Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 30

Thread: Gun seizure under red flag law leaves suspect dead

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    21,833
    Feedback Score
    5 (100%)

    Gun seizure under red flag law leaves suspect dead

    Nine states have passed "red flag" laws which " ...allows family members or authorities to seek a court order to temporarily restrict a person's access to guns when they show "red flags" that they are a danger to themselves or others" It's easy to see how that could lead to slippery slope to more general confiscations. Not commenting on this event as an example per se as there's little for details, but to woke members gun owners are getting killed over them, are hard to see how it's Constitutional:

    "Police said the suspect, Gary J. Willis became irate when they tried to serve him. He opened the door to his house and grabbed the gun. When police tried to take the gun away, Willis fired his gun. A second officer fired their service weapon and hit Willis.

    One of Willis' relatives tells the Baltimore Sun that his sister had filed for the protective order. The new Maryland red flag law lets relatives, police officers, and medical professionals file with the courts to temporarily remove someone's guns for risky behavior, including violence or threats of violence, drug abuse, or alarming statements and behavior.

    Nine states have already enacted red flag laws. DC and 29 other states are considering them."

    https://www.wusa9.com/article/news/l...e/65-611267631
    - Will

    General Performance/Fitness Advice for all

    www.BrinkZone.com

    LE/Mil specific info:

    https://brinkzone.com/category/swatleomilitary/

    “Those who do not view armed self defense as a basic human right, ignore the mass graves of those who died on their knees at the hands of tyrants.”

  2. #2
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    McKinney, Texas
    Posts
    820
    Feedback Score
    0
    High potential for abuse. Where does due process kick in?

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    8,715
    Feedback Score
    0
    why the other link I had about the one NY guy or whatever wanting to do facebook searches to see if you are worthy to own a gun ?

    and this post is why I say to those here who say they wont be able to take our guns !!! open your eyes they will a few at a time but they will try and they will work around the laws

    this is really to bad and another eye opener

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    8,715
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by grnamin View Post
    High potential for abuse. Where does due process kick in?
    well if he lived I am sure he will be convicted IMHO that is where it kicks in only AGAINST the gun owners sadly

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    Southern CA
    Posts
    2,173
    Feedback Score
    0
    This is just one of the ways they are trying to work around 2A. Very scary stuff.
    "Literally EVERYTHING is in space, Morty." Grandpa Rick Sanchez

  6. #6
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Colorado
    Posts
    17,382
    Feedback Score
    0
    There are people that for various reasons become mentally unhealthy and shouldn't have access to firearms. What are we going to do about it?

    The real answer is that there should be a lot more people institutionalized (more of a homeless than a gun problem), but that is expensive, so that isn't going to happen.
    The Second Amendment ACKNOWLEDGES our right to own and bear arms that are in common use that can be used for lawful purposes. The arms can be restricted ONLY if subject to historical analogue from the founding era or is dangerous (unsafe) AND unusual.

    It's that simple.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    South West
    Posts
    940
    Feedback Score
    17 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by grnamin View Post
    High potential for abuse. Where does due process kick in?


    When the state decides you don't need to question status quo.
    Last edited by Co-gnARR; 11-05-18 at 20:49.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    CONUS
    Posts
    5,997
    Feedback Score
    3 (100%)
    When family wants to dump responsibility on the government, new legislation pertaining to possession of firearms is enacted. A textbook example is Travis Reinking, who shot up the Waffle House in Antioch Tennessee. His firearms were seized by Law Enforcement after several documented incidents in which Reinking was delusional, suicidal and homicidal. Reinking was not charged with a criminal offense due to his mental state and his firearms were given to his father for safekeeping. His father was told that in no uncertain terms he was not to return the firearms to Travis until it was documented his mental health state improved to the point he was no longer a danger to himself or others.

    In violation of state and federal law, Reinking's father returned the firearms to him during the period of time Reinking was moving to Nashville, Tennessee. Reinking's father should have been charged with transferring firearms to an unauthorized person, a suicidal, homicidal mental subject. Of course we cannot hold the responsible person accountable for his actions, we have to pass another law that spells out their responsibility under the criminal statutes in the state in which they reside.

    You can thank people like Jeff Reinking for legislation that adversely affects millions of law abiding firearm owners.
    Last edited by T2C; 11-05-18 at 21:36.
    Train 2 Win

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    320
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by grnamin View Post
    High potential for abuse. Where does due process kick in?
    Don't know about the MD "red flag" laws.


    Under the CA "red flag" laws...
    Before the TRO is issued a judge must review the evidence and decide if the TRO should be issued or not. [PC 18155]
    If the judge determines that the TRO is being sought under false pretenses or being used as a means of harassment, then the party seeking the TRO is to be prosecuted. [PC 18200]

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    South West
    Posts
    940
    Feedback Score
    17 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by Quiet View Post
    Don't know about the MD "red flag" laws.


    Under the CA "red flag" laws...
    Before the TRO is issued a judge must review the evidence and decide if the TRO should be issued or not. [PC 18155]
    If the judge determines that the TRO is being sought under false pretenses or being used as a means of harassment, then the party seeking the TRO is to be prosecuted. [PC 18200]
    All well and good but...is this actually how the law is practiced?

Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •