Taurus Firearm Forum banner

Red Flag Laws will backfire

5K views 62 replies 26 participants last post by  kmw1954 
#1 ·
I rarely post articles but with all the knee jerk reactions going on about the recent shootings, it's looking like red flag laws will be some sort of twisted compromise. This article is well done and well researched and I thought it was worth passing along and getting everyone's thoughts. Spoiler alert: I think they're a very bad idea.

https://noqreport.com/2019/08/06/three-reasons-red-flag-gun-laws-will-backfire/
 
#42 ·
Good luck with that question!

HIPAA (Health Information Portability Accountability Act) being what it is and all. My question still stands: “If someone is adjudicated as mentally unfit (for purposes of firearm purchase and ownership) HOW, exactly, is that information transmitted to NICS?” Supposedly dishonorable discharges ARE supposed to be automatically forwarded to NICS (even tho the Texas church shooter from a year or so ago proves an imperfect system); so how are mental adjudications forwarded?

If HIPAA proves to be so watertight as to legally prevent potentially dangerous patients’ info from being forwarded to agencies designed specifically for firearm/public safety then maybe we need to pass GIPAA. Guns Information Portability and Accountability Act! Your personal firearm information is secure so that only YOU know what you have what you might use it for. That is what 2A was originally designed for - your PERSONAL right to keep and bear arms. The Founding Fathers (all < 40 years of age, BTW) wanted other Americans to take responsibility for policing themselves and their communities; remember the first American city to form a police force (LEO dept) didn’t do so until ~ late 1820s-1830s - 40 years after the foundation of our nation. It would be another 110 years before the FBI took life.
 
  • Like
Reactions: rollin thunder
#45 ·
Here we have two separate issues. 1. is keeping guns out of the hands of those that should not have or get them in the 1st place, Background Checks.. 2. Getting guns out of the hands of those that may have gone off the deep end after they already have guns. Same basic issue, two different scenarios.

I say one issue at a time and lets get it right the fist time.

The other frightening thing to me is in reading some blogs or news Vines is the number of people that conflate Background Checks with Gun Registration thinking they are one in the same or just interchangeable.. That is how uninformed some folks are on the issue.
 
#47 ·
Again, who makes these decisions? Most therapists are very, very liberal. Politicians shouldn't touch this with a ten foot pole. A jury of your peers, though no charges have been brought forth?

Let me ask this: People are extremely comfortable with having their own transportation. We really like our cars, yet drunk drivers kill volumes of people compared to shooting someone out of anger and vengeance or accidental shootings. Do you think we could ever take away our cars because of a few million drunks?
Why? Because we'll justify it, in order to keep our own.
If we are going to have true liberty, things like the Walmart shootings are going to happen. The numbers in comparison, are nonexistent.

20 people were killed. How many people did drunk drivers kill that day? And for arguments sake, we should include jacks falling on people. Cars rolling over owners and every other oddity there is.

You have guns, you have freedom, people die. Life goes on.

Do you want to talk about the heroin epidemic and the amount of people that kills, families ruined?
Pools
Playgrounds
Open manholes
Obesity
Smoking
Woman's clinics

Just a start...
 
#48 ·
Again, who makes these decisions? Most therapists are very, very liberal. Politicians shouldn't touch this with a ten foot pole. A jury of your peers, though no charges have been brought forth?

Let me ask this: People are extremely comfortable with having their own transportation. We really like our cars, yet drunk drivers kill volumes of people compared to shooting someone out of anger and vengeance or accidental shootings. Do you think we could ever take away our cars because of a few million drunks?
Why? Because we'll justify it, in order to keep our own.
If we are going to have true liberty, things like the Walmart shootings are going to happen.. The numbers in comparison, are nonexistent.

20 people were killed. How many people did drunk drivers kill that day? And for arguments sake, we should include jacks falling on people. Cars rolling over owners and every other oddity there is.

You have guns, you have freedom, people die. Life goes on.

Do you want to talk about the heroin epidemic and the amount of people that kills, families ruined?
Pools
Playgrounds
Open manholes
Obesity
Smoking
Woman's clinics

Just a start...
This is the crux for the entire issue played out all over the world. There are no guarantees or warrantees issued whenever you are born into this world. You could die at childbirth. You could die if any number of childhood illness. You can die as the victim of a drunk driver you you could be shot down in the next mass active shooter episode. You you could die at 95, of plain old age.

But we ALL die sometime! Nobody gets out of life alive?
As our ancestors settled this great nation, they either overcame adversity or perished. We all go about our days doing whatever it is we do. Hundreds die every day due to wrecks, falls, crime, etc. But the people mourn them move on. There is absolutely no way to guarantee that you will survive a day just because you woke up that day.

But, building on something else I mentioned, a lot of the displaced, antisocial loner tweens are empowered by what they can accomplish on the NET with no oversight no positive role models and protected by the anonymity of the NET.
 
#52 ·
I apologize if you all are getting tired of me giving real experience stories. This one is a Mental Health and Guns real story I was very much a part.
I was a deputy/investigator at the S.O. A friend of mine and his wife were having some marital issues. I had known his wife for many years. Over the years he had and I had discussed his being diagnosed as bi-polar disorder, treatments, symptoms, etc. I called and she told me he was on a long term manic high, buying swords, other stuff, sleeping with swords and guns, doing other non-characteristic stuff for him.

In our state, we have had a statue for years where a family member or a sworn officer can go in front of a judge and get a court order for a 72 hour "hold" for mental evaluation for the person's safety and well being. This time it worked. I was part of the team, as advisor and backup, that went to the house and took him into custody. The wife and I searched the house and found loaded guns in multiple places, and the aforementioned swords, etc. Anyway, he was found to be in a mental state that needed serious "in custody" treatment and spent several months in an institution. They divorced. His guns and swords were not returned to him.

