida have the right to criminalize shooting at someone or their property, i.e. felony, i.e. firearm prohibition ? They have ample remedy.
I’m not for defending this guy, but my point is that his ‘conviction’ could be challenged on the aformentioned preemtive grounds.
Not yet, but he was under order to surrender his firearms as condition of his bail. Under the circumstances, it seems reasonable.
I believe they convicted him under the red flag law because it had a stiffer sentence than disobeying the conditions of his bail. In any case, this is NOT a case to be appealed as practically no one has sympathy for someone who shot at someone else over a cell phone.
The fascists CHOSE a case such as this to set a precedence. Of course Red Flag Laws are great, look at the first guy convicted. They will do it again and again and again. Then when it seems normal a safe, they will go after someone who hasn’t committed a crime yet.
Pick a truly abused person to try a case. That improves your chance of winning.
Losing is not the way to curing the problem..
I DO get it. The guy was also ordered to surrender his firearms as a condition of his bail after he shot at someone (not a disputed fact). HE AGREED TO IT. He had his due process.
What i am saying is that existing laws should have disarmed him as he actually did something rather than using a precrime law after the fact.
The fact the courts didn’t use existing laws to disarm someone who already committed a gun crime doesn’t validate precrime laws disarming people who unlike this guy, will have not done anything yet.
No, we don’t care what leftists think of us.
But when you get to court, you sure will care what the jury thinks of you.
You hope they will see you as one of them and that they could someday be in your shoes.
Not like a guy that thinks shooting up cars is a good idea.
They probably just ask the google, facebook, youtube, and twitter algorithms to lend a hand and point out all the bad people for them.
It’s a plug-and-play system for social control, why build a new one?
Meh, ever heard that we don’t really need the 1st Amendment to protect speech that everyone agrees with?
Well, similarly, we don’t really need the 5th Amendment to guarantee due process to people who never get in trouble with the law.
“Bad cases make bad law.”
Which is why we're losing the civil war and the country. And make no mistake, war is being waged by one side of the political spectrum.
And who is this we you keep referring to? Crab lice?
“You think, they think, he thinks.”
Um.. Lol. You can't read my mind nor can you read the minds of jurors nor the mind of a guy who shoots up cars. It's true, you can't.
Apparently the prison CCW expired. 😂
RED FLAG LAWS: INNOCENTS WILL DIE!
https://www.brighteon.com/75473592-13e5-45c4-85e3-73ec524d3c02
Yieks. Read about this dooshbag first.
You are right on that one, My FRiend. And they will do the next one also. One by one.
Who made the determination and the rational use is
immaterial. The point is it was made and it will be enforced with and by deadly force if necessary.
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.