Now that I’ve actually read it

SCOTUS already ruled in 2021 that Red Flag laws are unconstitutional. I hope someone sues over this portion of the bill.

 

I agree with looking into juvenile records and taking steps to address mental illness. But I am totally against red flag laws since there is no due precess. I had to deal with having my firearms taken without due process years ago when my ex wife called 911 and lied saying that I was a danger to myself. I didn't get any due precess to prove that I was NOT a danger to myself or others. And it took my lawyer and letters from my VA doctors proving this to get my guns back.

 

Could somebody quote the text or point me in the direction or page where I could find the particulars of the expanded NICS check on juvenile offenses? Just curious about that, I raised a lil hell when I was a teenager, completed all the court requirements/diversion and to my knowledge the records are sealed.

I'm certain that sealed or expunged records aren't subject to the NICS check but it'd be interesting to see exactly what the bill says about it.

 

Juvenile records are only considered if the buyer is under 21.

See Title II, pages 28-33.

 

It won't matter. They simply ignore whatever the court says when it does not support the agenda.

 

That would be convenient, now I don’t have to write John and tell him he’s never getting another vote from me.

Ted will though, he gets it. This isn’t a destination for Democrats, just another bite.

 

The point is to see the past of people who turn old enough to buy and buy and with juvenile records sealed there's nothing to trip the instant check. So for three years they're unsealed, then you have three years of record so they seal them when you're 22.

 

^^ Quoted to help people understand how red flag laws REALLY work. I have an FFL acquaintance who had essentially the same thing happen to him, only it was by a squatter in one of his rental properties. It's a revenge weapon for the unethical.

Want to stop evil scum from doing evil things like shooting up children (and in the case of Uvalde, while the cops stand around and wait)? Put a couple of them through a wood chipper (or just hang them), let the rest of the would-be murderers know that'll also be their fate, and watch the crime rate plummet. As long as crime continues to be decriminalized, we'll have massive crime. But they like to say when someone suggests actually punishing the evil-doers, "that's not who we are" as a country. So we watch evil proliferate.

 

Fixed it for you.

It’s a nice thought. Kind of like taking my shoes off ensures I have safe travel in an air plane, only the naive believe that to be true.

 

True. They usually don't work very well for the claimed purpose. But they work for the gun controllers and others to annoy and implement further control and aggravation for law-abiding citizens (like the rental property squatter in the example I cited recently who, with zero justification, red-flagged a local FFL dealer and the police essentially SWAT-ed him as they are bound to do).

 

How many here have actually read a so called "Red Flag" law? i've read most: There is due process. From a Florida law firm:

What Is Florida’s Red Flag Gun Law?

"Many states have red flag laws and no matter where they are enacted, they receive a lot of attention. Critics of red flag laws argue that they violate the Second Amendment rights granted to all Americans, while proponents claim that they are one way to try and keep people safe.

Florida lawmakers enacted the law after the shooting at Stoneman Douglas High School, in an effort to prevent another tragedy. However, the law is very broad and sometimes, law abiding citizens have their firearms taken away from them, which is a violation of their rights. For this reason, every gun owner in Florida should know the law, and the rights they are still entitled to under it.

What is Florida’s Red Flag Law?

Under the Florida Statutes, the red flag law is known as Risk Protection Orders. The law allows police officers and law enforcement agencies to petition the court when they believe a person that owns a firearm is a risk to themselves or other people.

By petitioning the court, law enforcement agencies are asking the court to force a certain firearm owner, known as the respondent, to surrender their firearms and their license to carry a concealed weapon, if applicable. If a risk protection order is issued, an individual is also prohibited from having access to firearms. Owners of firearms are sometimes not even notified that their weapons are being confiscated. In these situations, it is known as an ex parte order.

You Still Have Rights Under the Law

Florida enacted its red flag law in 2018 and since that time, over 2,500 risk protection orders have been ordered within the state. Clearly, it is having an impact and it is likely that some people that have had to surrender their firearms are law abiding gun owners. If someone petitions the court and names you as a respondent under the red flag law, it is important to know you still have rights.

If you are forced to surrender your firearms, you have the right to a hearing in front of a judge. You also have the right to attend this hearing within two weeks of the confiscation of your firearms. During the hearing, you can tell your side of the story to the court. The police officer or law enforcement agency that petitioned the court originally also has the right to attend the hearing and argue their side of the story.

After hearing from both sides, a judge will make a decision to either return your guns to you, or to keep the protection order in place for one year. After that time, the judge can also decide to extend it on a yearly basis afterwards, as well."

