i'm hoping this woman gets a huge judgement against the state as well as the individual.

I'm also hoping this solidifies how unconstitutional red flag laws are unconstitutional.  Regardless of the stated intent, these laws deny due process to the one having their guns seized, their freedom violated, etc.

I think we will have to see how Rahimi plays out in SCOTUS.

Red flag laws are a concept, what matters are the specifics of each individual law a jurisdiction passes. One state could have a constitutional red flag law while another could have one that is abusive and denies our rights.
We probably wouldn't see the SCOTUS rule the entire concept unconstitutional. Rather you might see a specific law or specific language deemed unconstitutional.

Red flag laws are a concept, what matters are the specifics of each individual law a jurisdiction passes. One state could have a constitutional red flag law while another could have one that is abusive and denies our rights.
We probably wouldn't see the SCOTUS rule the entire concept unconstitutional. Rather you might see a specific law or specific language deemed unconstitutional.

Please tell us what state has a constitutional red flag law and about the law.

Please tell us what state has a constitutional red flag law and about the law.

Please show me that all red flag laws are unconstitutional.

The point is not how many are and how many aren't, the point is that the specifics matter much more than the concept. Traffic stops could be unconstitutional if done badly or constitutional if done properly.

Please show me that all red flag laws are unconstitutional.

The point is not how many are and how many aren't, the point is that the specifics matter much more than the concept. Traffic stops could be unconstitutional if done badly or constitutional if done properly.

U made the statement that a red flag could be constitutional. So back up how it could be by posting the one that is.

We have stated how they're unconstitutional many times and shown the why.  You took part in these postings, nothing changed. So go back and refer to this.

Tomorrow I'll be at the gun show. Change my mind: Red Flag Laws are unconstitutional. I'm sure there are others out there with tables as well.

U made the statement that a red flag could be constitutional. So back up how it could be by posting the one that is.

We have stated how they're unconstitutional many times and shown the why.  You took part in these postings, nothing changed. So go back and refer to this.

I do not have a list of the intricacies of each state's red flag laws and I am now about to go make one just for an internet forum debate.

If I had said that there are constitutional red flag laws then it would be fair for me to at least point to one, I agree, however that was not my argument.

I stated that red flag laws are capable of being constitutional, meaning that if they are written well, with sufficient due process, that they could pass constitutional muster.

Tomorrow I'll be at the gun show. Change my mind: Red Flag Laws are unconstitutional. I'm sure there are others out there with tables as well.

I'll have a table too. Don't have time to make a proper banner though!

I stated that red flag laws are capable of being constitutional, meaning that if they are written well, with sufficient due process, that they could pass constitutional muster.

Goal post moving.

I'll have a table too. Don't have time to make a proper banner though!

We already know that.

Goal post moving.

That’s exactly what he said in the first place… how is that “goal post moving”?

He's hijacked at least two other red flag threads arguing that the details trump the "concept."

We already have due process when someone commits a crime or is observed to be potentially dangerous due to mental issues and so on.

Red flag laws are an attempt to side-step the constitution in order to first take away guns and then address the situation.

In the case shown in the video, it was not a gun situation, but a 72 hour psych evaluation under involuntary institutional commitment.  But the process is the same for almost all state's red flag laws regarding guns.

My position has not changed -- if someone is too dangerous to possess firearms, then they are also too dangerous to be free.  They should be incarcerated and/or given a professional psych eval before they can be allowed out again. 

Leave the guns -- take the person.

The way red flag laws work is certain gov't and healthcare employees can identify someone as exhibiting red flags without having to observe any dangerous behavior or rhetoric whatsoever.  That flies in the face of the 4th amendment where no probable cause other than one person's opinion can get your guns taken and you held for evaluation.

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects,[a]
against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants
shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly
describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.[2]

When there is an intervening action prior to due process, even if there is a process later to try and quash the red flagging, that action is unconstitutional.

This post is about a COP who abused the red flag law to harass his girl friend (i'm sure ex by now).  We already know people are getting swatted.  Red flagging will be the next iteration.

Please show me that all red flag laws are unconstitutional.

The point is not how many are and how many aren't, the point is that the specifics matter much more than the concept. Traffic stops could be unconstitutional if done badly or constitutional if done properly.

Red flag laws =\= traffic stops. Unless you can show me a “concept” somewhere in our country where someone gets their car confiscated while a judge determines if you intended to speed.

Red flag laws =\= traffic stops. Unless you can show me a “concept” somewhere in our country where someone gets their car confiscated while a judge determines if you intended to speed.

We've already gone round and round.  He's 100% focused on the benefits of stopping people before they commit crimes, and he believes that's possible without violating anyone's rights.

In fact, he's said many times as long as you get the chance to fight the seizure AFTER your guns are taken, that's somehow "due process."

Pay a lawyer, spend time from work, and then IF you win jump through hoops so HPD will transfer the guns you already own back to you.

"Due process" must be synonymous with "gulty until proven innocent."

We've already gone round and round.  He's 100% focused on the benefits of stopping people before they commit crimes, and he believes that's possible without violating anyone's rights.

In fact, he's said many times as long as you get the chance to fight the seizure AFTER your guns are taken, that's somehow "due process."

Pay a lawyer, spend time from work, and then IF you win jump through hoops so HPD will transfer the guns you already own back to you.

"Due process" must be synonymous with "gulty until proven innocent."

This sums it up.

Sent from my SM-G991U using Tapatalk

Goal post moving.

Nope. You asked me to defend a statement I haven't actually made.

Red flag laws =\= traffic stops. Unless you can show me a “concept” somewhere in our country where someone gets their car confiscated while a judge determines if you intended to speed.

I was not saying that they were a direct comparison to each other. What I was trying to illustrate was that law enforcement can abuse a system or authority but that doesn't mean the system is unconstitutional.

Another issue is that mental health issues are not the same as criminal issues. In court they have different standards of proof and the goals are completely different.

Note that I am not saying all red flag laws are constitutional either, I look at it on a case by case basis instead of a blanket position.