Red Flag Law - HNN/Lynn Kawano (Read 3369 times)

drck1000

Re: Red Flag Law - HNN/Lynn Kawano
« Reply #40 on: January 13, 2020, 10:44:01 PM »
Criminals’ rights? 🤦🏻‍♂️

Hammurabi had it right in that regard...

Flapp_Jackson

Re: Red Flag Law - HNN/Lynn Kawano
« Reply #41 on: January 13, 2020, 11:07:33 PM »
How about instead of taking the guns away without any notice, move the initial court date to 1 week from the complaint. Give the (up to this point) life time law abiding citizen a chance to address the allegations and have a mental examiner there to so do an onsite exam to see if the person is crazy.

We have seen in every state how this law is abused. See my previous post about true examples.

So red flag is not the answer and is not better than "doing something".

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

You're proposing something similar to my proposal.  You know -- that suggestion that EEF keeps saying nobody is offering on "our side"?   :wacko:

How about we arrest the individual and require a mental health evaluation WITHOUT CONFISCATING ANYTHING? 

If the person is a violent risk, HE is the threat, not his guns.  Taking the guns and leaving him free (and probably pissed after his guns were taken) is not a solution.

If the individual is not prohibited, and the guns are legal to own, then confiscation without a chance to hear from doctors who examined the person, or without offering the individual a chance to offer a defense, is a non-starter for me.

My guess is the system is not capable of arresting him for NO CRIMES COMMITTED.  So, the Red Flag law is a work-around.  Nothing more, nothing less.

Work-arounds are not solutions.  They are ways to avoid the need for a solution.
"That's what laws are for...  If the right people don't break 'em, they're of no use whatsoever.""

6716J

Re: Red Flag Law - HNN/Lynn Kawano
« Reply #42 on: January 14, 2020, 06:41:22 PM »
I'd rather have a bottle in front of me, than a frontal lobotomy.

changemyoil66

Re: Red Flag Law - HNN/Lynn Kawano
« Reply #43 on: January 14, 2020, 06:52:33 PM »
Just saw this today...

So Red Flag laws could never go bad right...?

https://www.9news.com/mobile/article/news/local/next/colorados-red-flag-law-used-to-target-officer-involved-in-fatal-shooting/73-f52ddaca-893d-493b-983c-db9ecf250ad3

Sent from my SM-T580 using Tapatalk
LEO get special treatment.

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

6716J

Re: Red Flag Law - HNN/Lynn Kawano
« Reply #44 on: January 16, 2020, 12:36:54 PM »
So how do we fight this then?

How do we get this law removed/repealed (not that there is much chance of that happening...)

https://www.policeone.com/officer-safety/articles/opinion-the-dangers-posed-by-red-flag-laws-ITmhrV5x36djh5Jk/
I'd rather have a bottle in front of me, than a frontal lobotomy.

changemyoil66

Re: Red Flag Law - HNN/Lynn Kawano
« Reply #45 on: January 16, 2020, 12:49:11 PM »
So how do we fight this then?

How do we get this law removed/repealed (not that there is much chance of that happening...)

https://www.policeone.com/officer-safety/articles/opinion-the-dangers-posed-by-red-flag-laws-ITmhrV5x36djh5Jk/

Write to your law maker is the first step.  Lawsuit will be the 2nd step.

6716J

Re: Red Flag Law - HNN/Lynn Kawano
« Reply #46 on: January 16, 2020, 01:36:53 PM »
I'll be there on the 30th. Don't know how much help I'll be other than a face with a HiFICO shirt on. But we need numbers in our favor.
I'd rather have a bottle in front of me, than a frontal lobotomy.

changemyoil66

Re: Red Flag Law - HNN/Lynn Kawano
« Reply #47 on: January 16, 2020, 02:39:58 PM »
I'll be there on the 30th. Don't know how much help I'll be other than a face with a HiFICO shirt on. But we need numbers in our favor.

Good enough

eyeeatingfish

Re: Red Flag Law - HNN/Lynn Kawano
« Reply #48 on: January 19, 2020, 10:27:53 PM »
Wrong.

The Sex Offender registry is not a punitive device.  It is also not a preventative device.  It's a public service.

We as law abiding citizens deserve to know who among us in our neighborhoods has been convicted of sexual offenses and whether the charges involved minors.

The rate of recidivism among sexual predators is very high.  One study says 56.6%.  Given that, it's reasonable for parents, teachers and children to be informed if there are people with risky behaviors in their past nearby.

Many say sexual predators are unable to help themselves and need intensive mental health treatment.  Some are so untreatable they opt for chemical castration.

So, stop defending the criminals' rights.  The law abiding have rights, too, which includes access to publicly available law enforcement & court data.

Like I said, it was never meant to be a perfect analogy, just something else to think about it since it is affecting a right (though arguably one lost upon conviction)

The recidivism rates of all types of crime are actually lower for sex offenders than drug, property, and violent crime (except murder). They recommit sexual offenses at a higher rate but are less likely to commit crimes overall. Among that group of sexual offenders child molesters have a significantly higher rate of recidivism than your basic rapist so a good part of that recidivism risk seems to lie in those who are pedophilic sex offenders.

