My Thoughts On Red Flag Laws

[martybegan]

Seems to me that is social injustice, discriminating against those who are poorer, which would effect blacks to a higher percentage than whites. Why do the left want to discriminate against blacks?

Because we know it's about control and appearing to "do something" than actually doing something.

 

[Dogmaphobe]

The inherent problem with laws such as these is that they only work if reasonable people are acting in good faith and are acting as impartially as is humanly possible.

As the Biden administration has shown, the same laws are simply a tool to be used towards a political end when wielded by those who aren't.

 

[White 6]

They're stupid. Just more of the very same nonsense we are already doing now. Know someone who is a danger to themselves or others and owns guns? Petition the courts to take that person's guns away - while leaving someone who is a danger to others or themselves free to roam around. What is the logic of that? If you can prove they are a danger to others or to themselves enough to take their guns away then you can prove they shouldn't be running around loose in the first place.

Meanwhile, it takes time to go through the court process and even more time to actually confiscate their guns. And, my understanding is that this is for a set amount of time only and then the guns are automatically returned unless you can reprove the person is still a danger to others or to themselves, creating yet another crack things can slip through if the red flag law isn't re-upped.

And, in most cases, someone who is a danger to others or to themselves, generally speaking, never gets cured and will either be a permanent danger to others or to themselves or will always be in danger of having a relapse at any time. Not only will they be able to find guns if they really want to but they don't need guns to commit violent acts. When are we going to wise up and not let these people run around loose in the first place?

Red flag laws are necessary, as families often no longer take responsibility for removing weapons themselves. People would sooner remove someone's access to the car keys, than remove access to somebody's weapons, but at times, both are necessary precautions. Some people have no family or live apart from family. If talking and acting impaired psychologically or even psychotically at work with threats, plans, and intents of action, should nobody step in? When dad got to a certain point in the progression of Alzheimer's, we removed his access to his keys to vehicles as well as his access to weapon, as he was no longer stable enough to safely (for him or anyone else) these freedoms he had enjoyed, all of his life and indeed, trained us to enjoy.

 

[Burgermeister]

Some states have them now and I don't know how that's going. If it becomes a federal law, look out. Of course, there are Republicans voicing support for that. There is no party of smaller government, if there ever was one. That should be a red line for all Republicans.

 

[HandleTheTruth]

They're stupid. Just more of the very same nonsense we are already doing now. Know someone who is a danger to themselves or others and owns guns? Petition the courts to take that person's guns away - while leaving someone who is a danger to others or themselves free to roam around. What is the logic of that? If you can prove they are a danger to others or to themselves enough to take their guns away then you can prove they shouldn't be running around loose in the first place.

Meanwhile, it takes time to go through the court process and even more time to actually confiscate their guns. And, my understanding is that this is for a set amount of time only and then the guns are automatically returned unless you can reprove the person is still a danger to others or to themselves, creating yet another crack things can slip through if the red flag law isn't re-upped.

And, in most cases, someone who is a danger to others or to themselves, generally speaking, never gets cured and will either be a permanent danger to others or to themselves or will always be in danger of having a relapse at any time. Not only will they be able to find guns if they really want to but they don't need guns to commit violent acts. When are we going to wise up and not let these people run around loose in the first place?

Well sense the assault weapon ban was let to expire these killers look for the guns to do mass murder.
To not admit this is stupid in my view. Just the same nonsense from you right wingers.

 

[Circe]

I stand by what I said. If you have enough evidence that this person is a danger to others or to themselves to take their guns away then you have enough evidence to take this person off the streets. Otherwise, you DON'T have enough evidence to take their guns away.

I have a different perspective on this interesting issue. Wives have a problem with the fact that husbands are usually older and gunnier and I have heard of bad senility issues: we women don't want a senile husband running around with guns. Officials know about this problem --- they don't want to make a big song and dance about someone getting too old to drive or shoot. Better to let the man stay at home, cared for by his wife, with no guns, than put him into a rest home where he hates it and feels a prisoner.

 

[HandleTheTruth]

If you want to kill people and take away their rights then you shouldn't own one.

