Survivalist Forum - Reply to Topic
Survivalist Forum

Advertise Here

Go Back   Survivalist Forum > > >
Articles Classifieds Donations Gallery Groups Links Store Survival Files


Notices

Firearms General Discussion Rifles, pistols, shotguns, scopes, grips and everything in between.

Advertise Here
Thread: Red Flag Laws, but not for known gang members. Reply to Thread
Title:
  
Message:
Post Icons
You may choose an icon for your message from the following list:
 

Register Now

In order to be able to post messages on the Survivalist Forum forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.
User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.
Password:
Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.
Email Address:
Gender
Insurance
Please select your insurance company (Optional)

Log-in

Human Verification

In order to verify that you are a human and not a spam bot, please enter the answer into the following box below based on the instructions contained in the graphic.



Additional Options
Miscellaneous Options

Topic Review (Newest First)
10-08-2019 01:20 PM
The Old Coach Well, there's some sanity here in Ohio

Governor DeWine has nixed "Red Flag" law proposals.

https://www.buckeyefirearms.org/gov-...-mental-health

He knows that Ohio is not as purple as CNN/WaPo/NYT want us to think it is.
09-23-2019 12:18 PM
deprogramming services So-called red flag laws are intended for one purpose: to disarm those accused of thoughtcrime, with the most serious thoughtcrime of all being loyalty to America. This is all too clear from the anti-patriot propaganda coming from the Democratic Party and its PR machine the liberal press these days. Gang members do not commit thoughtcrime, since they have no loyalty to America, so there is no reason for them to be disarmed.

What is especially dangerous about the red flag scam is that running parallel to it is a massive propaganda blitz about the extreme danger of "white nationalists." A close look at that propaganda makes clear that white nationalist is liberalspeak for patriot. This propaganda blitz coming at the same time as the red flag scam is not likely a coincidence. The enemy is building a war machine right before our eyes, and threatening anyone who speaks out against it.

As far as what are we going to do about it, there has long been talk of armed resistance to this treason but I don't see any action being taken. I think patriot groups should be organizing and making plans, and putting together lists of enemies. But I don't see anything like that happening (though it probably is in secret, but not likely in a big way). Maybe a thread should be started where things like organization and strategy can be discussed (doing so in detail here would be a derailment of the thread).

Someone is certain to decry "all talk and no action..." But without talk there will be no action, or at least no coordinated and meaningful action. Talk among patriots is the origin of action. The enemy knows this, and it's why they threaten patriots with red flag laws and other thoughtcrime legislation, so patriots fear to talk about defending this nation from the aggression of traitors.

It could be that the enemy of freedom knows just how much the heat can be turned up without the frog jumping out of the water, so it looks like the frog might very well get cooked. I hope not, but that's the way it's looking at this point.
09-23-2019 10:41 AM
MagnumWill
Quote:
Since gang members make up 80% of gun homicides in the United States, it only makes sense to include them on the red-flag list.
Makes sense why they would oppose that, if gang members vote who do you think they vote for?
09-21-2019 11:57 AM
starbright
Quote:
Originally Posted by JBryan314 View Post
And what are we going to do about it?
That's a great (and timely) question. What are the options? There's an important word used in your question: 'we' (as opposed to 'I'). While everything does start with individual's deciding to take action, if everyone who opposes the situation go and does something different, there's no way for it to coalesce into a movement with real prospects of making a difference. I'm implying that there needs to be a planned and coordinated response.

The next question (in my mind), is where and how would a planned and coordinated response be discussed and planned? NRA isn't going to do it. While I like GOA, their focus seems to be on just getting large number of people to raise their voices to politicians of their disapproval. I don't know what that leaves open.

It feels as though the right thing would be for cities and towns to pull local people together for meetings to discuss and debate. Hopefully after a few local meetings, there could be some concrete ideas (and specific concerns) that could be forwarded on where each city/town's outcomes could be brought forth into a regional or state level discussion, and then among states. However, this takes time and I don't know that there is enough time available to go through such a process, even assuming the best of circumstances.

The next thought is whether the various online communities/forums could work together along similar lines. However, I don't think individual posts will do it.