The point is; laws are already in place in some/most states to take care of the problem, IF the family will go to a TRUSTED LEO or Attorney, explain the situation, and then do the due process to get an evaluation pickup, 72 hour hold, and an evaluation hearing. It is not fun, not pleasant, and does alienate family members and friends, sometimes for life. Any sworn officer can go before the judge and do it. Is the system perfect? Far from it. BUT, it's still better than having someone go on a rampage and taking lives.

Am I for Red Flag laws? No, because laws already exist to to take care of the situation. At least in my experience.
As I understand it, the proposal is for more or less immediate seizure of weapons without due process. That violates constitutional law IMO.
 
#55 · (Edited)
BINGO!

Unfortunately there is too much common sense and reasoning here to be useful in the real world. We can't have that when we have emotion and feelings that must be fed. If these people are a danger, they should be removed from society. Don't start restricting tools from law abiding citizens because we don't want to step on any toes. Remove THEM from society, not restrict law abiding citizens. These proposed new laws sound like a bastard child cross between gun control and the inability to hold someone accountable.
 
#54 ·
The red flag law stuff really sets off the paranoid, Tinfoil Hat Squad conspiracy nut part of me.

The way it's laid out right now, it's just begging for abuse.

All it would take is some woke social justice warrior to decide to make a call and you're facing a huge legal bill and a long court fight to undo their groundless attack. This strikes me as a legalized variant on SWATing.
 
#56 ·
I read this story from USA Today
White nationalists could have firearms taken under red flag law proposed by Kamala Harris
The Democratic presidential candidate's proposal calls for the creation of “domestic terrorism prevention orders” that would give law enforcement and family members of suspected white nationalists or domestic terrorists the ability to petition a federal court to temporarily restrict a person’s access to guns if the person exhibits clear evidence of being a danger.

“We need to take action to keep guns out of the hands of dangerous people and stop violent, hate-fueled attacks before they happen,” Harris said. “By focusing on confronting these domestic terror threats, we can save lives.”
So, even before they get universal Red Flag laws put into place, some of the people in the Democrat party who are pushing for them are already trying to expand them to include ideologies that they disagree with - on the basis that they consider them dangerous. Of course they also consider all of us "gun nuts" dangerous people to begin with.

It appears to me that the same anti-2nd Amendment people/party who are throwing around the "White Nationalist" label belong to the same party who railed against us ******** "clinging our guns and religion" and labeled people of the same mindset as the majority of us gun owners as being "deplorables". If they get their way, any gun owner who is vocal and loudly espouses a political viewpoint they disagree with will be ripe for getting slapped with a "White Nationalist potential domestic terrorist" label and then be subjected to firearms confiscation with no due process.

What's next? A proposal for re-education camps? Keep your powder dry folks.
 
#59 ·
I read this story from USA Today


So, even before they get universal Red Flag laws put into place, some of the people in the Democrat party who are pushing for them are already trying to expand them to include ideologies that they disagree with - on the basis that they consider them dangerous. Of course they also consider all of us "gun nuts" dangerous people to begin with.

It appears to me that the same anti-2nd Amendment people/party who are throwing around the "White Nationalist" label belong to the same party who railed against us ******** "clinging our guns and religion" and labeled people of the same mindset as the majority of us gun owners as being "deplorables". If they get their way, any gun owner who is vocal and loudly espouses a political viewpoint they disagree with will be ripe for getting slapped with a "White Nationalist potential domestic terrorist" label and then be subjected to firearms confiscation with no due process.

What's next? A proposal for re-education camps? Keep your powder dry folks.


Letitia James, New York’s attorney general allegedly said in a 2018 interview with Ebony, James said the NRA styles itself “as a charitable organization,” but argued it is actually “a terrorist organization.” That would mean individual NRA members would be labeled as terrorists.
 
#57 ·
Many of those who have committed mass killings have been found to be mentally deficient. Many of the homeless are also so afflicted. In his infinite wisdom, Jimmy Carter signed legislation that essentially eliminated long-term mental illness facilities, putting forth the idea they could be better integrated into society through outpatient treatment and self-medication. We've seen how that works....... It's become another subject that's out of bounds for politically correct conversation, much like divorce, unwed mothers, and bastard children were in the 50's and 60's. They make convenient patsies for the alphabet gang (FBI, ATF) to run their false flag events with. The swamp still needs to be drained ...it's deeper than first thought.....
 
#58 ·
The article's author says emotion should never drive policy and then trots out a lot of emotion-ridden anecdotal stories. Go figure.

Red flag laws....the devil is in the details. IMO they can work but only if speedy due process is ensured for the accused. And stiff penalties for the accuser if the law is misused to "swat" someone for revenge.

But before these new laws are passed more emphasis needs to be placed on fixing inter- and intra-agency communication breakdowns. There have been too many cases where people just plain failed to do their jobs.
 
#60 ·
There is nothing more they can do that is anything more than a "feel good" measure.

People that don't obey the current "bans" on rape, robbery, and murder certainly won't
obey any NEW laws. They don't obey the old ones.

Just the way it is.

All the Best,
D. White
 
#61 ·
Instead of us all here beating our gums at each other maybe we should be writing letters to our Senators and Representatives! I did.

Tonight on the local new I just seen a story that Our new Governor and the State Dems are sitting already to write a new RED FLAG Law for Wisconsin.
 
  • Like
Reactions: kschilk and pegasus
#63 ·
Watched most of the video. Didn't need the lecture or the editorial. Again if you want to be heard then start writing letters. I've sent SEVEN in the past Two days and have already received a response from US Rep Bryan Stiel and it was not a form letter with a thank you note.

I encourage everyone to do it. It's not that hard and doesn't take much time. If I can do it then so can you!
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top