Author Topic: Red Flag Laws are not a 2A infringement  (Read 2669 times)

Online walkstall

  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 25763
  • Gender: Male
  • WYSIWYG
Re: Red Flag Laws are not a 2A infringement
« Reply #30 on: September 05, 2019, 05:47:32 PM »
While this may be true, I still agree with the principle of the idea.  Just because we don't share the same goal doesn't mean we can't support the same policy. Ideally a judge would be the one to decide, since they cannot be politically biased.


 :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: Bull Shit!!! The Dem's go judge shopping all the time.   This is the real world not your BS Utopia. 
A politician thinks of the next election. A statesman, of the next generation.- James Freeman Clarke

Politics is supposed to be the second-oldest profession.  I have come to realize that it bears a very close resemblance to the first.  ~ Ronald Reagan ~

Always remember "Feelings Aren't Facts."

Offline s3779m

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2639
  • Gender: Male
  • Keep looking, it's there
Re: Red Flag Laws are not a 2A infringement
« Reply #31 on: September 06, 2019, 10:23:29 AM »
Forgive my clickbait title, perhaps I should have worded it as "a good idea" instead.  My main argument is that Red flag Laws act like a second background check that can be applied should someone's behavior change.  Can you explain how red flag Laws differ from background checks in principle?
Maybe this wil help with the red flag discussion.

https://www.redstate.com/streiff/2019/09/06/court-ruling-terrorism-watch-list-spell-doom-red-flag-laws/

Offline Killer Clouds

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 147
  • I love Conservative Political Forum!
Re: Red Flag Laws are not a 2A infringement
« Reply #32 on: September 06, 2019, 10:58:52 AM »
Maybe this wil help with the red flag discussion.

https://www.redstate.com/streiff/2019/09/06/court-ruling-terrorism-watch-list-spell-doom-red-flag-laws/

Since all muslims are terrorists they should all be on the watch list.

Offline s3779m

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2639
  • Gender: Male
  • Keep looking, it's there
Re: Red Flag Laws are not a 2A infringement
« Reply #33 on: September 06, 2019, 11:03:13 AM »
Since all muslims are terrorists they should all be on the watch list.
The point was the fact that the red flag was ruled unconstitutional. The same will probably happen to any red flag act which will try to take away guns with out facts to go on.

Offline Killer Clouds

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 147
  • I love Conservative Political Forum!
Re: Red Flag Laws are not a 2A infringement
« Reply #34 on: September 06, 2019, 11:25:05 AM »
The point was the fact that the red flag was ruled unconstitutional. The same will probably happen to any red flag act which will try to take away guns with out facts to go on.
Agreed. The red flag laws are unconstitutional for a few reasons.

I'm not an attorney but I did stay at a Holiday Inn Express last night.

Offline carolina73

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 202
  • I love Conservative Political Forum!
Re: Red Flag Laws are not a 2A infringement
« Reply #35 on: September 06, 2019, 11:57:48 AM »
Really? I see in the Constitution that the Federal Government only has the right to perform the duties that it was granted in the Constitution. I d not see where the Federal Government was granted the right to restrict your right to breathe, defend yourself with a weapon of any type or anything else until you have broken a law that would justify it.

They also have no right to force you to buy insurance or take part in Medicare or even Social Security. You can argue the merits of giving the Federal Government those rights but amendments have to be made to the Constitution to make it legal. Currently the Federal Government is out of control and has been for 150 years. The slow slide to destroying our Constitution has now put politicians in a position where they think they can burn it.

Offline mrclose

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2986
  • Gender: Male
Re: Red Flag Laws are not a 2A infringement
« Reply #36 on: September 06, 2019, 03:20:10 PM »
I agree with the thread premise and would add what is the need for weapons of mass destruction on the streets and in the homes of Americans. I have to also wonder who has the money to use a machine gun for hunting?  In case they miss the first time they get two hundred more times? 

"Fourteen-year-old boys are not part of a well-regulated militia. Members of wacky religious cults are not part of a well-regulated militia. Permitting unregulated citizens to have guns is destroying the security of this free state."  Molly Ivins

"In 1991, Warren E. Burger, the conservative chief justice of the Supreme Court, was interviewed on the MacNeil/Lehrer NewsHour about the meaning of the Second Amendment's "right to keep and bear arms." Burger answered that the Second Amendment "has been the subject of one of the greatest pieces of fraud--I repeat the word 'fraud'--on the American public by special interest groups that I have ever seen in my lifetime." In a speech in 1992, Burger declared that "the Second Amendment doesn't guarantee the right to have firearms at all. "In his view, the purpose of the Second Amendment was "to ensure that the 'state armies'--'the militia'--would be maintained for the defense of the state."

http://www.bradycampaign.org/key-gun-violence-statistics


There are a couple of you that have very little education as far as our constitution goes!

