Red Flag Survey

[bersaguy]

I got an email from this organization this morning which I do quite often and I went ahead and voted and thought I would post the results of the poll here. This is the email I received.

Douglas:

Following the horrific shootings in Texas and Ohio, some lawmakers are talking about passing a federal "red flag" gun confiscation law that would allow people who think you're a threat to petition a court to have the government take your guns away.

Please click here to tell us if you support such a law.

Several Republican senators have expressed support for this idea provided that it is written properly, but we want your opinion.

Thanks for giving us your feedback and for doing so much to help send conservative leaders to Washington.

Sincerely,


Mary Vought
Executive Director
Senate Conservatives Fund

 

yes

4%284

No

89%7142

Not Sure

8%628

Total Respondents

8054

 

 Mary Vought
 Executive Director
 Senate Conservatives Fund

[Omega]

I voted, just in case they are actually listening.  But, surveys are skewed, liberals won't respond to this as much as conservatives because it comes from a Conservative group, and vise-versa on the ones from Liberal groups.

[DaveTN]

That’s just an emotional click bait ad by SurveyMonkey.com to get your information and try to get you to donate to the Senate Conservatives Fund (SCF)

But it does say “allows someone who thinks you're a threat to petition a court” instead of immediate seizure by the Police. So I’m good with that; we don’t have that requirement now.

Of course they know how to target the folks they want to get the numbers they want.

The American people don’t think that LE should have to stand around wringing their hands when a credible threat is presented to them.

Here’s how you could word that question…. 

When LE has identified someone as a credible threat for violence to themselves or others, do you think the cops should have to wait until they start shooting to take their guns?

 

[bersaguy]

4 minutes ago, DaveTN said:

That’s just an emotional click bait ad by SurveyMonkey.com to get your information and try to get you to donate to the Senate Conservatives Fund (SCF)

But it does say “allows someone who thinks you're a threat to petition a court” instead of immediate seizure by the Police. So I’m good with that; we don’t have that requirement now.

Of course they know how to target the folks they want to get the numbers they want.

The American people don’t think that LE should have to stand around wringing their hands when a credible threat is presented to them.

Here’s how you could word that question…. 

When LE has identified someone as a credible threat for violence to themselves or others, do you think the cops should have to wait until they start shooting to take their guns?

 

I have no doubt you are correct Dave. It is a way of getting donations which I never send any but I think it is a good thing to get out there for folks to read about. Get folks thinking and keep them thinking about it.

I won't have an issue with Red Flag laws if they are written properly and require a court order to take the persons guns until he/she has their day in court. Then if found to be a fit they should be able to take their guns home that day. Not a waiting period of weeks or months but that day........JMHO

[DaveTN]

8 minutes ago, bersaguy said:

I won't have an issue with Red Flag laws if they are written properly and require a court order to take the persons guns until he/she has their day in court. Then if found to be a fit they should be able to take their guns home that day. Not a waiting period of weeks or months but that day........JMHO

We are in 100% agreement. I have asked for clearly defined Due Process in any proposed legislation. Hours or days , as I stated before, not weeks or months. And that if a person is found to be competent; their weapons will be return immediately with no further obstacles. (No transfers, proof of ownership, etc.)

I support this because it would offer protections we do not have now. Failure to act will result in cops doing whatever they want, whenever they want, and the only people that can do anything about it will be the people that can throw money at the issue. As a former cop I have seen this firsthand. (Not in this state, I don’t know what the procedures are in this state and it doesn’t appear many others do either.)

[Whisper]

4 hours ago, DaveTN said:

 I have asked for clearly defined Due Process in any proposed legislation. Hours or days , as I stated before, not weeks or months. And that if a person is found to be competent; their weapons will be return immediately with no further obstacles. (No transfers, proof of ownership, etc.)

Excellent points all.  In my original home state, there's a bill currently proposed that requires anonymous ex parte complaints (so the accused has no idea who complained and thus has no ability to argue against the charge) and specifies no process or timetable for having guns restored, but does specify that the police can assess storage fees against the accused while the guns are held in custody.  Folks, these laws are written specifically so that they can be used to harass gun owners.  And the sponsors know this.

[TripleGGG]

I'm not a fan of any new laws as most are written to remove rights slowly. DaveTN I do understand where you are coming from. 

My question would be when some high dollar Rifles or pistols, collectible firearms, etc are stacked like stove wood for transport and storage. Who is going to pay for the damages?

[gary_boom]

What I see happening is a man making $15 a hour, going thru a divorce and his soon to be exwife wants to punish him so she throws the red flag. Where is he going to come up with the money to for a lawyer to fight?

[DaveTN]

11 hours ago, TripleGGG said:

I'm not a fan of any new laws as most are written to remove rights slowly. DaveTN I do understand where you are coming from. 

My question would be when some high dollar Rifles or pistols, collectible firearms, etc are stacked like stove wood for transport and storage. Who is going to pay for the damages?

