Red Flag Law- Extreme Risk Protective Order

anatta said:
it's not an "ideology" - it's normative regulations.
This is an extreme situation, and what the shooters had in common was mental derangement

they are not a threat to others without guns
Click to expand...

What they have in common is white male racist supremacy

WHen you lump this to include other races It takes the racist white male off the hook

Guns will be removed from everyone but them

Y’all tired of the race card and we’re tired of the mental illiness card
 
Last edited:
PoliTalker said:
I would like to see the concept expanded so that an individual who:

a) Has amassed an arsenal,

and

b) Has expressed white supremacy views either online or in person,

-has their guns taken away.
Click to expand...

And that, is the strongest argument *against* Red Flag laws.
 
anatta said:
Pres. Donald Trump called for a national Red Flag law on Monday morning after two weekend mass shootings. A similar law, or or Extreme Risk Protective Order, was signed into law by Colorado Gov. Jared Polis earlier this year.

@LindseyGrahamSC
says he's made a deal with @SenBlumenthal
to create a federal grant program to encourage states to adopt 'red flag' laws.

Hopes to introduce legislation soon and says Trump "seems very supportive" of the idea after conversation this morning.
~~

Looks like the plan to offer states carrots to pass red flag laws is coming together. Red flag laws let courts temporarily take weapons from people deemed threats to themselves/others.
Click to expand...

Trump's rhetoric of hate and racism has incited mass shooting, and now, that has come back to bite him in the ass, and he knows that public opinion is not on his side. So now he is putting on this charade to try to nudge public opinion back on his side. I for one am not buying it.
 
SmarterthanYou said:
hey slave, where in the constitution does it give the federal government any authority to make marijuana illegal? that's right, it doesn't, so all of those people who have been affected by their possession of a weed were affected because of slaves like you who believe that the federal government can do any damned thing it wants to.

so you are actually the dumb one here, but don't take my word for it, read the fucking constitution
Click to expand...

Neighbor, I don't mind reading the Constitution.

But, it would take 6 weeks to read the US Code books!

law_books-100661672-primary.idge.jpg
 
Adolf_Twitler said:
I'll show you as soon as you show us where the Constitution says We The People regulated militias!
Click to expand...

have you not been paying attention on this forum? let alone in the internet world? I could paste over a dozen comments from the founders and court cases that specifically refer to it as an individual right
 
Adolf_Twitler said:
Neighbor, I don't mind reading the Constitution.

But, it would take 6 weeks to read the US Code books!

law_books-100661672-primary.idge.jpg
Click to expand...

when the law is so voluminous that it's impossible to read and know, we have tyranny. also, any law that violates the constitution is null and void......unless you're going to tell us that the supreme court gets to tell us whats constitutional and whats not
 
Trumpet said:
Trump's rhetoric of hate and racism has incited mass shooting, and now, that has come back to bite him in the ass, and he knows that public opinion is not on his side. So now he is putting on this charade to try to nudge public opinion back on his side. I for one am not buying it.
Click to expand...

Mass shootings increased in 2011. Who incited it before then or all the shootings before 2011?
 
SmarterthanYou said:
when the law is so voluminous that it's impossible to read and know, we have tyranny. also, any law that violates the constitution is null and void......unless you're going to tell us that the supreme court gets to tell us whats constitutional and whats not
Click to expand...

Who ruled Washington's ban on handguns was unconstitutional in the Heller case?
 
SmarterthanYou said:
when the law is so voluminous that it's impossible to read and know, we have tyranny. also, any law that violates the constitution is null and void......unless you're going to tell us that the supreme court gets to tell us whats constitutional and whats not
Click to expand...

I don't call that tyranny!

The reason why there are 100's of volumes of US code books, have more to do with the political power of the Legislative branches flipping back and forth just about every election cycle over the last 150 years.

Old code is updated and superseded with new code every time it flips and flops! Just sayin'
 
Flash said:
Who ruled Washington's ban on handguns was unconstitutional in the Heller case?
Click to expand...

it should have been the people using their power of jury nullification. but people are stupid, so............

if you need the supreme court to tell you whats constitutional and whats not, you FAILED as an American
 
Adolf_Twitler said:
I don't call that tyranny!

The reason why there are 100's of volumes of US code books, have more to do with the political power of the Legislative branches flipping back and forth just about every election cycle over the last 150 years.

Old code is updated and superseded with new code every time it flips and flops! Just sayin'
Click to expand...

well, you're sorta right wiht the whole flip flopping shit, but it's still tyranny no matter how you look at it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top