Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
Latest activity
Classifieds
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Log in
Register
What's New?
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Navigation
Install the app
Install
More Options
Advertise with us
Contact Us
Close Menu
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Forums
The Range
Law & Order
DOJ Releases Biden Gun Confiscation Order Legislation
Search titles only
By:
Reply to Thread
This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Message
<blockquote data-quote="uncle money bags" data-source="post: 3590931" data-attributes="member: 8377"><p>There are already procedures for the temporary confiscation of firearms from persons deemed a threat to themselves or others. Anyone who is familiar with a Victim Protection Order knows this. </p><p>Lets say; for example, there is a domestic assault and the dominant agggressor is identified. The assault resulted in visible physical injuries or obvious disfigurement. The dominant aggressor also made threats to " fu@#$&* kill that bleep". Maybe they have made threats in the past, maybe they even pointed a firearm at the victim in the past. Victim has a report taken, and the suspect is arrested or a warrant filed for their arrest. Victim requests a Emergency VPO and a judge will decide if the facts and circumstances warrant the seizure of the suspects firearms until a hearing can be held (within 5 days) to determine what will happen with the firearms. </p><p>To back up just a bit, if the judge decides that; based on all of the evidence presented, that the firearms shall be temporarily seized they will order that on the EPO. When the EPO is served on the suspect, their firearms are seized. </p><p>Red flag laws seek to undermine all of the checks and balances inherent in the current system in order to make the seizure of firearms easier. Red flag laws are clearly in direct conflict with 4th and 14th amendment at the very least. In my experience, the vast majority of LEOs or Peace Officers would refuse to enforce them.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="uncle money bags, post: 3590931, member: 8377"] There are already procedures for the temporary confiscation of firearms from persons deemed a threat to themselves or others. Anyone who is familiar with a Victim Protection Order knows this. Lets say; for example, there is a domestic assault and the dominant agggressor is identified. The assault resulted in visible physical injuries or obvious disfigurement. The dominant aggressor also made threats to " fu@#$&* kill that bleep". Maybe they have made threats in the past, maybe they even pointed a firearm at the victim in the past. Victim has a report taken, and the suspect is arrested or a warrant filed for their arrest. Victim requests a Emergency VPO and a judge will decide if the facts and circumstances warrant the seizure of the suspects firearms until a hearing can be held (within 5 days) to determine what will happen with the firearms. To back up just a bit, if the judge decides that; based on all of the evidence presented, that the firearms shall be temporarily seized they will order that on the EPO. When the EPO is served on the suspect, their firearms are seized. Red flag laws seek to undermine all of the checks and balances inherent in the current system in order to make the seizure of firearms easier. Red flag laws are clearly in direct conflict with 4th and 14th amendment at the very least. In my experience, the vast majority of LEOs or Peace Officers would refuse to enforce them. [/QUOTE]
Insert Quotes…
Verification
Post Reply
Forums
The Range
Law & Order
DOJ Releases Biden Gun Confiscation Order Legislation
Search titles only
By:
Top
Bottom