Red Flag Confiscation

Status
Not open for further replies.
Not to state the obvious but, I’d rather have a felony than a casket.

However the point isn’t what one can and can’t do, it’s how pointless the law is. If someone wants a guns, in our current state of affairs they can get one. That was my, likely poorly communicated, point.

People that legitimately need to be red flagged can just go get another gun, it may take a couple days but removing the tool and leaving the evil guy will not work… he’ll just find another tool.
And also seems to passively reinforce the idea that guns in and of themselves are the problem.

Like "it's OK folks, the family and community at large can rest easy tonight, we just took a supposedly dangerous unstable person who is apparently liable to become unhinged at some point in the immediate future and agitated him by invading his home and seizing his property, but we got the guns so nothing to fear!!!!"

I won't pretend like there aren't people who should have their guns confiscated, I've even met a few. I just think this whole red flag thing is a "Hey look we did something". I would propose something else entirely different that didn't violate the rights and presumption of innocence of others. There's gotta be something better than this dumpster fire. And like others stated, men going through divorce proceedings or custody hearings are going to be low hanging fruit for the type of potential abuse we are talking about.
 
Last edited:
Like "it's OK folks, the family and community at large can rest easy tonight, we just took a supposedly dangerous unstable person who is apparently liable to become unhinged at some point in the immediate future and agitated him by invading his home and seizing his property, but we got the guns so nothing to fear!!!!"
Exactly. Humans need to be held accountable for their actions. Putting the weapons in jail just leaves the danger to find another weapon. Soon we are banning butter knives because we refuse to punish humans for their bad behavior.

It the person is too dangerous to have a firearm, they are also too dangerous for driving and being left alone with matches. If that is the case they are unable to make decisions for their own well being and should be observed, you know, locked up. Which senator will sign on for that?

Red Flags should be a Mental Health issue but they are being bandied about as a GunControl issue.


I just don’t think it’s about saving lives. Shocker, huh?;)
 
Wait a minute. That is what I said.
I know people got all up in arms about Due Process when President Trump said something to the effect of "take the guns now, Due Process later." That said, and whether it's right, wrong, or indifferent, post-deprivation Due Process has long been recognized as one acceptable way to provide Due Process.
 
What if a gun store owner is red flagged? Hate to think of how that would go down.
It's happened. Sex offenses and DV. They lost their businesses. Typically this stuff won't make the national news unless... they happen to be reality TV stars. Look what happened to Richard Wyatt and Will Hayden... Don't know if any ERPOs were applied in those cases, but that was some pretty high-profile stuff. But thus far, no barricaded gunshop owners holding off SWAT because a vindicative ex-wife makes an allegation against them...
 
It's happened. Sex offenses and DV. They lost their businesses. Typically this stuff won't make the national news unless... they happen to be reality TV stars. Look what happened to Richard Wyatt and Will Hayden... Don't know if any ERPOs were applied in those cases, but that was some pretty high-profile stuff. But thus far, no barricaded gunshop owners holding off SWAT because a vindicative ex-wife makes an allegation against them...
I was just thinking, somewhat it may depend on the shop. My second favorite GS (soon to be favorite after my favorite moves up north in Oct) serves a lot of local police, so I would think they have somewhat of a better position if someone red flags the owner.
 
Another concern that I have not seen articulated is that fabricated Red Flag confiscations would be even more dangerous for decent and law-abiding people as compared to genuine dirtbag criminals:

EXAMPLE:
Joe and Susan are entirely law-abiding. They pay their taxes. They do not have so much as a parking ticket. Unbeknownst to them, a jealous (yet very convincing) troublemaking neighbor has decided to Red Flag them.

While a genuine dirtbag criminal may actually expect a police raid to occur someday, our decent and honorable friends Joe and Susan would NEVER expect such a violent raid. In my mind, Joe and Susan might react much more forcefully in the event of broken doors and windows at 4:30 am compared to a dirtbag criminal familiar with such things as getting arrested, getting handcuffed, manhandled, and getting processed through the system.

It can easily be a situation where entirely decent and law-abiding people could get injured or killed.
 