I believe that a set of questions would be helpful to give folks some specific things to think about in advance of a conference call. Maybe PMs could be sent giving out the details for a conference call. I don't think it should be publicly posted. Maybe after a few such calls (for people on a specific forum) the discussion outcomes could then be cross-pollinated across forums and then do wider conference calls.

I think it really starts with the logistics of being able to bring together folks of like-minds (without those who would be there to purposefully disrupt) and have serious private discussions.

Your thoughts?
09-21-2019 09:02 AM
Camelfilter
Quote:
Originally Posted by Armtx77 View Post
I will play devils advocate. How do they know they are on a LIST? Who do they contact to challenge this ruling? How do they get off of this list?
They are known gang bangers? Are they convicted felons, not capable under the law to own firearms?
A Federal judge just rules No Fly Laws were Unconstitutional...I dont know how Red Flag laws, are any different than No Fly Laws.

Devils advocate.
Yah.

Portland Oregon. Can’t track Gang Members anymore. If you can’t track gang members, then there’s no gang crime. Obviously.

Everything’s fine.

Ohh, and Oregon State Police keeps a record of all firearms transfers*. Because, well, umm. Yah. That’s why...



*OSP is supposed to destroy there electronic record of firearms associated with an individual after a certain time frame. Wink wink, nudge nudge.
09-21-2019 08:05 AM
Armtx77
Quote:
Originally Posted by LazorWolf View Post
Democrats voted against “red-flagging” known gang members, choosing instead to use the controversial gun control method to disarm rural Americans.

Rep. Ken Buck (R-CO) explained how his amendment that proposed applying a red-flag to anyone law enforcement labels a gang member was shut down by Democrats on the House Judiciary Committee.

Since gang members make up 80% of gun homicides in the United States, it only makes sense to include them on the red-flag list.

I think the Democrats are the known gang members.
I will play devils advocate. How do they know they are on a LIST? Who do they contact to challenge this ruling? How do they get off of this list?
They are known gang bangers? Are they convicted felons, not capable under the law to own firearms?
A Federal judge just rules No Fly Laws were Unconstitutional...I dont know how Red Flag laws, are any different than No Fly Laws.

Devils advocate.
09-21-2019 07:01 AM
JBryan314 And what are we going to do about it?
09-18-2019 04:10 PM
Chuckleberry `

https://gatdaily.com/magazine-ban-re...SQ2EOCOPUP0SB4

.
09-18-2019 04:03 PM
Kalashnikov47 Communism is a MENTAL DISORDER...LOL
09-18-2019 02:31 PM
cantankerous It shows their true agenda red flag laws are all about confiscation plain and simple.
09-18-2019 02:27 PM
A_SonofLiberty
Quote:
Originally Posted by LazorWolf View Post
Democrats voted against “red-flagging” known gang members, choosing instead to use the controversial gun control method to disarm rural Americans.

Rep. Ken Buck (R-CO) explained how his amendment that proposed applying a red-flag to anyone law enforcement labels a gang member was shut down by Democrats on the House Judiciary Committee.

Since gang members make up 80% of gun homicides in the United States, it only makes sense to include them on the red-flag list.

I think the Democrats are the known gang members.
Civilian disarmament is not about reducing shootings, it is about disarming civilians before they institute a socialist totalitarian government.
09-18-2019 02:18 PM
LazorWolf
Red Flag Laws, but not for known gang members.

Democrats voted against “red-flagging” known gang members, choosing instead to use the controversial gun control method to disarm rural Americans.

Rep. Ken Buck (R-CO) explained how his amendment that proposed applying a red-flag to anyone law enforcement labels a gang member was shut down by Democrats on the House Judiciary Committee.

Since gang members make up 80% of gun homicides in the United States, it only makes sense to include them on the red-flag list.

I think the Democrats are the known gang members.

Posting Rules
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:39 AM.


Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Search Engine Optimisation provided by DragonByte SEO (Lite) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2019 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
vBulletin Security provided by vBSecurity v2.2.2 (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2019 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Copyright © Kevin Felts 2006 - 2015,
Green theme by http://www.themesbydesign.net