 

[Circe]

Red flag laws are necessary, as families often no longer take responsibility for removing weapons themselves. People would sooner remove someone's access to the car keys, than remove access to somebody's weapons, but at times, both are necessary precautions. Some people have no family or live apart from family. If talking and acting impaired psychologically or even psychotically at work with threats, plans, and intents of action, should nobody step in? When dad got to a certain point in the progression of Alzheimer's, we removed his access to his keys to vehicles as well as his access to weapon, as he was no longer stable enough to safely (for him or anyone else) these freedoms he had enjoyed, all of his life and indeed, trained us to enjoy.

There you go; well done.

My stepmother hit three cars within three weeks in Massachusetts when she got dementia.

What happened was that my sister stole her car! Parked it somewhere near her own house and forgot about it. This worked. They still ended up having to have live-in nurses, however.

 

[HandleTheTruth]

Because we know it's about control and appearing to "do something" than actually doing something.

It's about keeping people that want to doass murder from caring out the act. I see why you hate it.

 

[HandleTheTruth]

If you make it clear you want to mass murder you should t have access to the tools to carry out your sick plans. Period.

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

They're stupid. Just more of the very same nonsense we are already doing now. Know someone who is a danger to themselves or others and owns guns? Petition the courts to take that person's guns away - while leaving someone who is a danger to others or themselves free to roam around. What is the logic of that? If you can prove they are a danger to others or to themselves enough to take their guns away then you can prove they shouldn't be running around loose in the first place.

Meanwhile, it takes time to go through the court process and even more time to actually confiscate their guns. And, my understanding is that this is for a set amount of time only and then the guns are automatically returned unless you can reprove the person is still a danger to others or to themselves, creating yet another crack things can slip through if the red flag law isn't re-upped.

And, in most cases, someone who is a danger to others or to themselves, generally speaking, never gets cured and will either be a permanent danger to others or to themselves or will always be in danger of having a relapse at any time. Not only will they be able to find guns if they really want to but they don't need guns to commit violent acts. When are we going to wise up and not let these people run around loose in the first place?

It is an attempt to preemptively stop crime.

All preemptive measures are tyrannical.

Anyone attempting to enact preemptive criminal measures should be brutally executed.

 

[HandleTheTruth]

It is an attempt to preemptively stop crime.

All preemptive measures are tyrannical.

Anyone attempting to enact preemptive criminal measures should be brutally executed.

If you make it clear you wish to do mass murder you shouldn't have access to the tools to carry out the crime.

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

It's about keeping people that want to doass murder from caring out the act. I see why you hate it.

What else can we do preemptively?

Why don't we chop off the dicks of all men so rape cannot occur?

Why don't we rip the uterus out of every woman so no abortion can occur?

chop off every fucking arm so nobody can steal?

I'm starting to like this proactive shit.

You should be first to get your dick and arms chopped off.

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

If you make it clear you wish to do mass murder you shouldn't have access to the tools to carry out the crime.

So what do you mean by "make it clear"?

And would that have stopped any of the most recent shootings?

It for goddamn certain would not have stopped the Las Vegas shooter.

So what are you really after?

You know the fucking answer and you know you should be shot for it.

 

[Independent thinker]

Red flag laws are necessary, as families often no longer take responsibility for removing weapons themselves. People would sooner remove someone's access to the car keys, than remove access to somebody's weapons, but at times, both are necessary precautions. Some people have no family or live apart from family. If talking and acting impaired psychologically or even psychotically at work with threats, plans, and intents of action, should nobody step in? When dad got to a certain point in the progression of Alzheimer's, we removed his access to his keys to vehicles as well as his access to weapon, as he was no longer stable enough to safely (for him or anyone else) these freedoms he had enjoyed, all of his life and indeed, trained us to enjoy.

We should step in and take these people off the streets, IF THERE IS ENOUGH EVIDENCE. Just taking their guns away is stupid because they can commit violence in any number of ways and can get guns in any number of ways after theirs are taken away.

 

[SavannahMann]

It was JFK who started the ball rolling on closing down Psyche Hospitals. Also, Progs had plenty of opportunities to reopen them.

It is far more than the building. It is the people working within. There is already a shortage of Doctors, especially Psychiatric Doctors. Where are we going to get these fine folks who will dedicate their lives to sitting and working with very disturbed, and dangerous people?

We need another 2,800 Doctors today. Without these notional Psychiatric Hospitals we haven’t yet built but could at any time according to you.

