Red Flag Laws

And by the way, anyone who spends free time on an internet forum discussing guns could be considered a danger, by more than a few officers of the court. Don’t think so? Visit a few anti gun forums, and/or listen to what some elected representatives are saying. The term “gun nut” doesn’t mean what it used to.
My impression is that any federalization would provide access ( for those deciding who’s unstable) to all sorts of records. We all know how the lie about Vietnam veterans all coming home addicted to heroin was passed around, and how the Iraq and Afghanistan “experience” has produced a massive PTSD epidemic.
Then there’s the rh factor in relation to homicide. Men shouldn’t be allowed to have firearms if you look at pure statistics.
 
These latest shootings have got the politicians going all out for more gun control. I believe we are about to see Red Flag laws get big time attention. Trump seems to have jumped on the band wagon for them.

It appears " they will have to pry it out of my cold dead hands" is not that far from happening. It seems every gun owner is now in their cross hairs so to speak. Not like any new gun laws will stop anything but that isn't their main goal anyway. Anyone that doesn't believe they are wanting to disarm the people is in my opinion being very naive. Will they accomplish their goal without starting a civil war remains to be seen.
 
Whether a person is falsely accused or the complaint is later found to be unsubstantiated, my first thought was about the information that will be available regarding the items possessed by the owner of said items.


If a red flag complaint is issued and the law enforcement officers are bound to investigate and possibly confiscate a person's firearms, they aren't just going to grab a few pistols or rifles. They will go through the house, through the safe, through every place you might have something stashed. In doing so, they will find all the ammo.


All of these items will be removed from the property until the case is settled/cleared. And because the ones removing and storing them are paid by our taxes, the local media will be able to request through the Freedom of Information Act, at the very least, the number of guns and amount of ammo that was confiscated. At least our local TV station will because that is what they do.
And when that person is exonerated, all of that person's info will have been made public. And every low life around the area will have the person's name, address and how many guns and how much ammo is owned.


And then somebody IS going to get hurt. Just hope its not the good guy.
 
Muss Muggins said:
My bad. It's a new law everywhere it's now a law. That means that the enforcement and litigation is still in its infancy everywhere it's now a law. . . .

(edited, straying from second amendment forum purpose)
Click to expand...

Not to "stray" too far but Red Flag laws aren't all that new everywhere either. MA, IL, and DE have had them since 2017, and unfortunately WA state passed one in 2016.

In an interesting side note, the AMA has stated that President Trump and all of us who say the problem is mental illness are all wrong. According to them the problem is easy availability of guns. After all, every country has its fair share of people with mental illness, but not all of them have this epidemic of mass shootings like we do, or so they say.

Of course we already knew the AMA's stand on guns (or rather AGAINST guns) anyway, so this comes as no big surprise.
 
Last edited:
brucev said:
The vast majority of agenda driven statues, ordinances, laws, are superfluous.
Click to expand...

Are there any statutes, ordinances, or laws that aren't agenda-driven? The Constitution, itself, was/is agenda-driven.
 
Muss Muggins said:
... How do you know there have been false reports?
Click to expand...
Here is a link to testimony from David Kopel to the US Senate Judiciary Committee on the Cato Institute's examination of these laws.
https://www.judiciary.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/Kopel Testimony1.pdf
Note the second paragraph of the Executive Summary. It is only one sentence but what a sentence!
Their finding was that the current track record of cases where ERPO's have been issued...
"Nearly a third of such orders are improperly issued against innocent people."
That sounds like a LOT of false reporting to me - or at least an awfully high percentage of the cases.
Putting it in perspective, imagine if 1/3 of the criminal cases being prosecuted were innocent people being charged - based on false sworn testimony.
Think that might generate a lot of outraged accusations of abuse & misuse of government authority?
 
Last edited:
Improper issuance. Perhaps an improper interpretation of the law or an improper application of the facts . . .

BC38 said:
Here is a link to testimony from David Kopel to the US Senate Judiciary Committee on the Cato Institute's examination of these laws.
https://www.judiciary.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/Kopel Testimony1.pdf
Note the second paragraph of the Executive Summary. It is only one sentence but what a sentence!
Their finding was that the current track record of cases where ERPO's have been issued...
"Nearly a third of such orders are improperly issued against innocent people."
That sounds like a LOT of false reporting to me - or at least an awfully high percentage of the cases.
Putting it in perspective, imagine if 1/3 of the criminal cases being prosecuted were innocent people being charged - based on false sworn testimony.
Think that might generate a lot of outraged accusations of abuse & misuse of government authority?
Click to expand...
 