Here is the Florida "Red Flag" law passed and signed into law by Republicans.

Statutes & Constitution :View Statutes : Online Sunshine (state.fl.us)

 

Because it is about controlling us. The end game is absolute rule of us. They have spent decades brainwashing people to believe that guns and gun owners are the problem and hence logic doesn't matter.

 

...

 

In Florida, there is due process within a couple of weeks AFTER they've come and hauled away your guns. And the outcome of the "due process" is the whim of the judge. In many jurisdictions the judge may see himself/herself as the decider of what he/she would like to see happen, not what the law says. As with many other institutions, some of the judges are out of control these days.

 

Having a "right to a hearing" after the fact is NOT how the U.S. justice system is supposed to work ! This "presumes" your guilt WITHOUT being able to defend yourself at that time. This is where "due process" is lost and possibly, never regained.

 

It’s a white flag of sorts, too. An acknowledgment that to try to claim they’re doing anything about mass shootings, they have to address something substantive, instead of the usual dumbshow-for-the-ignorant of “assault weapon” bans and magazine limits.
If anything, it’s an admission those horses have long since left the barn.

 

That

The only issue with guns is that we have them to protect ourselves from the government and they don't like it.

 

So with red flag laws, there is no due process, at all? Someone only needs to make a claim that you are a danger and LE just swoops in and grabs your firearms?

If that's really how it works that's just so, so wrong....

 

Yes that IS how red flag laws work.

 

Sweet, all we need is one activist judge and we can disarm lawful gun owners indefinitely.

Before someone thinks that it is paranoia to think a judge would stoop that low or even make decisions based on false information…

https://www.cnn.com/2020/01/23/politics/fisa-carter-page-warrants/index.html

https://www.justice.gov/usao-ct/pr/fbi-attorney-admits-altering-email-used-fisa-application-during-crossfire-hurricane

There isn’t even any jail time when THEY are found guilty of altering or providing false evidence used against you.
https://www.politico.com/news/2021/01/29/fbi-lawyer-trump-russia-probe-email-463750

Thanks but no thanks.

Likely? How about every single one of them? If they are not law abiding gun owners, arrest them AND take their firearms while you are at it. No new laws needed, the ones in place already allow for that.

Not like taking a couple guns away from an individual makes them incapable of causing anyone harm, anyway. If that were true prisons would be the safest place on earth to live.

“Clearly, it is having an impact…” Ok, let’s see the proof. How many lives have we saved so far? Oh, there is no way to tell. How convenient…

 

As with the obummercare debacle, it looks like they took Pelosi's infamous "we have to pass the bill before you can see what's in it" approach. What more proof could a person need that they are not even making an attempt to govern in the best interest of those who elected them? I believe that *I* would have to be a pure-bred moron - that's dominant moron gene on mother's side, dominant moron gene on father's side - to believe that many in the GOP (puke) such as Cornyn and McConnell are trying to help us. So, I don't believe them, don't trust them.

Rand Paul talks about how it went down:
https://summit.news/2022/06/24/rand-paul-says-gun-control-bill-was-kept-secret-and-senators-not-allowed-time-to-read-it/

Infuriating. I'm not sure if I'd rather see Mitch McConnell out of office, or Brandon.

 

So anybody you are feuding with, ex, brother, neighbor, FB enemy, co worker, and safe space people of all stripes can just call your name out to authorities on a whim and send LE to your house to take your guns? They don't have to establish any credibility whatsoever like a threatening voice-mail, text message or provide a witness or anything like that?

This will be abused badly...... I'm not certain but I'm pretty sure that in some states even if you want to file a restraining order on somebody they require some evidence that you have good cause for it or you aint getting it, seems the threshold for depriving somebody of rights and property should be a lil higher......

People love to call on and report people for just about anything..... we live in a society where kids can't even set up lemonade stands on their lawns because some Karen is going to report them for lack of a permit.......

 

From the perspective of a Ca. resident, the federal law is really nothing to us. It wont change how we buy/sell guns at all since we are already u der the thumb of the hacks up in Sacto.

But that wont stop DC from trying to implement more Ca. style oppression on the rest of the US later. Don’t fall asleep or it’ll happen.

Stay safe.

 

I have two views.

1. If the words "not too bad" apply, it's bad and further infringes on rights where it shouldn't. It's another step in the wrong direction. When do we GAIN rather than compromise away?

2. When has throwing money by the government at problem ever resulted in improvement?