This is not a study of the sex offender registry idea, just something to consider because the individual is having a right taken away after having served their sentence based on a probability of re-offending. Thats what the link is in the comparison, the system is restricting a person's freedom based of a probability of future crime.

eyeeatingfish

Re: Red Flag Law - HNN/Lynn Kawano
« Reply #49 on: January 19, 2020, 10:42:17 PM »
How about instead of taking the guns away without any notice, move the initial court date to 1 week from the complaint. Give the (up to this point) life time law abiding citizen a chance to address the allegations and have a mental examiner there to so do an onsite exam to see if the person is crazy.

We have seen in every state how this law is abused. See my previous post about true examples.

So red flag is not the answer and is not better than "doing something".

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

There is one huge weakness there, if you notify the person  first and hold the court date later then you run the risk of not preventing anything. If I am thinking about going on a shooting rampage or killing myself then I get a notice to go to court to have my guns taken away in 1 week then this could either push me over the edge or it could cause me to move up my timeline, either way failing to prevent the harm. If a school shooter knew his guns were going to be taken away he would just act before the date. If a violent spouse knew his guns were going to be taken away he would likely act before the court date.


There is already legal precedent that someone can be arrested (rights taken away) based on probable cause but they have to be charged within 48 hours. That is the model I would use for red flag laws, if a judge finds probable cause then he grants the temporary one. What I would do different is require a hearing within 48 hours instead of the 14 days under our current law. That way if probable cause is found then the guns can be confiscated (rights taken away) temporarily before the harm can happen but the state has to justify itself expeditiously or else they have to give the guns right back for failing to show enough evidence in due time.

Maybe there can be two types of orders a judge could issue, like an immediate one for some impending harm or one like you suggest for someone who has no immediate warning signs but whose general safety is in question.

Another idea I had was instead of focusing on the firearms themselves, maybe the concerned person could petition the judge to order a psychological evaluation, following which firearms could be retained or taken away.

6716J

Re: Red Flag Law - HNN/Lynn Kawano
« Reply #50 on: January 20, 2020, 10:58:00 AM »
The biggest problem is the confiscation of property. It doesn't matter that it's firearms. The court decided without all the facts in hand that it will confiscate your property. What's to say that it won't confiscate your car when someone says it's parked illegally and you're parked in your assigned spot in a garage? They have it towed and you pay to get it back. What if you don't have the $1000 to get it out of the impound yard and they charge by the day. But fine, you get your car back. What recourse do you have against an unknown person? What about the state for not doing due diligence? What happened to Due Process?

If the Red Flag laws are the way they want to go, then fine, but it should be a mental health check of the person, followed by a 3 day Psych Hold if warranted for further evaluation. But done by at least 3 professionals with no conferencing between that way it remains impartial and they make their own conclusion on the mental state of the individual. Gotta have 2 to commit. Then if further action is warranted after the 3 day eval, then a court date on the 4th day. There is at least some semblance of due process. But that make too much sense so would never happen.

I know it works in reality because it was done to my neighbor in Vegas this way. METRO was called, he was given the 3 day, I was called by METRO (via neighbor) to go in and secure his firearms before he was released. METRO called me after a week to say he could have them back. The system worked.
I'd rather have a bottle in front of me, than a frontal lobotomy.

Heavies

Re: Red Flag Law - HNN/Lynn Kawano
« Reply #51 on: January 20, 2020, 08:04:43 PM »
If your 2nd amendment rights can be removed, then there should be enough evidence for ALL your rights to be removed.  Anything less is an INFRINGEMENT, and illegal in the freaking United States of America.  PERIOD

There is no argument or debate on this, and the very reason our liberty is at stake.

Why is this so hard to grasp for some people?

Flapp_Jackson

Re: Red Flag Law - HNN/Lynn Kawano
« Reply #52 on: January 20, 2020, 09:58:56 PM »
If your 2nd amendment rights can be removed, then there should be enough evidence for ALL your rights to be removed.  Anything less is an INFRINGEMENT, and illegal in the freaking United States of America.  PERIOD

There is no argument or debate on this, and the very reason our liberty is at stake.

Why is this so hard to grasp for some people?

Because they see guns as the problem.  If they focused on the real problems (mental illness, psychotropic drugs, pure evil, etc.) they inevitably come to the same conclusion over and over -- you can't identify the violent people BEFORE they commit violence, therefore any treatment or incarceration is not preventative.  They believe we as mere mortals have the ability to control every aspect of society, one way or another.

Therein lies their solution:  control.  Whether it's birth control, rent control or gun control, it's all the same: an attempt to place controls on human behavior that historically has been unable to be controlled.  The best they have been able to do is Communist Russia and Communist China, where millions died rather than conform to the "big brother" collective society.

You can stop a baby from hurting itself with scissors by taking the scissors away.  Or, you can teach the child when it's old enough to respect sharp objects and handle them safely.  But, it just takes one kid behaving badly with scissors to make the whole class use safety scissors that can't cut warm butter.

