Posted on 12/10/2019 6:49:23 PM PST by dontreadthis
Exactly, it’s already a crime to shoot up a car.
Use the laws you have, you don’t need new ones.
First, supporting him gives us a black eye.
2Nd, going into court with a guy who really deserves a stay in prison makes it harder to win your case, although I am well aware that there are guilty people who are free because of prosecutor misdeeds.
If more than 2,000 Floridians have had guns seized under the red flag law, surely there is one among them who is more deserving of support.
What exactly are you going to take to the Supremes? The fact the guy refused a court order and refused to comply with the search warrant for the guns in his home?
If that’s what you want to hang your hat on, go ahead.
Now if you’re talking about funding the challenge to someone who has a final (temporary, up to a year, renewable) order that confiscates their firearms, that’s something I can get behind.
Idiot above was as sensible about handling the police as he was about shooting up his friend’s car. This ain’t going anywhere on appeal other than the guy going to jail.
Exactly. It’s a typical lefty incremental foot in the door move. Red Flag Law was never required to arrest this guy and confiscate his guns as evidence.
There must be.
That was President Trump...
"That prompted the president’s now famous complaint about lengthy court proceedings. “Take the guns first, go through due process second,” he recommended."
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2018/03/25/red-flag-laws-allow-temporary-restrictions-access-guns-gain-momentum-across-nation/454395002/ (Towards end of article.)
Unfortunately this is not the guy to do that. Or maybe he is the best case. The 2Amd is absolute. It does not say that apparently erratic persons may be barred from keeping and bearing arms. I am not sure there is any judge in the system that will uphold the 2Amd as it is written.
Okay, I read it wrong. He is charged with attempted murder for shooting at his friend over the cell phone. That apparently hasn’t gone to trial yet.
He was supposed to turn in his weapons as a condition of his bail bond. He did not.
So police went after him with the red flag law, which seems a little redundant with the bond conditions. And he was convicted for refusing to turn over his weapons under the red flag law. Seems like he should have been convicted for refusing to turn over his weapons for the bond condition as well.
Confusing.
Don’t worry about how you (and certainly not we) look to leftists.
if he was arrested in 2018, he likely got a temporary risk protection order following his arrest, when he would have had to surrender his weapons. (maybe a restraining order at the same time?) According to the article below, the temporary order issued starts a 14-day clock, at the end of which is a risk-protection hearing, and if no successful challenge (presumably in the year following the hearing) is mounted, the order becomes permanent after one year.
Sounds like the year was up? And if the guy claims ignorance, he’s probably lying like a rug since he had to have seen a judge and received some sort of paperwork.
No sympathy here for an idiot who would shoot at a vehicle, without caring a wit about what or who else was in his line of fire or ricochet.
https://parrislaw.org/risk-protection-order/
Well, the concept of preemtive denial of Second Amendment rights. I'm not saying there are not grounds in this guy's case, but it seems obvious that the state had ample remedy available. If you want to hang your hat on this as prima facie reason for preemtive gun confiscation, make your case.
He wasn’t convicted of that. He was convicted of refusing to comply with a court order and a search warrant.
So, what, you want to appeal that the court order was illegal and therefore anything after that should be tossed out?
Again, WHY?
Pick one of the other 2,500 confiscation orders made in Florida. It’d be a great case - you have the denial of a constitutional right via a civil hearing where you have to supply your own lawyer and effectively prove yourself innocent.
But this guy? He’s more than welcome to go rot in jail.
Not much sympathy here. The guy was accused of attempted murder. Since he was arrested for a violent crime, he was already under order to surrender his firearms. I would bet that the reason they convicted for refusing to surrender his firearms under the red flag law instead of violating a court order was that it carried a stiffer sentence.
Divorce attorneys have something called “the silver bullet strategy”. Lie about spousal abuse and imply child sexual abuse. It gets him kicked out of the family home, prevents unsupervised visitation with kids, cuts off contact with her, ruins his reputation, and forces the kids into counseling where the children are automatically turned against Dad. This is a TACTIC based on lying about abuse.
Red flag laws would naturally dove tail into this, and there are already anti-gun ex’s and in-laws falsely reporting guys to get his guns taken from him.
And the same people who lie to Child Protective Services and are protected by anonymity laws - including teachers and doctors you complained about - now have another weapon to use against you. This isn’t theoretical, it has already happened.
New Jersey man’s guns seized under red flag law after his rival in a lawsuit filed a petition
https://www.theblaze.com/news/new-jersey-mans-guns-seized-under-red-flag-law-after-his-rival-in-a-lawsuit-filed-a-petition
Did you read the part where he tried to murder someone? This is hardly a case you appeal at all.
I believe o read no indication of any convictions.
No, but if its this obvious we dont need red flag precrime laws to deal with him. Other existing laws are already on the books to deal with violent felons that prevent gun ownership.
They are just trying to use this to validate precrime laws for everyone. and i am sad you don’t realize it.
Why bother with facts? My knee is jerking like crazy when his guns are being confiscated.
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.