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
The real danger of red flag laws...
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="Glocktogo" data-source="post: 3263626" data-attributes="member: 1132"><p>In every state in the nation, there are mechanisms with which concerned family members and/or the government can have someone declared mentally incompetent. While not every jurisdiction reports the mentally incompetent to the FBI for inclusion on the NICS prohibited persons list, there's nothing saying they can't. Yet all we hear about is how they can't prevent mentally ill people from buying or possessing guns without these new "Red Flag" laws.</p><p></p><p>I've seen law enforcement officers on other forums supporting these types of laws, saying Due Process is afforded by the affidavit sworn to a judge and it's no different than getting a warrant on probable cause of a crime. What they fail to mention is the "Due Process" hearing is <em>in absentia</em> and were they actually swearing a warrant for a crime, the warrant would be denied due to lack of probable cause that a crime has been committed.</p><p></p><p>What they really want is this:</p><p></p><p><img src="https://tse4.mm.bing.net/th?id=OIP.fMzSH84ACz-J9q3Q10AXPwHaE7&pid=Api&P=0&w=249&h=167" alt="" class="fr-fic fr-dii fr-draggable " style="" /> </p><p></p><p>They want an easy way to circumvent the hard work of proving a case against someone, and that's borne out in Florida where they've had a Red Flag law on the books for 18 months and they've already used it some 2,500 times:</p><p></p><p><a href="https://www.npr.org/2019/08/21/752815318/florida-could-serve-as-example-for-lawmakers-considering-red-flag-laws" target="_blank">https://www.npr.org/2019/08/21/752815318/florida-could-serve-as-example-for-lawmakers-considering-red-flag-laws</a></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>The big risk comes in two ways. One is where a person is flagged for removal of their rights under the law (I don't consider 12 months to be "temporary") who IS NOT an actual threat to themselves or others, has committed no crime and despite that, the mere act of being reported is enough for a judge to grant the order "out of an abundance of caution". The other risk is mistaken identity, and Florida has already had this happen:</p><p></p><p><a href="https://townhall.com/tipsheet/bethbaumann/2019/08/19/red-flag-law-failure-guy-is-stripped-of-his-gunsbecause-of-another-mans-criminal-activity-n2551921" target="_blank">https://townhall.com/tipsheet/bethbaumann/2019/08/19/red-flag-law-failure-guy-is-stripped-of-his-gunsbecause-of-another-mans-criminal-activity-n2551921</a></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>In this case, this man's civil and constitutional rights have been violated by the government, and yet he will likely have no redress for damages because the sheriff's office is acting in accordance with the law. This is unconscionable and intolerable. These laws MUST be challenged and overturned all the way through the Supreme Court. The risk of abuse is far too great and is not an acceptable shortcut in protecting the public.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Glocktogo, post: 3263626, member: 1132"] In every state in the nation, there are mechanisms with which concerned family members and/or the government can have someone declared mentally incompetent. While not every jurisdiction reports the mentally incompetent to the FBI for inclusion on the NICS prohibited persons list, there's nothing saying they can't. Yet all we hear about is how they can't prevent mentally ill people from buying or possessing guns without these new "Red Flag" laws. I've seen law enforcement officers on other forums supporting these types of laws, saying Due Process is afforded by the affidavit sworn to a judge and it's no different than getting a warrant on probable cause of a crime. What they fail to mention is the "Due Process" hearing is [I]in absentia[/I] and were they actually swearing a warrant for a crime, the warrant would be denied due to lack of probable cause that a crime has been committed. What they really want is this: [IMG]https://tse4.mm.bing.net/th?id=OIP.fMzSH84ACz-J9q3Q10AXPwHaE7&pid=Api&P=0&w=249&h=167[/IMG] They want an easy way to circumvent the hard work of proving a case against someone, and that's borne out in Florida where they've had a Red Flag law on the books for 18 months and they've already used it some 2,500 times: [URL]https://www.npr.org/2019/08/21/752815318/florida-could-serve-as-example-for-lawmakers-considering-red-flag-laws[/URL] The big risk comes in two ways. One is where a person is flagged for removal of their rights under the law (I don't consider 12 months to be "temporary") who IS NOT an actual threat to themselves or others, has committed no crime and despite that, the mere act of being reported is enough for a judge to grant the order "out of an abundance of caution". The other risk is mistaken identity, and Florida has already had this happen: [URL]https://townhall.com/tipsheet/bethbaumann/2019/08/19/red-flag-law-failure-guy-is-stripped-of-his-gunsbecause-of-another-mans-criminal-activity-n2551921[/URL] In this case, this man's civil and constitutional rights have been violated by the government, and yet he will likely have no redress for damages because the sheriff's office is acting in accordance with the law. This is unconscionable and intolerable. These laws MUST be challenged and overturned all the way through the Supreme Court. The risk of abuse is far too great and is not an acceptable shortcut in protecting the public. [/QUOTE]
Insert Quotes…
Verification
Post Reply
Forums
The Range
Law & Order
The real danger of red flag laws...
Search titles only
By:
Top
Bottom