Why There is a Psychiatrist Shortage — and What to Do About It | Adaptive Medical Partners

Physicians are in shortage everywhere, and the lack of psychiatrists is particularly severe. According to The National Council for Behavioral Health “The coverage of, and increasing demand for, psychiatric services is occurring at the same time as a growing shortage of outpatient and inpatient...

adaptivemedicalpartners.com

Nurses? We’re gonna need a lot of them. They’re on duty around the clock, while the Doctor is On Call. So where will we find them?

And which of you fine RW types is going to sign up for the great job of Orderly?

As I said above. If we started today, it would take Decades to get where we need to be. Because it will take years to get the people through the schools, the Doctors to choose the specialty, and get trained and certified. Nurses will have to be trained, and that is all going to cost a lot of money. And if there is one thing that Republicans hate spending, it’s money for some social bullshit. Especially Leftist Social Bullshit.

So lets say we get this through Congress today. Biden Signs it tomorrow. Ten seconds after the Republicans take control, it is on the scrap heap as a waste of money. Then we’re back where we started from.

No, we’re just going to keep having events like this over, and over again. You guys on the Right will scream Mental Issues, but you won’t do anything about them. You’ll scream more guards and single point entry into buildings. But you won’t pay for it. You won’t tolerate a single dollar in additional taxes to pay for it. You’ll demand the money come from Welfare, or Child Educational Programs, or whatever. But you won’t pay a single dollar more. So it won’t happen.

The Left will talk about common sense gun reform, and Red Flag laws to take the guns when someone says hey, Jack the jackass is a nut and shouldn’t have guns. Jack would have to go to court and prove he isn’t a nut. But no, that is a secret unconstitutional way to get the guns from good law abiding Conservatives. Like Jack the Jackass who is really a nut.

So nothing will change, nothing will be done except finger pointing by both the Left and Right. And in a few weeks, or months, more kids will die. And the Right will scream that we need to get the guns away from the Cities like Chicago, because Blacks are killing each other. Odd, the Right doesn’t like their own answer. Because everywhere but the Inner Cities the solution of more guns, is always advocated. Why haven’t the Right Wing ever said we need to pass out guns for free to the law abiding folks in Chicago?

It’s all a lie. It’s all nonsense. It’s all bullshit. And eventually the Civil War will start up. And we will all die because neither side wants to do anything but destroy the others.

Want to know why your side is so unhappy? You can’t stand for anyone on the Left to be happy. That is also why they are unhappy.

So yeah. It’s the Liberals fault they didn’t throw money constructing buildings they couldn’t possibly staff. It’s the Liberals fault they didn’t come up with a program that would be denounced as socialist, or communist, or unconstitutional to convince people to study psychiatric medicine.

Idiots. The nation is doomed. The world is doomed.

 

[HandleTheTruth]

What else can we do preemptively?

Why don't we chop off the dicks of all men so rape cannot occur?

Why don't we rip the uterus out of every woman so no abortion can occur?

chop off every fucking arm so nobody can steal?

I'm starting to like this proactive shit.

You should be first to get your dick and arms chopped off.

If you make it clear you are going to shoot masses of people with your weapons and deny them their rights of life and liberty. You give up your second amendment rights where my right to life begin.

 

[Independent thinker]

Well sense the assault weapon ban was let to expire these killers look for the guns to do mass murder.
To not admit this is stupid in my view. Just the same nonsense from you right wingers.

The stupidity is in thinking that if this kid couldn't get an assault weapon then these shootings would have never happened. They would still have.

 

[Independent thinker]

I have a different perspective on this interesting issue. Wives have a problem with the fact that husbands are usually older and gunnier and I have heard of bad senility issues: we women don't want a senile husband running around with guns. Officials know about this problem --- they don't want to make a big song and dance about someone getting too old to drive or shoot. Better to let the man stay at home, cared for by his wife, with no guns, than put him into a rest home where he hates it and feels a prisoner.

Interesting perspective I hadn't considered. It would seem that one size doesn't fit all.

 

[HandleTheTruth]

The stupidity is in thinking that if this kid couldn't get an assault weapon then these shootings would have never happened. They would still have.

The stupidity of your thinking aside. You don't get to threaten people with weapons or threats of violence and get to stay armed. My right to life is more important. How stupid are you guys?