Muss Muggins said:
Improper issuance. Perhaps an improper interpretation of the law or an improper application of the facts . . .
Click to expand...

Splittin' hairs there ain't ya' boss? And for the innocent people that are on the receiving end of the ERPO that's a distinction without a difference.

These gun confiscation orders only happen when someone petitions the court to issue one. If one third of them are are being issued against innocent people that cannot possibly be attributed entirely to judicial errors. Our legal system doesn't have a track record of going after innocent people 1/3 of the time.

As a bondsman, aren't you considered an officer of the Court? And you honestly believe the courts are getting it wrong in 1/3 of these cases - as opposed to most of those innocent people being targeted due to someone filing false or exaggerated information leading to the ERPO?

REALLY?
 
Last edited:
Muss Muggins said:
What I will say is that nearly every mass shooter in recent years exhibited signs of mental instability, and most should have been hospitalized and addressed way before the trigger got pulled. The Dayton shooter is a prime example. Properly administered, these laws are a good thing. Of course “properly administered” is a moving target . . .
Click to expand...

Yes, for all the push back against Mr. Trump for mentioning mental illness (one of four points in his speech), I have to believe he is speaking of one that exhibits psychopathic behaviors vs. having any/all form of diagnosed mental illness. He appears to have been speaking of the combination of a person who sees other humans as being non-human, first-person shooter video games in which such a person is immersed in killing these non-humans, and the availability of a firearm.

Now, as for red flags; dunno at all what that's all about. But I will say that here in Queensland Australia I choose not to own a firearm at all, long or hand; because their equivalent of a red flag causes the law to arrived with a SWAT team and remove the firearms in the middle of the night. Worse than that, to maintain the license itself one must compete in the local gun club every month; one doesn't do that with no guns, does one? Now the license is gone. No license? Can't ever own that gun (only one per caliber, please) either.

On the other hand, as I say, no one shoots at me from a casino window while I'm at an outdoor concert with the wife. And we do have casinos. In Australia's case they exported the killer to New Zealand who then indulged in his 'Call of Duty fantasy' as mentioned in several 'manifestos' beginning with Doom and Columbine.
 
All I will say, because I'll never change your disdain and distrust of police and the court, and me ("boss" seems to be one of your favorite terms, and around here, it's both dismissive and insulting) is that after a 34 year and still running career involving all aspects of the criminal justice system, I know this:

Find a yardstick and a couple sticky notes. Write "Gov't" on one note and "Defendant" on the other note, and stick 'em on opposite ends of the yardstick. You can write "Yankee Gov't" on one, because I think it's funny and also perfectly illustrates most people's dislike of the gov't, even Yankees. Put 'em so that the sticky notes are aligned with the 1" and 35" marks. Get different colors if you like. Find a penny. Label it "T" for "Truth" Balance the yardstick on a extended index finger at the 18" mark, and put the penny on the 18" mark as well. You can move the penny a couple inches either way, towards the defendant or the gov't, and the yardstick will stay balanced. You can move it even a little further away from the center and roll your finger around a little, and it will still stay balanced. You never get over halfway to the end before the yardstick falls.

That's criminal justice. The defendant has a story, and the Yankee Gov't has a story, usually better written and more cohesive than the defendant's, but not always. The truth is out there. Sometimes it's over the tipping end, and the truth overwhelmingly favors one or the other. Most times, it's in that 12" to 24" range where the yardstick stays balanced, and somebody's gotta figure out where society should go with this particular incident. What society does with the case is generally within the parameters of the law, because ERPO's are generally not "beyond a reasonable doubt" decisions. So the yardstick is still balanced on your fingertip, but the penny is about six inches away from the middle. Those are the hard cases. The defendant is telling the truth, as he sees it. The gov't is telling the truth as they see it. Somebody's story is just that much better and more well organized than somebody else's story. Still legal? Sure. Improper? Certainly to the loser it's improper, but is it false? No . . .

