"Scalise says red flag laws are ‘unconstitutional"

Granule said:
Who's doing the deeming? Is it pervert degenerate activists, or is it pervert degenerate activists in "officials" clothing? Something tells me that this red flag shit will be more a gun grabber initiative than an actual mental fitness issue.
Click to expand...

Court
 
Gondwanaland said:
That's like asking why would someone judged by a court as guilty of murder need a retrial or appeal? You do understand that there have been a lot of people found guilty of things by the judgement of a court, who it has been discovered later, were innocent of said things, right? So why the fuck would it be any different here with red flag usage???
Click to expand...

Sure there will be errors, but are you condemning the entire judicial system in the US because they make errors now and then?
 
__b8a762465cf8874dee932bf9353ee3df_width-600.jpeg
 
Cops have been taking assets without court oversight for almost 40 years, all they have to do is to claim that they suspect that illegal activity in involved. It is a minor matter to take guns under the same program.
 
archives said:
Sure they do, decreases the number of assault weapons others can access, and we all know, accessing guns is easy

And the "shooter does the killing" is lame, could have all the plans he wanted but no way he would have killed fifty nine people and shot over four hundred in under eleven minutes if it weren't for the guns
Click to expand...
"assault weapons ban" did nothing in the way of crime stats
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Assault_Weapons_Ban
The scientific consensus among criminologists and other researchers is that the ban had little to no effect on overall criminal activity, firearm deaths, or the lethality of gun crimes. Studies have found that the overwhelming majority of gun crimes are committed with weapons which are not covered by the AWB, and that assault weapons are less likely to be used in homicides than other weapons. There is tentative evidence that the frequency of mass shootings may have slightly decreased while the ban was in effect, but research is inconclusive, with independent researchers finding conflicting results.[2]
~~

Paddock was careful to conceal his behavior - but even a cursorylook would have found him out

Most of the shooters are all over instagram or SM. use that for red flags
 
dukkha said:
"assault weapons ban" did nothing in the way of crime stats
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Assault_Weapons_Ban
The scientific consensus among criminologists and other researchers is that the ban had little to no effect on overall criminal activity, firearm deaths, or the lethality of gun crimes. Studies have found that the overwhelming majority of gun crimes are committed with weapons which are not covered by the AWB, and that assault weapons are less likely to be used in homicides than other weapons. There is tentative evidence that the frequency of mass shootings may have slightly decreased while the ban was in effect, but research is inconclusive, with independent researchers finding conflicting results.[2]
~~

Paddock was careful to conceal his behavior - but even a cursorylook would have found him out

Most of the shooters are all over instagram or SM. use that for red flags
Click to expand...

.Assault weapon ban significantly reduces mass shooting
https://news.northwestern.edu/stori...apon-ban-significantly-reduces-mass-shooting/

Did the number of mass shootings triple after the assault weapon ban ended?
https://www.statesman.com/story/new...le-after-assault-weapon-ban-ended/9941501002/

Changes in US mass shooting deaths associated with the 1994-2004 federal assault weapons ban
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30188421/

Assessment of the Federal Assault Weapons
https://www.ojp.gov/pdffiles1/nij/grants/204431.pdf

Biggest finding is that since the ban expired, mass shootings increased dramatically

And what made Paddock’s slaughter possible was the guns, without them, the shooter, Paddock couldn’t have done what he did
 
archives said:
Sure there will be errors, but are you condemning the entire judicial system in the US because they make errors now and then?
Click to expand...

No, dumbfuck, I'm telling your stupid ass the answer to your goddamn idiotic question of why someone judged unstable by the courts would need their guns back, you braindead cunt.
 
archives said:
"House Minority Whip Steve Scalise (R-La.) on Sunday said he does not support legislation on red flag laws, calling them “unconstitutional” and a non-solution to a broader debate on how to curb gun violence."

"Scalise told “Fox News Sunday” host John Roberts that red flag laws, implemented in 19 states across the U.S., are unconstitutional because authorities violate a Second Amendment right to bear arms when they seize firearms from an individual a court deems is a threat."

https://thehill.com/news/sunday-talk-shows/3512317-scalise-says-red-flag-laws-are-unconstitutional/

Let me see if I got this straight, the right, who keep saying escalating gun deaths in America are due to mental health problems, oppose removing guns from the property of those deemed mentally unfit, is that correct? If a third party goes infront of a court and shows evidence that the concerned individual is struggling with mental issues, an exact situation that the right tells us needs to be done, Steve thinks it is improper and illegal then to remove that person's access to guns?

Amazing how many times and ways the right attempts to deflect off of the crisis of guns in America the more they expose themselves as puppets of the gun manufactures
Click to expand...

Yup...that's what they are saying.

They are saying, "The best way to handle this problem is to see that individuals with mental issues do not have access to guns, but we have to remember that it is illegal to take guns away from anyone no matter what."

It is nuts!
 
dukkha said:
Im fine with red flags... But the seizure should only be for a certain short time period
Click to expand...

We should explore a hypothetical case, and see where it leads. Let's say a man calls the police saying the voices in his head tell him to kill the children in the school across the street, he is arguing with the voices in his head, but losing the argument. The police ask if he has any guns in the house, and he says he has 23 sniper rifles, and 100,000 rounds of ammo. The police get a red flag seizure of the guns.

How many days before he gets his rifles back again? At what point do you say he is 100% trustworthy to have 23 sniper rifles and 100,000 rounds of ammo?

I look at this case, and think that is someone who should never be allowed to own a gun. Time is not a factor here. Maybe given time, and a lot of work, I would consider allowing him to walk free, but even there time is not the major factor.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top