Survivalist Forum banner
101 - 120 of 120 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
795 Posts
Well put.

DIscollector, based on his USResisters link, still says In order to keep firearms out of the wrong hands, keep the bodies of the wrong hands in jails, prisons, mental health facilities, and / or under constant supervision.

Doesn't look like there is an age "before" issue.

The point of discussion boards is to discuss ideas, test theories, and better our arguments, I hope we can all walk away with a better idea on how to express and explain our argument against taking away our individual rights.
Here is what is wrong with what people like Traxxas do. They want a bumper sticker solution to every problem. When you can't give them one, they will accuse you of not having a proposal. When you offer it to them, they say TLDR. Traxxas knows that all he has to do is READ the proposal. He won't address it here OR on the site where it is outlined. He just makes unsubstantiated claims based upon the dishonest bumper sticker "solution" that isn't even the Cliff Notes.

He doesn't ask WHEN people are put into jail, prison, or mental health facilities, or under WHAT circumstances. He just creates strawmen and argues against them.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
319 Posts
guardian ad litem and that individual works FOR the minor and only the minor. IF the family court, mental health professionals,
Bit of reality: ad litems work for themselves and always have. Agents of the court. There are no unbiased ones. Just ask all the elderly who have been banned from seeing any family and had all their assets stolen.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
6,165 Posts
The Gun Control Act of 1968 includes provision for dealing with nutters. Why would the progs demand additional legislation (to protect the 2nd/your rights)???

That the GCA68, like the current BS (and the NFA), is Unconstitutional is a separate issue.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
663 Posts
The Supreme Court, in its wisdom, has precluded any of these laws doing anything other than resulting in lawsuits, and the ultimate dissolution of this once great republic, should calmer heads not prevail.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
795 Posts
Bit of reality: ad litems work for themselves and always have. Agents of the court. There are no unbiased ones. Just ask all the elderly who have been banned from seeing any family and had all their assets stolen.
This will be highly costly for me here, but there is a proposal on the table that changes ALL of that. Everything would be transferred to a private entity. I hope that you can appreciate this as I can't personally litigate the proposal on this board. This will give you a better idea of how it works. Dramatically Reduce Mass Shootings |

Since private entities are paid to produce results, their interest lies with the children. I'm well aware of the situation and there exists that proposal plus a couple more to rectify what you are bringing up. FWIW, you sound like you have been personally impacted. If so, I am sincerely sorry and post that from a personal level. I can empathize with you and am working with those trying to do something about it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
795 Posts
The Patriot Act and FISA courts don't meet the due process standards either. But the members of "The January Insurrection" have been in a maximum security prison for going on two years now, without a trial. MSM doesn't talk about that though.
This only means we need to talk about it more. We need to be in the face of the MSM making them listen. At some point there should be an accountability due to the unconstitutional acts of the powers that be.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
795 Posts
NOT YET…You Say…
There was that one guy who name eludes me. He was into more than guns IIRC. I'll see if I can find a link...

I am deleting the link, but will tell you via PM. Since he is in court proceedings right now, his material might be against the rules to post here.

He pushed the envelope and the government tightens the noose. You're next as Goldberg says.
 
Joined
·
18,412 Posts
The Gun Control Act of 1968 includes provision for dealing with nutters. Why would the progs demand additional legislation (to protect the 2nd/your rights)???...
The GCA of 1968 is worded for those whom are adjudicated as mentally ill, because mental hygiene laws still authorized a physician, LE, social worker, etc., to place an unbalanced person in emergency care.

Those same mental hygiene laws are still in effect, but now these "Red Flag" laws don't place a person in emergency care, but rather their firearms.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
280 Posts
To me, Red Flag laws might only work some of the time if there is a mandatory minimal jail time for the accuser if the report turns out to be false.
Should be twice the time the firearms were to be held. Call it closing the "The girlfriend loophole" or maybe the "Karen countermeasure".
 
  • Like
Reactions: annoyinglylongname

·
Comic, not your lawyer!
Joined
·
15,653 Posts
I vehemently disagree with these clearly unConstitutional laws, as they violate the 2A, the due process clauses (4A, 5A, 6A), the 14A equal protections rights, and the 8A cruel and unusual punishment prohibitions.

I wrote a warning for men about domestic relationships. Some people simply do not "get it," that we are growingly increasing in dangerous territory where we are more divided and spiteful, and the laws are making it easier for feminists and liberals to disarm men.

It's more than just red-flags, and it goes back decades to the other problems and weaponized laws used against men and gun owners.

As I see it, these laws do little to stop violence. Instead they have the very damaging effect of destroying trust between the sexes, destroying family units, driving men out of the house, creating a perpetual single parent society which damages the next generation, and eroding gun ownership in the home, which negatively impacts future gun ownership.

These anti-gun and anti-male (that's what they are, they even name it closing "boyfriend loopholes") laws are extremely bad for our society and for women.

 

·
Comic, not your lawyer!
Joined
·
15,653 Posts
To me, Red Flag laws might only work some of the time if there is a mandatory minimal jail time for the accuser if the report turns out to be false.
That might work. I do agree with you that I often see lying women accusers suffer no legal consequences even if the man prevails.

However the danger with such policy is that, if the judge or jury know the woman accuser will suffer if she loses, that may sway them to side with her in close case scenarios where the man would otherwise win. Example, let's say a woman complains and she has weak evidence, for the sake of discussion say 35% sufficient but not the 51% needed for a preponderance. But she cries, and is emotional, and has kids to care for, and a job she would lose if she's convicted and incarcerated. Judges and juries are humans often swayed by emotions... Knowing her situation, they might err toward her and convict the man to prevent her from punishment. It's not right, but it is reality.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
663 Posts
Red Flag laws might work, if the police do their jobs.
Without getting into departmental politics and overzealous prosecutors, I frequently hear over the years as an excuse from law enforcement- "we can't do our jobs, because" I am prone to conclude the prefatory clause is actually just a standalone fact.
Lots of the mass shooters were known to investigative agencies and nothing was done. This does not make me sympathetic to their plight, nor does it incline me to give up one iota of my rights or anyone elses.
Many police officers are, after all, just government employees counting down to the day they can draw their pensions. Every cop on the beat knows them and they call them ROAD. Retired on Active Duty.
 
  • Angry
Reactions: Discollector

·
Registered
Joined
·
795 Posts
Red Flag laws might work, if the police do their jobs.
Without getting into departmental politics and overzealous prosecutors, I frequently hear over the years as an excuse from law enforcement- "we can't do our jobs, because" I am prone to conclude the prefatory clause is actually just a standalone fact.
Lots of the mass shooters were known to investigative agencies and nothing was done. This does not make me sympathetic to their plight, nor does it incline me to give up one iota of my rights or anyone elses.
Many police officers are, after all, just government employees counting down to the day they can draw their pensions. Every cop on the beat knows them and they call them ROAD. Retired on Active Duty.
Red Flag Gun Laws will work if you agree that the Bill of Rights is no longer enforceable.
 
101 - 120 of 120 Posts
Top