Same as now, no one.

[DaveTN]

4 hours ago, gary_boom said:

What I see happening is a man making $15 a hour, going thru a divorce and his soon to be exwife wants to punish him so she throws the red flag. Where is he going to come up with the money to for a lawyer to fight?

Well, he can either use his divorce lawyer or the criminal lawyer he will need when she throws the Domestic Violence flag. If he is indigent the court will appoint a public defender on the criminal charges. If he has any property, he will still need a divorce lawyer.

Rarely does either side in a divorce think they got a fair shake. As a cop I saw some really nasty ones, people in jail, careers destroyed.

[bersaguy]

4 hours ago, DaveTN said:

Well, he can either use his divorce lawyer or the criminal lawyer he will need when she throws the Domestic Violence flag. If he is indigent the court will appoint a public defender on the criminal charges. If he has any property, he will still need a divorce lawyer.

Rarely does either side in a divorce think they got a fair shake. As a cop I saw some really nasty ones, people in jail, careers destroyed.

I have only been through 1 divorce and I won that one on desertion and adultry by her and she got nothing but her clothes. I got the kids which were teenagers, the house and everything in the house and property and the judge even wanted me to request Child support. Yea, the judge and not my lawyer. When the judge found out she was walking out on my son after his accident and was just beginning to come out of a coma she told me I deserved Child support from her and her new boyfriend. I declined it but I did request that I set the times she would be allowed to visit my sons and she made that happen. My ex got what she deserved. Turned out he was a drug addict, a drunk and worst of all for her a wife beater. She got pregnant by him and had a daughter. Soon after that was when the beatings started and she was terrified of him and to scared to call the police. My youngest son Ronnie and his girlfriend went to visit his mother and was a day after he spent the night beating on her and my son spoke up and told him he was tired of the guy beating on his mother so out of no where he back handed my son and his girlfriend Tammy dragged Ronnie out of the house and they left. Tammy could not wait to tell me he had hit Ronnie in the face. Next time they came to the hospital on their day to visit I was there and took her new husband aside and politely quietly told him if he ever laid his hands on one of my sons again he would not be breathing in 24 hours. My ex didn't know what we talked about but the following weekend he beat her up bad, packed his bags and went back to east St Louis where he was from. Ronnie told his mother to file for divorce and she told him that her guy (Chuck) told her if she filed for a divorce or for Child Support he would come back and kill her and the kid.

    About a year later we got news that Chuck had beaten a girlfriend to death up in St Louis and got the death penalty and will never be released. She is so scared of this guy that she is still married to him and said she won't divorce him until he is dead. She is still waiting!!! Now with all of that said, Red Flag laws would not have helped my ex because he didn't have any guns cause his favorite weapon was his fists to beat on women with.

[JayC]

23 hours ago, DaveTN said:

I support this because it would offer protections we do not have now.

All permit holders have much greater protections today, unless you're under arrest they must return your firearm(s) when they release you. 39-17-1351(t)

How would a red flag law that would allow a police officer to take your guns, and at some later date a court might return them to you give us more protections?

If the police feel you are a threat, have a hearing before a judge (where you have representation) and request an order to have your firearms removed.  That is the only form of a 'red flag' law that has true due process.  Anything less is unconstitutional on it's face.

[DaveTN]

1 hour ago, JayC said:

All permit holders have much greater protections today, unless you're under arrest they must return your firearm(s) when they release you. 39-17-1351(t)

How would a red flag law that would allow a police officer to take your guns, and at some later date a court might return them to you give us more protections?

If the police feel you are a threat, have a hearing before a judge (where you have representation) and request an order to have your firearms removed.  That is the only form of a 'red flag' law that has true due process.  Anything less is unconstitutional on it's face.

Dang man, why didn't I think of that?? JayC you are the man!

 

 

[JayC]

But, you're talking about allow the police to either get an ex parte order, or allowing the confiscation of firearms before a court hearing where you have representation.  But of those violate due process.

[DaveTN]

16 minutes ago, JayC said:

But, you're talking about allow the police to either get an ex parte order, or allowing the confiscation of firearms before a court hearing where you have representation.  But of those violate due process.

If you have been arrested and are being held in jail; that’s fine, they can petition the court for the order and get it before you are released. But they aren’t going to leave you there with the guns if someone is complaining you are threatening them or you are threatening suicide. It’s just not going to happen.

Usually if its threats; this will be a non-issue anyway. Your guns are taken as evidence and you get them back, or you don’t, when the criminal case is settled. Suicide threats are generally where I have seen guns seized without someone going to jail. I’ve seen cases of the guns being taken and marked as “personal property” of the wife because she didn’t want them in the house at the time.

Do you have idea what would happen right now if your wife called the cops, said you threatened to shoot her, that you have a bunch of guns, she is in fear for her life and she doesn’t want you or the guns in the house?

