Police legally seizing guns under 'red flag' laws [See word about SAF in the article!]

Fox News ^ | April 2, 2018 | Dan Springer

[familyop]

Washington is one of six states with high risk or red flag laws. But in the wake of the Parkland school shooting, the Brady Campaign says at least 30 states are considering them...Even gun rights advocates, who are afraid of government abuse, say it appears to be working...“We’ve seen the downside of people who are distraught or crazy taking out their problems on the general public,” said Dave Workman of the Bellevue, Wash.-based Second Amendment Foundation. “We don’t want that to happen here.”

[familyop]

Do any of you believe that due process isn't needed? If you don't, you've got another thing comin'.

You know what this is. You know what to do. And as always, be civil.

Second Amendment Foundation
https://www.saf.org/

Judicial people already have remedies for disarming people who are a danger to themselves or others. The red flag laws most likely involve a kind of court order that is similar to a domestic restraining order. I've known several professionals (two of them doctors: MDs) with perfect histories and reputations, who spent all that they had in typically futile fights against such orders for the purpose of spending time with their own children. As soon as they were old enough to decide, years later as teens, their children ran to them and stayed with them from then on to escape abuse from their other parents.

[familyop]

The anti-Second-Amendment tactic here, by the way, is that of insidiously, incrementally disarming the American population one subgroup at a time--exactly the main tactic that the anti-Second-Amendment activists have recently been discussing with each other.

[familyop]

One error on my part in the excerpt above. I should *not* have put an ellipsis between “appears to be working” and “We’ve seen” The second sentence immediately follows the first in the article.

[familyop]

I should have posted that part of the excerpt as follows.

——————Quote-————————

Even gun rights advocates, who are afraid of government abuse, say it appears to be working. “We’ve seen the downside of people who are distraught or crazy taking out their problems on the general public,” said Dave Workman of the Bellevue, Wash.-based Second Amendment Foundation. “We don’t want that to happen here.”

——————Unquote——————————

[Wolfie]

After weeks of saying the authorities ignored what a nutjob the Parkland shooter was, what did you expect?

[FlingWingFlyer]

This “red flag” nonsense is going to backfire on the politicians big time. They better be prepared to have their asses sued. Relatives and neighbors love to turn people in for BS when there is a family feud or neighborhood spat. When they are challenged about their allegations, they change their minds about what they said. Believe me. I dealt with this kind of BS hundreds of times on my last job before retiring.

[familyop]

The NRA is warning us against bills for red flag laws in at least some states and issuing information on how to try to stop those bills from passing. The NRA is also taking an active role itself in doing so.

That leaves the SAF to the left of the NRA.

[familyop]

"This 'red flag' nonsense is going to backfire on the politicians big time. They better be prepared to have their asses sued."

I doubt that we will successfully sue the representatives and senators of the states for passing the legislation. It would probably be better to try the tried and true political route. Let them know our opinions, then prepare to replace them in primaries. Now's the time.

So far, the left's tactic of gradualism has been highly successful, but only because most voters refuse to write to their state representatives and senators to argue against laws like the one described above.

[SecondAmendment]

If an individual is too dangerous to possess a fire arm, they are too dangerous to be at large, and must therefore be committed...

[JudgemAll]

They are working? Illegal means are working? Wow. Taking guns like this without compensation and the cops keeping them instead of heirs is a violation of the 2nd Amendment. These guns belong to the militia, not the public at large.

Another socialism box checked and sheeps find it cool

[JudgemAll]

Bingo, if we take their rights without due process, then why can they keep privileges and run for office?

That big “gun show” loophole that elects people to wield the police state while they are not allowed to own guns strike me as breeding puppets of the deep state

[JudgemAll]

I swear, these Fudd organizations are worse enemy than liberals because they execute what liberals are afraid to do

And the next time i hear “I was in the military and full auto is not useful blabla”. I mean sht the fck up Fudd veterans, I precisely left the military to become a civilian so I would not have to have a friday weekend afternoon lecture from a$$ hole telling me to not smoke, wear a condom and not ride motorcycles!!

[Steamburg]

So if they are nuts enough to be a danger to themselves or others seizing an object not the person solves the problem?

Our education system is the problem. We are paying for our own demise with Public Education.

[familyop]

"Our education system is the problem. We are paying for our own demise with Public Education."

Are you referring mainly to the lack of education in civics, that is, where a bill goes, the Constitution, the Federalist Papers, etc.? If so, I agree. We often see that lacking in discussion here, too, and it's the most important kind of background needed for supporting and advancing our Second Amendment rights.

[M1911A1]

I have little faith in fake news. Workman is likely quoted out of context.

[familyop]

"If an individual is too dangerous to possess a fire arm, they are too dangerous to be at large, and must therefore be committed..."

That's the remedy. Too often, their reluctance to use it is revealing, isn't it. They expect those of us with the least resources to continue taking care of the burned out freaks in our neighborhoods, including the aging, schizophrenic hippie trust fund babies from their neighborhoods.

[Iron Munro]

One problem with these kinds of laws is that they can and will be used and abused by liberals as a way to attack and destroy their opposition.

On the surface the purpose of these laws is supposedly to provide a way to disarm people who are a danger to themselves or others.

But who defines what constitutes a danger to oneself or others?

You know darn well these laws will be abused to silence opposition to, and criticism of, the liberal agenda.

People like anti-abortionists, climate deniers and constitutionalists will be targets and fair game for the liberals.

As will owners of too many guns, scary looking guns, stockpiles of ammo, etc.

[familyop]

"I have little faith in fake news. Workman is likely quoted out of context."

If that's the case, he might get something positive in return for it from Fox. I know that sounds crazy, but I've been watching Second Amendment issues from Fox for a few months. From what I've seen while monitoring the news website and the Fox YouTube channel, Fox is still reorganizing little by little, and for the better so far.

To sum it up, Fox has been producing, on average, increasingly more conservative content over the past year or so and since getting some new executives and reporters. There's even been more material in favor of the Second Amendment, although some of the material is still anti-, too (as seen in the article linked over this thread).

Remember that many of the decisions are made in a New York environment: a world apart from the experiences and perspectives of most Americans. The NYPD even had custom triggers with an abnormally monstrous pull installed for it police in the recent past because of accidental/negligent discharges. I don't know if that's still the case, but it was interesting in consideration of the lack of training in the general populace there (and the NRA's original purpose for national defense, not the same but related in general).

But it appears that some of the honchos at Fox have been trying to learn. It could also be that Fox is seeing the political pendulum swinging and wants more of an Internet footprint. That's why I've been linking to the Fox site sometimes, mostly to pro-conservative content.

So I'm guessing that Fox is watching online conservative discourse. It's really interesting in light of what many of the decision-makers in sponsoring companies want. Have a look at this.

Fox News Says Laura Ingraham Will Return
Variety
By Brian Steinberg
April 2, 2018
"We cannot and will not allow voices to be censored by agenda-driven intimidation efforts," said Jack Abernethy, co-president of the 21st Century Fox-owned cable outlet, in a statement. "We look forward to having Laura Ingraham back hosting her program next Monday when she returns from spring vacation with her children."

[rawcatslyentist]

So disarm everybody, rational people will not seek arms, irrational people will.

Do they not see the YUGE problem? This leaves law abiding rational people DEFENSELESS against irrational law breakers!

[momincombatboots]

didn’t some very influential American executive office holder recently dismiss due process.
Isn’t that just what a NY liberal does? Give more power to the government and to criminals.
More infringements.. now that’s winning right there.