Control is an illusion that is the stepping stone to tyranny.  The people who don't grasp that as a real risk are the ones voting for ineffective laws that punish the gun owners who do nothing bad every single day.
"That's what laws are for...  If the right people don't break 'em, they're of no use whatsoever.""

eyeeatingfish

Re: Red Flag Law - HNN/Lynn Kawano
« Reply #53 on: January 21, 2020, 08:40:48 PM »
The biggest problem is the confiscation of property. It doesn't matter that it's firearms. The court decided without all the facts in hand that it will confiscate your property. What's to say that it won't confiscate your car when someone says it's parked illegally and you're parked in your assigned spot in a garage? They have it towed and you pay to get it back. What if you don't have the $1000 to get it out of the impound yard and they charge by the day. But fine, you get your car back. What recourse do you have against an unknown person? What about the state for not doing due diligence? What happened to Due Process?

If the Red Flag laws are the way they want to go, then fine, but it should be a mental health check of the person, followed by a 3 day Psych Hold if warranted for further evaluation. But done by at least 3 professionals with no conferencing between that way it remains impartial and they make their own conclusion on the mental state of the individual. Gotta have 2 to commit. Then if further action is warranted after the 3 day eval, then a court date on the 4th day. There is at least some semblance of due process. But that make too much sense so would never happen.

I know it works in reality because it was done to my neighbor in Vegas this way. METRO was called, he was given the 3 day, I was called by METRO (via neighbor) to go in and secure his firearms before he was released. METRO called me after a week to say he could have them back. The system worked.

That certainly sounds like another viable alternative.

And it is about confiscation of property but in this case that property is a right so just like the government arresting you, they are taking away a constitutional right. Granted taking your whole person would seem a greater infringement of your rights. Regardless of whether they take just your firearms or instead take you, the process you mention could be a good alternative suggestion.

eyeeatingfish

Re: Red Flag Law - HNN/Lynn Kawano
« Reply #54 on: January 21, 2020, 08:44:59 PM »
If your 2nd amendment rights can be removed, then there should be enough evidence for ALL your rights to be removed.  Anything less is an INFRINGEMENT, and illegal in the freaking United States of America.  PERIOD

There is no argument or debate on this, and the very reason our liberty is at stake.

Why is this so hard to grasp for some people?

Just to be clear, the law currently in place does require evidence. Requires probable cause to take them away in the beginning and preponderance of evidence to keep them for a year. Of course it is debatable on whether that is sufficient or not but the court is supposed to require evidence.

Heavies

Re: Red Flag Law - HNN/Lynn Kawano
« Reply #55 on: January 21, 2020, 08:59:50 PM »
Just to be clear, the law currently in place does require evidence. Requires probable cause to take them away in the beginning and preponderance of evidence to keep them for a year. Of course it is debatable on whether that is sufficient or not but the court is supposed to require evidence.

So what stops the person from stabbing people with a three prong garden hoe, stealing guns, and burning down a neighborhood? 

If the evidence says no 2A rights, then the evidence should says arrest and incarcerate.

changemyoil66

Re: Red Flag Law - HNN/Lynn Kawano
« Reply #56 on: January 21, 2020, 09:22:07 PM »
Just to be clear, the law currently in place does require evidence. Requires probable cause to take them away in the beginning and preponderance of evidence to keep them for a year. Of course it is debatable on whether that is sufficient or not but the court is supposed to require evidence.
Like i stated b4, every state that has red flag laws, have required very little to confiscate.

Guns were even returned on many occassions. Which means i guess that person wasnt a danger after all, or the guns would not have been returned.

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

eyeeatingfish

Re: Red Flag Law - HNN/Lynn Kawano
« Reply #57 on: January 21, 2020, 09:43:18 PM »
So what stops the person from stabbing people with a three prong garden hoe, stealing guns, and burning down a neighborhood? 

If the evidence says no 2A rights, then the evidence should says arrest and incarcerate.

I would tend to agree with you there.

eyeeatingfish

Re: Red Flag Law - HNN/Lynn Kawano
« Reply #58 on: January 21, 2020, 09:46:01 PM »
Guns were even returned on many occassions. Which means i guess that person wasnt a danger after all, or the guns would not have been returned.

This could to do with the levels of proof required. Sometimes a court or prosecutor might say that there was probable cause to justify the arrest but not to take to trial or convict. So it doesn't necessarily mean the person wasn't a danger, just insufficient evidence for an extended denial of rights.

Heavies

Re: Red Flag Law - HNN/Lynn Kawano
« Reply #59 on: January 22, 2020, 12:40:23 AM »
This could to do with the levels of proof required. Sometimes a court or prosecutor might say that there was probable cause to justify the arrest but not to take to trial or convict. So it doesn't necessarily mean the person wasn't a danger, just insufficient evidence for an extended denial of rights.

A person is a danger or isn't

If they don't have guns that doesn't make them any less dangerous