The anti's can't do away with the 2A, which is their ultimate goal so they create as many road blocks as possible. In many states they control they use the permitting process to delay or deny gun ownership or concealed carry. The next layer is limiting the places you can carry as much as possible. People still own and carry guns? Let's use red flag laws to confiscate guns knowing that former spouses or girlfriends as well as others will falsely report gun owners under this law. Shame on the politicians who are supposedly pro 2A for going along with it. I can only hope there are significant criminal and civil penalties built into these laws, giving gun owners who are victims of false claims recourse. Of this I'm not optimistic.
 
The family members that typically initiate a "red flag" procedure presumably know what guns the person has. So this is not as difficult as it seems.

Not a single family member or friend has the slightest remote idea of what I have. I'm betting that's the same for many THR members. Don't ask, don't tell, don't let them be seen all in one place at one time. Nobody's darned business. They can inventory everything after I'm dead. I have an inventory myself, but it's not public either.

I'm sure many of you saw this news report from the weekend: https://www.cbsnews.com/news/allen-kentucky-shooting-lance-storz-arrested-3-officers-killed/

Not stated as a red flag warrant, but it was being served for domestic violence so the owner likely interpreted the outcome would be that they would confiscate his guns. Didn't work out very well for the poor officers and dog. Nor for the homeowner; he's not dead, but his mug shot looked like he'd been beaten pretty badly.
 
In January, 2019 Illinois The Firearms Restraining Order Act, or a Red Flag law took effect. The Highland Park shooter had runs ins with law enforcement and was known to be a threat. If existing laws are not enforced why does anyone think passing more laws will solve problems?

https://www.uslawshield.com/update-red-flag-laws-il/

Highland Park mass shooting suspect had two prior incidents, police said
Robert Crimo, the suspect in the Highland Park Fourth of July parade shooting that killed seven and wounded dozens, was involved in two incidents prior to the massacre, police said Tuesday.

In April 2019, an individual called police a week after learning of Crimo attempting suicide, authorities said. Police said the matter was handled by mental health professionals with no law enforcement.

In September 2019, a family member reported Crimo had a collection of knives and “was going to kill everyone,” authorities said. Police responded to the incident and removed the weapons from Crimo’s possession, police said. Highland Park police notified State Police of the incident but no further actions were taken.
 
In January, 2019 Illinois The Firearms Restraining Order Act, or a Red Flag law took effect. The Highland Park shooter had runs ins with law enforcement and was known to be a threat. If existing laws are not enforced why does anyone think passing more laws will solve problems?

https://www.uslawshield.com/update-red-flag-laws-il/

Highland Park mass shooting suspect had two prior incidents, police said
Robert Crimo, the suspect in the Highland Park Fourth of July parade shooting that killed seven and wounded dozens, was involved in two incidents prior to the massacre, police said Tuesday.

In April 2019, an individual called police a week after learning of Crimo attempting suicide, authorities said. Police said the matter was handled by mental health professionals with no law enforcement.

In September 2019, a family member reported Crimo had a collection of knives and “was going to kill everyone,” authorities said. Police responded to the incident and removed the weapons from Crimo’s possession, police said. Highland Park police notified State Police of the incident but no further actions were taken.
 
I like how media is calling for the fainting couch because the Highland Park crackpot owned seventeen knives.
My anticipation is our leadership class will opine owning "too many" legal items is good cause for Red Flags.
 
No one but me knows what is in my safe, and I wonder if they come knocking because someone reported me what would happen if I simply lock the safe. I wonder then what the procedure would be, because there's no way I'd voluntarily open it.
 
I don't think police carry those, but I wonder of they'd call a locksmith to drill the safe.
Doubt they'd bother with a locksmith. Locksmiths are called when there is concern for excessive collateral damage.

If anyone they'd call in a couple of firefighters. Those guys do have angle grinders. Big, gas-powered ones.
 
No one but me knows what is in my safe, and I wonder if they come knocking because someone reported me what would happen if I simply lock the safe. I wonder then what the procedure would be, because there's no way I'd voluntarily open it.

If there is a warrant, the officers are going to make entry into the safe. All of the "Red Flag" statutes that I'm aware of require judicial approval before LEOs can seize weapons. I have not seen any that permit seizure based only on an unverified report made to LEOs.