It's easy to spectate and criticize from the cheap seats, working only with the 25% of the case's information that is publicly available. It's hard to work on the field, and my experience has been that the participants bend over backward to find the truth of the matter. You'll never agree with this, and I don't expect to change years of cynicism and distrust with one grade school example, but it's as close as I can get to your level. Somebody once said something about dangerous freedom vs. peaceful servitude, which Gadsden flaggers are prone to repeat. "Dangerous" cuts both ways. That's the price we pay for freedom . . .

Your reply to this post will be duly noted . . .

BC38 said:
Splittin' hairs there ain't ya' boss? And for the innocent people that are on the receiving end of the ERPO that's a distinction without a difference.

These gun confiscation orders only happen when someone petitions the court to issue one. If one third of them are are being issued against innocent people that cannot possibly be attributed entirely to judicial errors. Our legal system doesn't have a track record of going after innocent people 1/3 of the time.

As a bondsman, aren't you considered an officer of the Court? And you honestly believe the courts are getting it wrong in 1/3 of these cases - as opposed to most of those innocent people being targeted due to someone filing false or exaggerated information leading to the ERPO?

REALLY?
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
But you fail to note, PG county has stolen 136 guns in one year due to these red flag laws. That's one county. 136 cases of no due process. Don't anyone kid yourself, the "reasons" to confiscate your weapons under red flag will be basically any excuse before it's over.

Watchdog said:
This one-man-is-dead-already-because-of-a-red-flag-law seems to pop up on this forum every time red flag laws come up for discussion.



Let's set the record straight one more time.

Ferndale, Maryland, November 5, 2018. Gary Willis, 61, shot and killed by police who were attempting to serve a warrant in accordance with Maryland's recently passed ERPO law. ERPOs are just another name for red flag laws.

Willis answered the door holding a handgun. He then put the gun down on a table next to the door. When officers began to serve him the order, Willis became irate and grabbed his gun. One of the officers tried to take the gun from Willis, but instead Willis fired the gun. The second officer fired a gun, striking Willis. He died at the scene.

Gary Willis did not die because a relative was mad at him and thought this would be a good way to "get back" at him. He didn't die because of a red flag law.

He died because of his own stupidity and irrational behavior.

It's a really bad idea to pick up a gun while the cops are trying to serve a warrant on you. And an even worse idea to pull the trigger.

Don't believe me? I'm not making this up. Read about it here, here, or here.
Click to expand...
 
Muss Muggins said:
All I will say, because I'll never change your disdain and distrust of police and the court, and me ("boss" seems to be one of your favorite terms, and around here, it's both dismissive and insulting) is that after a 34 year and still running career involving all aspects of the criminal justice system, I know this:

Find a yardstick and a couple sticky notes. Write "Gov't" on one note and "Defendant" on the other note, and stick 'em on opposite ends of the yardstick. You can write "Yankee Gov't" on one, because I think it's funny and also perfectly illustrates most people's dislike of the gov't, even Yankees. Put 'em so that the sticky notes are aligned with the 1" and 35" marks. Get different colors if you like. Find a penny. Label it "T" for "Truth" Balance the yardstick on a extended index finger at the 18" mark, and put the penny on the 18" mark as well. You can move the penny a couple inches either way, towards the defendant or the gov't, and the yardstick will stay balanced. You can move it even a little further away from the center and roll your finger around a little, and it will still stay balanced. You never get over halfway to the end before the yardstick falls.

That's criminal justice. The defendant has a story, and the Yankee Gov't has a story, usually better written and more cohesive than the defendant's, but not always. The truth is out there. Sometimes it's over the tipping end, and the truth overwhelmingly favors one or the other. Most times, it's in that 12" to 24" range where the yardstick stays balanced, and somebody's gotta figure out where society should go with this particular incident. What society does with the case is generally within the parameters of the law, because ERPO's are generally not "beyond a reasonable doubt" decisions. So the yardstick is still balanced on your fingertip, but the penny is about six inches away from the middle. Those are the hard cases. The defendant is telling the truth, as he sees it. The gov't is telling the truth as they see it. Somebody's story is just that much better and well organized than somebody else's story. Still legal? Sure. Improper? Certainly to the loser it's improper, but is . . .

