DaveTN

Absolutely, but that has nothing to do with Red Flag laws or defining due process. He just wants to seize all our firearms. Same as all the rest of them. However, that’s what I mean about him being too mentally unstable (because of age) to be President. He didn’t think about what he was saying; he just blurted it out. I bet his handlers almost stroked out when he said that. And he will be trying to walk that back!

Yes, drinking and driving is sociably acceptable. Getting arrested for DUI is not. Why is that? It's because people don’t understand that “drunk” is a meaningless legally undefined term, while “impaired” and "presumption" are clearly defined legal terms, but most have no idea what .08 (or any other number) means or feels like. One of the stats you didn’t post was that depending on whose numbers you use, or the year, 1,000,000 to 1,500,000 drivers are arrested every year for DUI. A lot is done in DUI enforcement. There are plenty of people that complain about it as overreach. As you see in our mass shooting threads it depends on where you get your stats, We are on a gun forum, so you see people defending potential shooters arrested or investigated by the Police. That is because they identify with them and have an irrational fear that because they are a gun owner they somehow will get caught up in this. You will see people across all types of forums complain about DUI enforcement because the fear of being arrested for DUI is not irrational if you drink and drive. If I could do anything as a public service it would be talk to high school kids about DUI. They don’t understand it, their parents don’t either, and without even looking at the possibility of being in an accident and hurting someone or getting hurt; a DUI can be a career ender before that career ever gets started; a DUI conviction can impact your life.

If your neighbor or family member accuses you of a crime; you could go to jail until trial (usually not, but you could be if the accusations were bad enough and had supporting evidence). Then you will be tried by either a Judge or a jury of your peers; usually your choice. Rarely is a BS case going to make it to trial, rarely are guns going to be seized in a BS case. Could it happen? Yes…stay away from hateful crazy people....and whatever you do; don't marry them or move in with them. Your resulting bad luck and loss of guns won't be the cops fault; it will be your own. Burden? It wouldn’t be a burden to me to reduce the possibility of me having to come to his house and kill him after he starts shooting people. Some of you seem to think that the safety of the family or the safety of the public are somehow secondary to the rights of a criminal thug threatening a violent act. Nothing could be farther from the truth and is not required by the United States Constitution or by Criminal Law.

In the first cases because the guy is going to jail and his wife doesn’t want the guns there when he gets out. In the second case because the guy is threatening suicide and his wife wants the guns gone. He’s getting committed and they will be taken anyway.

I could have got that handled in Illinois many years ago. But the NRA told me they get involved in criminal cases.

It should worry you. And you should know what the Red Flag laws in your state are. Do you know? Do any of you know? I don’t know and I have asked several times on this forum without a response from anyone in law enforcement or any laws quoted. My guess is from what I’ve seen posted on the internet that they can take your guns, and have you committed pretty easily; I don’t think there are many rules in places for you getting your weapons back. Hence…no due process. My support is for doing away with this “do whatever you like” process and have a specifically called out set of rules and regulations of due process. Is your neighbor calling the Police accusing you of a crime? Or just thinks you are nuts? The Officer sent out may knock on your door and hear what you have to say, or he may not. Anyone can accuse you of a crime. If there is probable cause to believe the “victim” the Officer will arrest you or use his discretion and not arrest you. If after talking to you, the Officer decides no crime has been committed; he will leave. If after reading you your rights (the first indicator you are the suspect of a crime) and you talk to him he may either arrest you or believe you and not arrest you. If you invoke your right to remain silent he will move forward with whatever information he has. Would Red Flag laws and Domestic Violence laws be used against innocent people in family situations and Divorces? Of course, everyday would be my guess. If you expect that is going to happen you better have a plan to cover your butt; or you will likely be in jail. Sorry, but you married her; if you can’t handle your personal life that’s what happens. Be ready to take responsibility for your actions. Or…Life’s not fair; wear a helmet. That's not Directed at you Hipower; just a general statement.

You guys are correct and this has nothing to do with you but I laugh every time I see this 21 foot number. I expect someday to see a case where people are measuring and yelling about someone getting shot when they were 25 or 30 feet away. probably would have been the case if the Police arrived at the first scene and killed this guy.

The Democrats have already said “No” to expanding background checks. They want an AR ban or nothing. They won’t get an AR ban.

I can’t read that; they want paid. I would be willing to bet we get universal background checks…soon. I would also bet (although not very much) if they are Federal they don’t make it through the SCOTUS, if they will hear the cases. I wonder if Tennessee will file if they try Federal?

I bought a pistol complete lower and put a 10.5 inch upper on it. To make an AR Pistol. I didn’t put a brace on it. According to the BATF that is legal; at least TODAY that is legal. So my question is this: Unless you buy it new how do you know it’s a pistol lower? I bought mine new so I had the paperwork. But I see plenty for sale used or that people built. Its my understanding that if it ever was a rifle; it can't be a pistol without being NFA SBR?? If someone just threw a SB upper on their old POS AR Rifle lower and sold it as a “Pistol”; how would you know? Or more importantly how would cops know if they stopped you and found it? Would it matter?

That was waaaaay back in February; he might not remember saying that. As a lot of things he says are: it was a stupid thing to say. Taking the guns is part of due process; if you have due process.

https://www.saf.org/

Share with us. Why the GOA and not the SAF? For those of you that are going to post "Join both"; save it, that not what I ask.