Your posts are a testament to your ignorance!

Burger, as most of our self serving government 'elitists' are was a liar or worse .. Ignorant!
And for your information: The Supreme Court or no other so-called lawmakers have any authority to pass or enforce law that conflicts with the Constitution!

The ONLY reason that they have been able to get away with these "infringements" is because of the Ignorance of the people which, as I already said ... is on display here by a couple of you!

I created the following, Really Short two pages on the 2nd amendment and the myth of only having muskets during the writings of the 2nd.

There are no ads or popups on the pages and it will take all of 2 minutes to read through them.

(Pay particular attention to what Noah Webster had to say about the 'militia')

https://mrclose.neocities.org/2ND.html

« Last Edit: September 06, 2019, 03:25:07 PM by mrclose »
"When you are dead, you don't know that you are dead.
It is difficult only for the others.

It is the same when you are stupid."

~ Anonymous

Offline Killer Clouds

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 147
  • I love Conservative Political Forum!
Re: Red Flag Laws are not a 2A infringement
« Reply #37 on: September 06, 2019, 04:01:13 PM »
There are a couple of you that have very little education as far as our constitution goes!

Your posts are a testament to your ignorance!

Burger, as most of our self serving government 'elitists' are was a liar or worse .. Ignorant!
And for your information: The Supreme Court or no other so-called lawmakers have any authority to pass or enforce law that conflicts with the Constitution!

The ONLY reason that they have been able to get away with these "infringements" is because of the Ignorance of the people which, as I already said ... is on display here by a couple of you!

I created the following, Really Short two pages on the 2nd amendment and the myth of only having muskets during the writings of the 2nd.

There are no ads or popups on the pages and it will take all of 2 minutes to read through them.

(Pay particular attention to what Noah Webster had to say about the 'militia')

https://mrclose.neocities.org/2ND.html

EXCELLENT!

Offline mrclose

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2986
  • Gender: Male
Re: Red Flag Laws are not a 2A infringement
« Reply #38 on: September 06, 2019, 04:27:16 PM »
EXCELLENT!

Thank You!

I tried to put everything in the most basic and easily understandable way possible 'but', (Yes there is always a 'BUTT' in there somewhere), I still have leftists argue with me.

Not on what is actual reality 'but' on the way "Things Should Be" ! :blink:
"When you are dead, you don't know that you are dead.
It is difficult only for the others.

It is the same when you are stupid."

~ Anonymous

Offline TboneAgain

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4407
  • Gender: Male
  • Alex, I'll try "THINGS ONLY I KNOW" for $200.
Re: Red Flag Laws are not a 2A infringement
« Reply #39 on: September 06, 2019, 10:13:45 PM »
We've had red flag laws in the US for decades. They're called "child protection" and "domestic partner protection" laws. They are the most abused laws on the books. The new red flag laws won't be any better.
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people. -- Tenth Amendment to the US Constitution

Government is not reason; it is not eloquent; IT IS FORCE. -- George Washington

Offline HuntingVorel

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 24
  • Gender: Male
Re: Red Flag Laws are not a 2A infringement
« Reply #40 on: September 07, 2019, 03:52:32 AM »
Real Conservatives have an issue with ALL gun laws, which was my point about "Shall Not Infringe".
Point is, the Fed has absolutely no business in the matter, particularly SCOTUS and Congress, while States are another issue.
The Bill of Rights was an impediment to the Federal Govt, a restriction against them. That's why it was a stand alone document, without it, there would never have been a Republic in the first place.
Yes, from a constitutional perspective, red flag Laws are an infringement.  However, what I can't get over is the precedent set by certain gun laws, particularly background checks.  If we allow infringements such as background checks, red flag laws just seem reasonable.  It's an emotional conviction, but a conviction nonetheless.  You would have to argue that we don't need background checks or show how entirely different red flag laws are from background checks (or how we could make them more similar to make good policy).  Also, I would say that conservative means a respect for tradition and the great things the world has to offer, and we shouldn't be talking about how extreme/moderate a "real" conservative must be.
"A man who has nothing to die for, is not fit to live" -Martin Luther King Jr.

