Posted on 02/17/2020 7:19:50 AM PST by SeekAndFind
No. We’re purple. We won the governorship by less then 1 percent. And the senate seat by less then 1 percent.
Unconstitutional, but will remain on the books until someone with enough financial backing can take it to the SCOTUS.
The law denies due process, and if for no other reason should be declared unconstitutional................
Just who determines who’s subject to red flag laws? PSYCHIATRISTS? Show me a shrink and I’ll show you someone with more issues than all the newsstands in Times Sq, Grand Central, JFK, O Hare, LAX and Heathrow combined. Dirty little secret, the reason most people either majoring in psych or in the field are there is to try and figure out why they themselves are so effed up in the head to begin with. A classic case of the blind leading the blind.
Reminds me of an old quote:
"When you think it's time to bury your guns, it's actually time to dig them up."
“I have no doubt that you are going to find individual cases that are questionable, if you dig into them, but as a whole, this isn’t looking like any sort of huge evidence that the law is being abused wholesale.”
Without due process, any confiscation is abuse...
I agree that some should not be allowed weapons but w/o that pesky due process, the whole thing is an unconstitutional travesty.
As Rush pointed out some years ago, our whole Justice system is supposed to be predicated on the concept that it’s better to let 100 guilty folks go free than to convict even one innocent person.....and these folks aren’t even being convicted...just accused and “evaluated” (to use the term loosely).
Before “Red Flag” laws, Prosecutors could and occationaly did request a Judge to require gun confiscation for conviction. That is due process.
As part of civil proceedings, esp where a divorce case was resulting in a restraining order, Judges did issue orders for the guns to be removed and the person with the restraining order was prohibited form possession of a fire arm.
The failure was in the lack of utilization of those due process enforcement options.
I am of the opinion that any law which deprives a citizen of their Constitutional rights, MUST past “strict scruitny”. Red flag laws do not and violate due process. They should be struck down as unconstitutional by SCOTUS. All of them - state or federal.
You can’t have them confiscated without court involvement... Are you claiming that courts are not providing due process?
I hate to break this to you, but you can be involuntary committed temporarily as well... So claiming no due process is a bit of stretch.
When you find systemic abuse, you are going to have an argument to stand on, but given laws like this have existed, that flat out deny people liberty, and have survived constitutional challenges, its hard to see how you are going to win the argument over temporary court based confiscation of a weapon.. that you have the right to contest.
Thought so.
Wayne is busy picking out his next suit to go with his champaign
He is why I am NOT a huge fan of the NRA.
GOA is my preference.
Nice PSL, gosh I miss mine.
Not just scrutinize, but acquire details on how the confiscations when down. The who, what, when, where how and why for every case.
If this does not begin to happen, it won’t matter where you buried it, or how bad the boating accident was. I cannot stress the importance of this.
This is sort of like the FISA court procedure.
Certainly the red-flag laws are
U N C O N S T I T U T I O N A L .
That is obvious and should be said often.
The legislation was passed in the panicked aftermath of Parkland School shooting. Rick Scott(R) is one heck of a campaigner and he won by a rather thin margin over incumbent Bill Nelson(D). Scott was something of a carpet-bagger and has so much money that he was essentially able to buy the elections which he won (IMO).
And, if the state loses, full reimbursement to the defendant of ALL costs incurred to defend!!
Since Tom Cruise’s “Minority Report” is fiction and none of us really have clairvoyance, there is no way to really determine whether the red flag laws actually work.
But, having been a concealed carry guy for over forty years and supporter of 2A,I also recognize that there are people out there that shouldn’t have firearms. The question becomes, how do you sort them out from the rest of society that should be allow to have firearms? And, how do you keep the people who shouldn’t have firearms, from having them?
We thought it would be a deterrent when we created laws that added mandatory jail time for the possession of a firearm in the act of committing a crime or for a felon to be in possession of a firearm. Now we hear story after story, time after time, where neither of those instances have been enforced. We could go on and on about the “laws on the books” that never amount to anything, so we ask ourselves, “why do we need another law,” especially since what have don’t work or don’t get enforced.
There DOES have to be a solution out there, but there is no way it can be found, unless both sides of this issue can be brutally honest about the facts.
Good, honest,law abiding people, according to the second amendment, have the right to own and bear arms without any infringements. Many non-law abiding people do not. As simple as that.
Good luck sorting them out.
Good points.
............
How many of these cases actually resulted in confiscations?
...........
How many of these cases involved a child custody/divorce dispute?
...........
Cheap shot divorce attorneys must be drooling over these kinds of laws.
Somewhat playing ‘Devils Advocate’ here but in a true sense,
‘WE’ ASKED FOR AND DEMANDED THIS.
Remember after the Parkland shooting it was revealed that kid was even on the FBI ‘watch’ list as well as local authorities and ‘WE’ demanded something be done.
Well, they went draconian on us and, as that ‘Mooslimb’ said, ‘somebody did something’.
Same as after a shooting ‘WE’ point out that under present laws the guy/gal would have been able to obtain the gun anyway so no sense passing new ones.
I don’t think that is the proper way to address that problem. Just gives ‘them’ more excuse to go after US.
I tell ‘them’ that if taking MY gun away will stop shootings etc would rapes and sexual assault stop if ‘we’ cut off ‘your’ tallywacker?
Again, I am absolutely sure you may be able to find individual cases that are questionable... there will always be people trying to abuse any law for their benefit.
However, the articles claim that this is some sort of huge numbers of confiscations is flagrantly dishonest.
What is the filing vs granting rate ( how many resulted in confiscations).. Is the court being a rubber stamp, or truly doing its job.
Custody/divorce cases are certainly a ripe place for this sort of abuse.. though they also are a higher incident of violence, whether we want to admit it or not.... PFA’s are a strategy for some, but they are indeed real in others... lest not fool ourselves. Divorce and Custody can be very very bad situations... I know 3 young girls with no parents personally because the father committed a murder suicide during their parents divorce/custody battle.
I am more than willing to condemn the law if some sort of evidence of systemic abuse is found, but this article offers none on its face to suggest there is a systemic abuse of this, and that large numbers of innocent people are being caught up in this law being abused.
“The law, supported by legislators of both parties”
All you really need to know about our present day “parties”.
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.