Think about it this way… When you arrive after people have called asking for help its you GlockSpock (Sorry, I don’t know what your first name is) that is there to help them. Not the PD, not the legal system, you…as a person. You will have family members scared to death look you in the eye and beg you for help. What will be important is not how you appear to others on a forum; its going to be can you do your job properly with the tools you have to work with, to stop the violence. You have that responsibility to the people that ask for your help. You have that responsibility to your community, and you have that responsibility to the other Officer you work with, so they don’t have to follow behind you and do your job. Every case will be different. I have never suggest violating anyone’s Constitutional rights, although some here seem to think taking guns from someone threatening to commit homicide or suicide is a violation. I would do what I needed to do and if anyone felt I had violated their rights; they were certainly free to get a lawyer and sue me. I handled a domestic violence case where a 6-year-old boy was shot to death. Everyone said I did everything I could have done; and I probably did. But it has bothered me all my life. I was called to keep a family safe and I failed. I would never make that mistake again. So, would I take a firearm? Absolutely and wouldn’t have to think twice about it. You threaten someone and I would cuff you and book you into jail. Do what I would do if guns weren’t involved??? Okay if that woman asks me to help her get the knives and hammers out of the house; that is precisely what would happen. I’m not leaving that old man at home; gun or not. he’s going to sign himself into the hospital voluntarily or he’s going to be arrested and committed on a psych hold. Guns are leaving the house; he has proven he isn’t responsible enough to have them. When cops are called, they are supposed to do their job. Some do, some don’t. Court isn’t held on the street. Worrying about violating the rights of someone that has just threatened to kill someone is a cop that isn’t prepared to do their job, hasn’t been properly trained, hasn’t read the Constitution, doesn’t have a real understanding of it, or all of the above.

That would work. Keep them in jail until trial. Great idea! Would you give them the option of being able to bond out if they voluntarily surrender their firearms? Because that’s what they are going to want to do.

You think it’s an unreasonable seizure to take firearms from someone threatening homicide or suicide?

Correct. I would guess you uploaded the picture from your computer to the forum and the forum is using Amazon for storage. I just remember people having a lot of trouble and David posting something about limited photo storage and you should use a third party provider. But that’s been awhile maybe that has all changed.

Okay, that’s fair. You are willing to let innocent people die instead of what you see as either a rights violation, or just that you can’t stop the inevitable. I’m not. The right of an innocent to be safe and secure trumps the gun rights of a criminal every single time. Someones rights are going to be violated, if its me choosing the choice is going to be an easy one. Your job is to make the situation safe for the innocent family members using whatever laws and procedures you have available to you. When people call the Police they expect someone to show up that can help them. Too often anymore that is not the case. I can absolutely assure you that if an innocent person dies because you didn’t do everything you could, even though you did what the law requires; it would eat at you the rest of your life.

The picture in that thread isn't in PhotoBucket; its at Amazon.

Against what? Against what they will do? Against what the procedure you now have is? What are you against? And what would GlockSpock do as a Police Officer when a woman has told you her husband threatened to kill her, there are guns in the house, she does not want them there, and she is in fear for her life and the lives of her children. Go… Second scenario. An elderly woman has told you her elderly husband has been depressed and has threatened to kill himself. There are firearms in the house and she believes he will kill both her and himself. Go… I don’t believe in violent convicted felons owning guns, and I don’t believe in second changes for some violent offenses. I don’t have a problem with restoring the rights of a convicted felon as long as it goes before a Judge, preferable the Judge that heard the case if possible, and as long as the victim is notified and allowed to be heard. Some crimes don’t deserve a second chance; actions have consequences. Some people have trouble understanding that.

Ha, ha ha, After hearing the first minute or so of that I wasn’t going to watch an hour because there is no way of having any kind of prediction on who would win a conflict without very specific facts and causes. That and him walking out there with a motorcycle helmet on. That looked stupid….and funny. Maybe you can give the CliffsNotes version of what he decided.

Sure, but not legally. Cops don’t want to shoot innocent people. If they don’t have cover and are being shot at; they will probably return fire. If they choose to, cops can give up their life instead of shooting at an active shooter, if they are concerned they might hit someone else. I wouldn’t, but some might. Every factor in every shooting could be different. You always will face the fact that civil cases can do what they want. And that people will take days, weeks, or months to decide if the decision you had to make in a second was right and reasonable. (Police or Citizens)

You don’t have to prove you are not a threat. The state has to prove you are, to the satisfaction of a Judge or possibly a jury. In a civil hearing the burden is preponderance of the evidence, in a criminal trial it is beyond reasonable doubt. It’s usually going to boil down to credibility. Is someone going to lose their guns because of a pizzed off wife in a dispute? You bet. It happens now and these laws won’t change that. You picked her and you have to deal with the consequences of that action. Is a Judge going to rule you aren’t a threat and give you your guns back? Probably not, unless of course the people making the claims against you don’t show up. Which is usually what happens in BS family disputes. Nothing in a family dispute will be “fair” for everyone. And as always… you will get just as much “justice” as you can afford. You need to be the one able to afford the attorney that has “connections” with the Judge. Now let me ask you a serious question. Have you seen something in proposed Red Flag laws that allow the cops some rights to seize your guns that they do not have right now?

Photobucket broke the internet a long time ago. Imgur.com is the latest new "go to" thing. I think uploading directly to the forum has issues.

They want the drama of a cop shooting an innocent bystander. They fully understand that if someone is dropping bodies, the cops may have to take shots that have the risk of shooting bystanders (as in this case). However, if that happens they want to make a bunch of noise about that being unacceptable. Unless of course their family or friends are about to die.