[gregintenn]

20 minutes ago, DaveTN said:

If you have been arrested and are being held in jail; that’s fine, they can petition the court for the order and get it before you are released. But they aren’t going to leave you there with the guns if someone is complaining you are threatening them or you are threatening suicide. It’s just not going to happen.

Usually if its threats; this will be a non-issue anyway. Your guns are taken as evidence and you get them back, or you don’t, when the criminal case is settled. Suicide threats are generally where I have seen guns seized without someone going to jail. I’ve seen cases of the guns being taken and marked as “personal property” of the wife because she didn’t want them in the house at the time.

Do you have idea what would happen right now if your wife called the cops, said you threatened to shoot her, that you have a bunch of guns, she is in fear for her life and she doesn’t want you or the guns in the house?

You should remove ME from the home and we’ll work it out in court. You have no reason to remove my legal, personal possessions.

[FUJIMO]

For a taste of the future Google SWATTING and read the latest that happened to the fortnite kid.

It's clear all it takes nowadays is a "claim" to get authorities all hot bothered and knuckle deep in your azz. Much like the media let's overreact first then worry about facts and evidence later. 

 

[DaveTN]

31 minutes ago, gregintenn said:

You should remove ME from the home and we’ll work it out in court. You have no reason to remove my legal, personal possessions.

She doesn’t want the guns in the house. And I can’t think of a situation where I would let you drive off with the guns. That would be something you would have to arrange with her without the Police being involved.

A couple of things to remember….The Police are not your friends, and guys like me are not the cops you would want showing up after you have threatened your wife or anyone else with violence.

[DaveTN]

40 minutes ago, FUJIMO said:

For a taste of the future Google SWATTING and read the latest that happened to the fortnite kid.

It's clear all it takes nowadays is a "claim" to get authorities all hot bothered and knuckle deep in your azz. Much like the media let's overreact first then worry about facts and evidence later. 

 

In the 80’s most cops lost their discretion on Domestic Violence (and DUI). If you are accused of Domestic Violence you are probably going to jail. Just like MADD got it to where most people stopped for DUI are going to jail; women’s groups said domestic violence offenders weren’t being arrested. So that changed. I even had a little speech I gave when I walked in to keep people from blurting out stuff that would force an arrest.

[gregintenn]

25 minutes ago, DaveTN said:

She doesn’t want the guns in the house. And I can’t think of a situation where I would let you drive off with the guns. That would be something you would have to arrange with her without the Police being involved.

A couple of things to remember….The Police are not your friends, and guys like me are not the cops you would want showing up after you have threatened your wife or anyone else with violence.

What if she wanted that grand piano upstairs out of the house? Would you remove that as well? I just don’t follow your line of thinking.

[DaveTN]

2 minutes ago, gregintenn said:

What if she wanted that grand piano upstairs out of the house? Would you remove that as well? I just don’t follow your line of thinking.

You really don’t understand the problem, or you simply don’t agree with what is going to happen?

[Erik88]

1 hour ago, FUJIMO said:

For a taste of the future Google SWATTING and read the latest that happened to the fortnite kid.

It's clear all it takes nowadays is a "claim" to get authorities all hot bothered and knuckle deep in your azz. Much like the media let's overreact first then worry about facts and evidence later. 

 

Don't forget the guy who was shot to death on his front porch after being Swatted by another person. He was unarmed.  Apparently, you can simply move your hand and by shot to death, with zero repercussions for the officer. 

"Justin Rapp, Officer, Wichita Police Department; originally stated he believed Finch had a gun, but testified in May 2018 that he merely saw Finch make a motion with his hand"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2017_Wichita_swatting

Edited August 14, 2019 by Erik88

[FUJIMO]

14 minutes ago, Erik88 said:

Don't for get the guy who was shot to death on his front porch after being Swatted by another person. He was unarmed.  Apparently, you can simply move your hand and by shot to death, with zero repercussions for the officer. 

"Justin Rapp, Officer, Wichita Police Department; originally stated he believed Finch had a gun, but testified in May 2018 that he merely saw Finch make a motion with his hand"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2017_Wichita_swatting

Yeah that was first time I heard mention of it.

[bersaguy]

This day in time if the police is at your home because someone called them the best thing to do is cooperate with them and see if the issue can be resolved and don't do anything that may cause the officer to feel threatened. If the officer does not see anything that could have been required that the call was made he might try and see why the call was made in the first place. I have found that most times cooperation with the officers is always the best path forward. Cool heads would always be my recomendation...........JMHO

[FUJIMO]

13 minutes ago, bersaguy said:

This day in time if the police is at your home because someone called them the best thing to do is cooperate with them and see if the issue can be resolved and don't do anything that may cause the officer to feel threatened. If the officer does not see anything that could have been required that the call was made he might try and see why the call was made in the first place. I have found that most times cooperation with the officers is always the best path forward. Cool heads would always be my recomendation...........JMHO

And if anyone could sum up in 1 paragraph how F**Ked up all this if you just did.  For you to feel compelled to HAVE to give that kind of advice