FReepmail me if you want to be added to or deleted from the list.
More 2nd Amendment related articles on FR's Bang List.
Posted on 07/31/2018 1:15:31 AM PDT by BBell
"...explosion in SWATing incidents..."
You’re right, except in the case of an illegal alien in Florida. The sheriff’s deputies in Hillsborough County will NOT enforce any laws against Hispanics who may be illegals so that means all Hispanic males are exempt from this stuff, since the LEO’s are prohibited from checking immigration status based on suspicion alone. If you are a non-Hispanic white or black though, all bets are off, and you’d better watch out. You are the “real” terrorist now. And the law will be enforced against YOU. I’ve witnessed the HCSOs “hands off” policy for years. This county’s and several others’ sheriff’s offices have been bought and paid for by restaurant, construction and agribusiness big money protecting the cheap labor express which has saturated Florida for so long with illegals.
FReepmail me if you want to be added to or deleted from the list.
More 2nd Amendment related articles on FR's Bang List.
You are not wrong.
Which is why the gun grabbers love this approach.
The only practical recourse is to do it back. Start swatting the hell out of them. I realize that approach risks chaos, but it is that risk vs guaranteed incremental confiscation. Always, always keeping in mind what they will do to us if they are successful in confiscation of our arms.
Those who think "reeducation" camps & killing fields can't happen here are delusional. We've seen the insanity since Trump was elected. Imagine if they thought they had nothing to fear from us.
Yeah, he's better than Nelson. But on guns, apparently not by much. Deeds, not words, tell the tale.
And shame on our local GOP rep, Joe Gruters, who signed on so quick he almost set the parchment on fire.
To say these two men behaved in highly disappointing manner, especialy with the elections coming up, would be an understatement.
Congress is prohibited from passing ex post facto laws by clause 3 of Article I, Section 9 of the United States Constitution. The states are prohibited from passing ex post facto laws by clause 1 of Article I, Section 10.
“Isn’t this what our side has been preaching every time there is a mass shooting and whenever the DUmmies want to take everyone’s guns away? It is a good law, as far as I’m concerned.”
I fought one of these “red flag” bills where I live. We won in committee. I read the bill front to finish several times and the bill was appallingly bad—ex parte seizure of guns where you don’t know anything about it until the police show up at your door. Any girlfriend, family member, roommate, ex-roommate and many others could bring the secret seizure motion.
Then, once your guns are seized, you have seven days to get ready for a hearing to figure out whether the seizure is permanent — $20,000 in lawyers fees out the door — and you still don’t get to confront or cross-examine the witnesses against you.
Because of the way the economics of these bills are designed, 99% of these gun seizures will become permanent because only the idle rich are going to pay $20,000 in attorney’s fees to get back a Glock 19 and a HiPoint. Us regular folks don’t have the resources to fight the state —and the bill is designed that way.
And imagine what a dandy weapon it will be in the arsenal of divorce lawyers. A secret gun seizure hearing by the ex will become as routine as the mandatory child-abuse claims now.
Add to that, there are no sanctions against cops or ex’s who wrongly seize your guns. You may get your AR back. But you’re out $20,000. Does you ex pay? Nope. Do the police pay? Nope.
In the short term, this may get some guns out of the hands of nutty people. In the long term, this is a massively powerful gun-seizure law against ordinary law abiding citizens. Easily 1/3 of Americans have been diagnosed (officially) at some point in their lives with depression, anxiety disorder, OCD, aspergers and on and on. In Berkeley and Madison and Chicago, and LA and Detroit, you can bet that the red flag laws will be expanded in application to cover all of them and maybe more. Their only protection is a Berkeley judge who only hears one side of the case (a secret hearing). The side that gets to present their case in secret hearings almost always wins, especially if the judge thinks guns are a bad idea anyway.
And the ultimate absurdity is that removing a gun from and violent, crazy person leaves them angrier, still crazy and still violent and with lots of remaining weapons — cars, knives, fists, not to mention going downtown and buying an illegal gun.
If you are crazy and violent, you need to be removed from society for a time and treated. 72 hour holds are one way to do that.
I still don’t really have a good answer for the fact that there *ARE* people who simply shouldn’t have guns. I know some of them. Mental disabilities, multiple felonies for assault, etc. But what criteria and processes for preventing them from owning a firearm- that I have no answer for. A neighbor across the street who beat the hell out of his fiancé and I *HEARD* him yell ‘If I had a gun I’d shoot you right now B***H’ (and he was such a moron he would probably have used a 30:06 even in our neighborhood, yeah, that dumb- nothing against the thirty ought, but it could have gone through that cheatin’ skank, AND the wall, AND my wife).
The 1968 GCA made it illegal millions of ex-cons to own guns even if their crimes were committed before the law was enacted. This law will stand but it may be challenged if due process is delayed or denied.
I would think it fair if a person’s lawfully owned firearms are seized that they must be given a hearing within 10 days at which time the state must prove they are a danger. If they cannot, the firearms must be returned immediately. If the state proves their case, then the accused will be given a period of time to attend anger management or see a doctor or maybe just cool off. After that period of time, the state must again testify as to why the defendant should not be allowed to have them. Again, if they cannot, the firearms must be returned immediately.
"...If they cannot, the firearms must be returned immediately..."
Can you you ever get your name off that list once you are on it?
The DUmmies are the scary ones. Most of them would like to emulate Che’.
Remember the Movie “Young Frankenstein” when Gene Wilder locks himself in a Room with the Monster and tells his People not to let him out no matter how much he begs them?
>450 fools in FL and have no idea the wording of 2A.
You say that like it matters.
If they can ignore the Constitution, folks can ignore their legitimacy, which they undermine by their actions
I view them an intellectually dishonest and morally wrong. They have legitimacy the same way the Mafia does. Cross them and you're a gonner.
Re: “Can you ever get your name off that list once you are on it?”
A good question. It’s probably a public record that follows you around for the rest of your life, even if you can get your name removed.
I also wonder if such a “voluntary” list is Constitutional.
Our laws do not allow Americans to surrender “inalienable” rights.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
