duane_wade
Member
K Street lawyers, advocacy groups and lobbyists....
Sent from my SM-G991U using Tapatalk
Senate Gun Bill Compromise Reached
- Thread starter DWalt
- Start date
Sent from my SM-G991U using Tapatalk
There are many existing legal processes that can be abused, as our Bayou barrister points out above.
Most States have abuse of process laws to control people who would abuse the system. Civil remedies are also available, but they cost money. Appellate courts also clarify the vague phrases and should protect an individuals "due process" on how the laws are actually enforced. That is why Judges are incredibly important, especially fFederal Judges and most importantly the Supreme Court.
It is a messy process, we are still working out Roe v Wade, and, interpreting how to handle Heller on the second amendmendment.
Democracy is messy, but so is cleaning up after some 18 year old nut case shooting up a classroom full of children.
Most States have abuse of process laws to control people who would abuse the system. Civil remedies are also available, but they cost money. Appellate courts also clarify the vague phrases and should protect an individuals "due process" on how the laws are actually enforced. That is why Judges are incredibly important, especially fFederal Judges and most importantly the Supreme Court.
It is a messy process, we are still working out Roe v Wade, and, interpreting how to handle Heller on the second amendmendment.
Democracy is messy, but so is cleaning up after some 18 year old nut case shooting up a classroom full of children.
rjroberts
Member
The remedies you speak of are not available in many of the red flag laws already enacted. Most of the procedures are ex parte. The person sanctioned by such a law isn't even aware it is happening until the police show up with the warrant to collect. In addition, the identity of the complaining party is withheld, and some laws even preclude legal actions against a false accuser.
You may be correct that the appellate process may be used, as well as other motions and procedures. But, this politically charged issue is quite certain to get a refusal. Even setting that aside, the cost for such procedures only serves to support "you only get as much justice as you can pay for." It would be impossible for someone like myself, retired and on fixed income and savings to pursue my "rights".
In some counties, the Sheriff may choose not to file until further investigation to establish the facts. That is always one election away.
So, many things sound good on paper; reality, not so much.
As far as the classroom full of children is concerned, yes a terrible tragedy. Demonstrates that one needs to get the nuts taken away or treated, not a gun from someone hundreds or thousands of miles away, who didn't do it.
Want to know the worst school tragedy? It took place in 1927 (very few gun laws) in Michigan. Around 40 people killed, 38 of them children. The perp used a bomb.
So, some feel-good legislation or political grandstanding by a politician running for office is just a tool for the dishonest.
Last edited:
Well, New Mexico has had red flag laws (extreme risk firearm protection orders 40-17-1 through 40-17-13 NMSA 1978), and includes that only full time, salaried law enforcement officers, DAs, or the AG can file an application for an order; it has to be filed in district court (not lower municipal nor magistrate courts) and a real lawyer judge decides or declines to issue a temporary order based on based on probable cause; there is an adversarial hearing on temporary orders within 10 days; after the hearing, a one-year order can be instituted based on a preponderance of the evidence; owners can sell or transfer their firearms through an FFL at any point throughout the temporary or one-year orders. Filing ANY false report with police or prosecution is already a crime (30-39-1 NMSA 1978).
The only thing missing is a free respondent's lawyer, but you don't get one in most civil cases except some mental health commitment cases.
Nine of these cases have been filed within 2 years; 5 resulted in one-year orders.
Last edited:
rjroberts
Member
And, that's the way it should be. In some other places it isn't. I can only say, read any legislation carefully. No "pass it so you can see it."
I’ll wait to see the proposed legislation, not that anyone may care what my opinion is.
It sure is taking a long time, can’t it be just a page or five?
It sure is taking a long time, can’t it be just a page or five?
But each comma has a cost - not joking.
Then what was lost in The Great Compromise?
The enhanced background checks are additional vetting for potential gun buyers between the ages of 18 and 21 to include previously blocked juvenile records on criminal activity and mental health.
I’m ok with that.
csurp34
US Veteran
What’s been proposed isn’t great, but it’s better than what was proposed and quite frankly it should serve as a wake up call for gun owners.