It's easy to spectate and criticize from the cheap seats, working only with the 25% of the case's information that is publicly available. It's hard to work on the field, and my experience has been that the participants bend over backward to find the truth of the matter. You'll never agree with this, and I don't expect to change years of cynicism and distrust with one grade school example, but it's as close as I can get to your level. Somebody once said something about dangerous freedom vs. peaceful servitude, which Gadsden flaggers are prone to repeat. "Dangerous" cuts both ways. That's the price we pay for freedom . . .

Your reply to this post will be duly noted . . .
Click to expand...

Dang! That must be the best explanation of the criminal justice system in layman's terms that I have heard so far. It's not a perfect system, it's written by humans and executed by humans and humans are fallible creatures.

Red Flag laws are coming, if they are not already in your state, they will be. National Red Flag laws are also likely and I expect we will see some states add to any federal laws to make them even more strict. Governments grow and societies decay, it is inevitable and it is simply a repeat of history. I feel that we need to be vigilant, we need to be very careful in crafting such laws, and we need to be extra vigilant in the execution of such laws so as to preserve due process and to minimize the potential for false claims.
 
Last edited:
Sorry MM, I sit in a similar position as you do. The pressure to close cases often ends up in breaches of justice. And once red flag laws are there, there will be a quota. That's right, no written policy statements but most of this sort of thing isn't written down and you are misleading people if you can't admit the DAs office has just has much politics and human issues as any other human organization. Red Flag laws, without due process, are not constitutional and I will not enforce them.

Muss Muggins said:
All I will say, because I'll never change your disdain and distrust of police and the court, and me ("boss" seems to be one of your favorite terms, and around here, it's both dismissive and insulting) is that after a 34 year and still running career involving all aspects of the criminal justice system, I know this:

Find a yardstick and a couple sticky notes. Write "Gov't" on one note and "Defendant" on the other note, and stick 'em on opposite ends of the yardstick. You can write "Yankee Gov't" on one, because I think it's funny and also perfectly illustrates most people's dislike of the gov't, even Yankees. Put 'em so that the sticky notes are aligned with the 1" and 35" marks. Get different colors if you like. Find a penny. Label it "T" for "Truth" Balance the yardstick on a extended index finger at the 18" mark, and put the penny on the 18" mark as well. You can move the penny a couple inches either way, towards the defendant or the gov't, and the yardstick will stay balanced. You can move it even a little further away from the center and roll your finger around a little, and it will still stay balanced. You never get over halfway to the end before the yardstick falls.

That's criminal justice. The defendant has a story, and the Yankee Gov't has a story, usually better written and more cohesive than the defendant's, but not always. The truth is out there. Sometimes it's over the tipping end, and the truth overwhelmingly favors one or the other. Most times, it's in that 12" to 24" range where the yardstick stays balanced, and somebody's gotta figure out where society should go with this particular incident. What society does with the case is generally within the parameters of the law, because ERPO's are generally not "beyond a reasonable doubt" decisions. So the yardstick is still balanced on your fingertip, but the penny is about six inches away from the middle. Those are the hard cases. The defendant is telling the truth, as he sees it. The gov't is telling the truth as they see it. Somebody's story is just that much better and well organized than somebody else's story. Still legal? Sure. Improper? Certainly to the loser it's improper, but is . . .

It's easy to spectate and criticize from the cheap seats, working only with the 25% of the case's information that is publicly available. It's hard to work on the field, and my experience has been that the participants bend over backward to find the truth of the matter. You'll never agree with this, and I don't expect to change years of cynicism and distrust with one grade school example, but it's as close as I can get to your level. Somebody once said something about dangerous freedom vs. peaceful servitude, which Gadsden flaggers are prone to repeat. "Dangerous" cuts both ways. That's the price we pay for freedom . . .

Your reply to this post will be duly noted . . .
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

R
KENTUCKY: Red Flag legislation to be discussed this coming Friday morning
Replies
0
Views
338
raisedin99
R
W
New ATF proposals
2
Replies
31
Views
4K
delcrossv
delcrossv
glowe
Michigan is Falling in Line with Other Gun Control States
Replies
15
Views
1K
ajgunner
ajgunner
R
prelim injunction California SB2 sensative places
Replies
3
Views
1K
ISCS Yoda
ISCS Yoda
J
Voting in the NRA Election < Spread The Word!!
6 7 8
Replies
143
Views
18K
CAJUNLAWYER
CAJUNLAWYER

Latest posts

Back
Top