Offline HuntingVorel

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 24
  • Gender: Male
Re: Red Flag Laws are not a 2A infringement
« Reply #41 on: September 07, 2019, 03:55:26 AM »
By the way, welcome to the forum. :cool:
Thanks man, I figured this would be a better place to discuss politics than my college campus  :biggrin:
"A man who has nothing to die for, is not fit to live" -Martin Luther King Jr.

Offline HuntingVorel

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 24
  • Gender: Male
Re: Red Flag Laws are not a 2A infringement
« Reply #42 on: September 07, 2019, 04:00:00 AM »
  a red flag is just someone's damn opinion which by itself would not justify a search warrant so in essence if violates the 2nd and 4th. If what someone posts on social media is concerning enough, get a damn search warrant, convince a judge that what is a red flag is serious enough to take away that person's rights. And no, I do not know of any conservatives in favor of increasing back ground checks or red flag laws.
Absolutely, a red flag law being "someone's damn opinion" concerns me too.  My idea of red flag laws are like what you said: someone posts/says something concerning, so they are investigated and a judge decided the appropriate action.  Would you support that?
"A man who has nothing to die for, is not fit to live" -Martin Luther King Jr.

Offline HuntingVorel

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 24
  • Gender: Male
Re: Red Flag Laws are not a 2A infringement
« Reply #43 on: September 07, 2019, 04:07:28 AM »
How, Pray Tell, is "Due Process" Maintained? 

This is my Main objection to "red flag laws", they are subjective and in my opinion PRETEXTUAL in nature.  This is a way for the left to attack the 2d amedt and skirt the Constitution.  And I speak from the viewpoint of one who served in Law enforcement for 25+ years ad Private security for another 15. I got many a "restraining order" as a private body guard and took lots and lots of guns out of the hands of criminals who shouldn't have had them as a sworn LEO.

In each of those scenarios I had to have Probable cause for an arrest or was willing to swear out an affidavit outlining PROBABLE CAUSE before a JUDGE or MAGISTRATE why I thought the person might be armed/dangerous or have access to an illegal firearm. Then I needed a search warrant... There were a few times when the Judge/magistrate didn't agree with me.

Before you throw your support behind any "Red Flag" law I suggest you read the diagnostics and proceedural steps that must be taken.

If the LEOs can just come and confiscate firearms or other weapons on the say so of 3rd party HEARSAY, unsupported by that complainant/witness sworn affidavit before a Judge/Magistrate, outlining the PROBABLE CAUSE that the persons is dangerous or had made specific threats or is about to use said weapon in the commission of a crime  then right off the bat that law is UNCONSTITUTIONAL and a violation of the persons right to due process.

And in cases where such the aforemetion legal requiremets exist the Police need a WARRANT to look for SPECIFIC Weapons as described in the warrant, no fishing expiditions, no taking guns belonging to my son or my brother if they aren't part of that which I'm alleged to have done

READ YOUR 4th Amedt which deals with search and seizure and the volumes and volumes of case law dealing with the seizure of citizens property by LEO & you'll understand where Im coming from

Last but not least what is the proceedure for a citizens REDRESS for having their property returned or refuting the "red flag"....I better have a hearing and face my accussers in a court of law before a Judge or perhaps a jury if I so choose as entitled to by the Constitution, and if you are going to keep my weapons then you better charge me with a crime or have a Forensic Psychiatrist testify why Im a danger to myself and others.

This is the slipperyest of slopes
I agree that more gun laws tend to be slippery slopes but what you have described is what I think of when I hear red flag laws.  You go before a judge with evidence admissible in court, and depending on how the court rules, warrants may be given out to confiscate guns. 
"A man who has nothing to die for, is not fit to live" -Martin Luther King Jr.

Offline HuntingVorel

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 24
  • Gender: Male
Re: Red Flag Laws are not a 2A infringement
« Reply #44 on: September 07, 2019, 04:16:01 AM »
The main problem with these ref flag laws is they are going to be like thought crimes. Some person in power will decide what a person was thinking when he posted something on Facebook
In a court of law, evidence is presented and a verdict is fairly reached.  "Threatening Violence" is not an arbitrary or subjective standard.  Very different from the "incitement of violence" we are seeing in current events nowadays.
"A man who has nothing to die for, is not fit to live" -Martin Luther King Jr.

 

Powered by EzPortal