But probably not the way many of you are thinking.
Remember those morons who held open carry demonstrations at Chipotle, Target, Starbucks, etc who turned those mostly pro gun business against open carry (and thankfully just silent on open carry)?
They are not helping our cause. In fact people who go around posting pictured of themselves with guns and in tactical gear and then making statements to the effect they’ll use their guns and God given rights to defend their cause, whether it’s a flag, or their belief that library fines are theft, create a very negative gun sub culture.
No harm may be intended, and 99.99 % of the people posting those posts will never act on them or commit a crime with a gun, but there will be impressionable young ,en you have been bullied or abused and or were just born a half bubble off plumb who will take that messaging seriously. They’ll see it as a group they belong to and a gun as a means to have power and control they don’t have in their lives.
A few of the, every year will see the sensational and excessive media coverage of a mass shooting and see the shooter as someone like them who wielded power and became important, and they’ll decide to do the same.
We don’t have a gun problem in the US but:
- we do have a mental health diagnosis and treatment problem;
- we do have problems caused by irresponsible use of media and social media requiring more responsible wielding of everyone’s first amendment rights; and
- we have a toxic gun sub culture that the other 99% of us firearms owners and shooter need to stomp on as part of our being more responsible in wielding and preserving our second amendment rights.
But probably not the way many of you are thinking.
Remember those morons who held open carry demonstrations at Chipotle, Target, Starbucks, etc who turned those mostly pro gun business against open carry (and thankfully just silent on open carry)?
They are not helping our cause. In fact people who go around posting pictured of themselves with guns and in tactical gear and then making statements to the effect they’ll use their guns and God given rights to defend their cause, whether it’s a flag, or their belief that library fines are theft, create a very negative gun sub culture.
No harm may be intended, and 99.99 % of the people posting those posts will never act on them or commit a crime with a gun, but there will be impressionable young ,en you have been bullied or abused and or were just born a half bubble off plumb who will take that messaging seriously. They’ll see it as a group they belong to and a gun as a means to have power and control they don’t have in their lives.
A few of the, every year will see the sensational and excessive media coverage of a mass shooting and see the shooter as someone like them who wielded power and became important, and they’ll decide to do the same.
We don’t have a gun problem in the US but:
- we do have a mental health diagnosis and treatment problem;
- we do have problems caused by irresponsible use of media and social media requiring more responsible wielding of everyone’s first amendment rights; and
- we have a toxic gun sub culture that the other 99% of us firearms owners and shooter need to stomp on as part of our being more responsible in wielding and preserving our second amendment rights.
- Joined
- Aug 9, 2005
- Messages
- 8,980
- Reaction score
- 11,107
Certainly an excellent post.
squidsix
Member
How about this:
No.
Not one more inch. The good Lord provided us the will and wit to defend ourselves and our families. This was specified in the Constitution.
Any other discussion, any other usurpation, any other restriction, goes against the Creator.
“I’m ok with that” is what I keep seeing here. Well, I am NOT ok with any of it.
Possession of the tools to defend life and fight oppression is a RIGHT. No further discussion is required.
No.
Not one more inch. The good Lord provided us the will and wit to defend ourselves and our families. This was specified in the Constitution.
Any other discussion, any other usurpation, any other restriction, goes against the Creator.
“I’m ok with that” is what I keep seeing here. Well, I am NOT ok with any of it.
Possession of the tools to defend life and fight oppression is a RIGHT. No further discussion is required.
Probably because that is the first clause in the Amendment.
It all seems to have fallen apart yesterday as John Cornyn left for home and commented "I'm through talking."
It was not clear from the article I read if he was referring to his fellow Republicans or Democrats.
It was not clear from the article I read if he was referring to his fellow Republicans or Democrats.
Paul in Nevada
Member
- Joined
- Mar 30, 2021
- Messages
- 870
- Reaction score
- 1,019
If you feel the need to "stomp" on your fellow gun owners, then you are just a Quisling of the gun ban lobby. People like you always sell out your friends and neighbors to the tyrants and then you wonder why there is no one to help you when the thugs finally come for you too.
Last edited:
Seems a rather unfriendly response.
