Posted on 09/14/2019 8:57:18 AM PDT by rellimpank
How much of the drug money are politicians receiving from gangs?
A lot.
Absolutely needed red flag for older mom with young children who admits mental health issues and problems dealing with anger!
Her two guns, and maybe her children need to be taken away.
It’s for the children!
Yeah, that’s you, Alyssa Milano!
Executing drug dealers would eliminate a lot of gun control nonsense.
No conservative should have anything to do with red flag legislation other than to defeat it.
Adding gang members to the red flag targets is a sucker punch.
Wake up.
Addressed to all, not to you personally.
And they are REALLY opposed to targeting everyone with current or recent use of psychiatric drugs. That would be 100% of the mass shooters of the past 3 or 4 decades.
It would also red-flag the entire Democrat Party plus 20 million other assorted affiliations, for a total of 80 million mind-controlled zombies.
“It’s predictable given that gun laws are intended by the Democrats to punish political opponents but really have nothing to do with public safety.”
BINGO!!! This action shows they’re doing their level best to use these laws against law abiding people while exempting the criminals who support them and are responsible for massive carnage, as in Chicago. Combined with what Robert Francis just did at the last DemonShit debate, while wildly cheered on by his fellow communists in the audience and on the stage, this may well kill most “commonsense” gun grabbing for the near future.
In Chicago most of the “clergy,” “civil rights leaders.” and DemonShit politicians couldn’t survive without heavy subsidies from the gangs; hence, the endless carnage and calls for “commonsense” gun grabbing to divert attention from what’s really happening.
It’s not???
But Jimrob gave me those cool colored neckerchiefs!
The primary concern with red flag laws is who defines and identifies the “red flag.” Period.
When a person is exhibiting behavior that an objective person would deem as threatening to themselves and/or others, the majority of people see it as reasonable to remove firearms and make it difficult for them to acquire firearms. That ability pretty much already exists with “safekeeping” laws/policies and the background check system.
There is NO DOUBT in my mind that many on the left would view membership or participation in conservative groups as a “red flag.” They demonstrate this over and over. This type of legislation leads to a social credit score assigned by big brother or those in power at that particular time. It is fraught with risks and it would likely be abused the next time an administration like the last one is in power just as they abused our intelligence apparatus to include the FISC to domestically target opponents.
This is a very bad idea. Period. I do not want “deranged” individuals who threaten others to have access to firearms, but my definition of “deranged” is far different than theirs and I do not see any way to fairly enforce it as it is likely that only 1 in 1000 (likely much smaller percentage than that) individuals who display whatever “anti-social” behavior is defined as in any given moment would go on to be a homicidal maniac.
It is impossible to be certain who that one person is and impractical to remove the rights of 999 for the actions of 1. A bedrock principle of our justice system. Furthermore, a lack of legal access to firearms by that 1 is unlikely to deter them from acting on their sick impulses - they can simply choose another weapon.
If we are serious about addressing the 1 person, the appropriate action would be to place them in a mental hospital, not to deprive the “non-conforming” of their rights or naively think if we remove one “tool” such as a firearm we can prevent such acts. Firearms are here to stay.
Objectively, this proposal will only make the situation worse and not improve public safety in any way. Well-meaning people who know little about firearms or who have not rationally analyzed this proposal are foolishly going to trade freedom for knee-jerk emotion. The left is full of such ideas and beware of any politicians (to include the GOP) who think this is a good idea.
In fact, I would expect many judges to see it the same way as I do so in the end this is a feel-good talking point that is largely impractical and incompatible with our constitution.
All my guns, including “assault rifles,” and SUVs over the years, have never done the damage he did.
Nobody should ever lose their Constitutional rights because their name was put on a list without due process.
The definition of “gang member” or “terrorist” can be expanded quite easily.
Buck knows the Dems will never agree to that. It’s a poison pill and he is just posturing.
Thanks for the heads-up. I wrote to my rep, suggesting that we red-flag gang bangers in Chicago as a test case. Let’s verify that the corrective action works. (That seems to be a huge hole in a lot of government ideas ... verifying that the action is successful, seeing where the money went, anything like that. It’s mind-boggling.)
If only it weren’t racist. /s
--and I agree that Cook County , Illinois would be a great place to propose a trial run--
Democrats promise low-information voters everything under the sun to stay in power, not that they actually intend to follow through with their promises.
The problem that Democrats have with following through on their constitutionally indefensible gun-control laws for example, is that they cannot let low-information voters find out that gun control laws are ineffective, evidenced by Chicago.
I see shootings/murders at least weekly here in Nashville. I go to the court website and enter the shooter’s name. Over 90% of the time, they are people with previous convictions on violent gun-related felonies and they are on the street on probation, parole and often multiple bonds. Bonds for people who have new violent felonies when they’re already on probation for previous convictions for similar crimes. So some new victim dies because the Court and the DA won’t do their jobs.
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.