Early in my career with the Sheriff's Department, I was involved in the service of a search warrant for narcotics. The location was a two story, wood framed, commercial building and there was a large safe on the second floor. The owner of the building declined to open the safe to permit a search pursuant to the warrant. We called a locksmith (who was a retired LEO) and he drilled out the lock mechanism using a flood coolant on the drill bit. He explained that he would never use a torch or grinder for fear that the safe might contain explosives or combustibles. A half-hour later we recovered a lot of dope from the safe.

It turned out that the flood coolant caused considerable structural damage to the building. The owner filed a civil claim against the County (required in order to later file a lawsuit) which was denied. He lost his civil lawsuit against the county on the grounds that he had the opportunity to limit damages by opening the safe and that he failed to do so. He private insurer also denied his claim, citing the failure to mitigate damages clause in his insurance policy.
 
Last edited:
If there is a warrant, the officers are going to make entry into the safe.

I've read that police can confiscate weapons with no warrant under RFL. I will have to find out about that here in NV. If there's a warrant I wouldn't lock it but if there's not I would.
 
Alright I found this, it seems they will only confiscate after a hearing and court order.

"Nevada courts can grant a seven-day-long emergency order prohibiting an allegedly high risk person from having a gun without that person being at the hearing or even receiving notice of the hearing. The court just has to find by a preponderance of the evidence that:

  1. The person poses an imminent risk of causing a self-inflicted injury or a personal injury to another person by possessing, controlling, purchasing or otherwise acquiring any firearm; and
  2. The person engaged in high-risk behavior; and
  3. Less restrictive options have been exhausted or are not effective.
Before the emergency order ends, the court will hold a second hearing to determine whether to grant a one-year extended order. (The person named in the order must have been given notice of the hearing and an opportunity to appear.) The court will grant the extended order if it finds the above three conditions by clear and convincing evidence.

The person named in the extended order must surrender their firearms to police immediately after they get served with the order. And the person may not get the guns back until the order expires or is dissolved by the court
."

But you may not have a presence at the hearing, or lawyer, or the ability to confront your accuser. This is BS - quite the liberal state this has turned into. CA East.
 
Given how many very well-known nutcases are still legally able to get their hands on weapons to then wreak havoc...
I would appreciate some constructive suggestions as to best approach to handling.

NOTE: while Tucker Carlson gets a bit strident in his opinions of late, his latest OpEd is right on target:
What we have evolved to as a society has very deliberately produced a significant increase in unstable young males.
https://www.foxnews.com/opinion/tucker-carlson-gun-control-doesnt-stop-bad-people-guns
... and I quite frankly don't know how to walk things back at this point.

Again, I would appreciate some constructive/practical suggestions.

.
 
Last edited:
The general movement toward confiscation is driven by fear. The corrupt media eagerly dishes out heaping helpings of anti-gun fear mongering with every opportunity. When I occasionally drift into media narrative about "gun violence", I see "Red Flag" greeted as a cure with much greater frequency at present. Anti-gunners almost celebrate with every shooting. Fear breeds far more destruction than easily acquired firearms. Just look around at the pandemic responses....... We all know this.
 
Not a single family member or friend has the slightest remote idea of what I have. I'm betting that's the same for many THR members. Don't ask, don't tell, don't let them be seen all in one place at one time. Nobody's darned business. They can inventory everything after I'm dead. I have an inventory myself, but it's not public either.
I'm also low-key as to what I have. But friends and family? Why bother to have a collection if you can't brag to someone about what you've spent so much effort assembling?
 
Alright I found this, it seems they will only confiscate after a hearing and court order.

  1. The person poses an imminent risk of causing a self-inflicted injury or a personal injury to another person by possessing, controlling, purchasing or otherwise acquiring any firearm; and
  2. The person engaged in high-risk behavior; and
  3. Less restrictive options have been exhausted or are not effective.
1) Anti gunners very easily "feel" threatened or at imminent risk.
2) Anti gunners very easily "feel" that other people engage in high risk behavior.
3) Anti gunners agitate, threaten and gas light normal people. This can easily make a normal person continue their behavior in lines 1 and 2 which initially made said anti gunner "feel" so threatened and triggered.

Watch for anti gunners to hone their skills at agitating and gas lighting.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top