Yes trp said that but backed away when he realized it was a mistake.This guy is a retard. Petitioning a court IS due process.
"Take the guns first. Go through due process second, I like taking the guns early. - Donald J. Trump
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Yes trp said that but backed away when he realized it was a mistake.This guy is a retard. Petitioning a court IS due process.
"Take the guns first. Go through due process second, I like taking the guns early. - Donald J. Trump
Nope never happen but you can stop projecting.Republicans are becoming more and more on the wrong side of the issues.
So you're a troll ...okA retard such as yourself does not deserve a response other than pointing out that you are a retard.
No, it's more than that: they want be able to legally SWAT people and get them killed.I dont think background checks are unconstitutional
I think if you want to take a man’s gun away we already have a process for that
Convicted felons are not allowed to own guns
But lazy gun grabbers want take guns away based on hearsay
Thats unacceptable
And that disappeared from the news FAST when the suspect became known.I somewhat disagree
The black guy who ran over the white ladies at a Christmas parade did get some attention
But no one was callIng for red flag laws or the confiscation of automobiles
The domestic violence decision would have to be on the cops on the scene IMHO. If they arrested the person, then they must've thought the persons was dangerous enough to take into custody to prevent future violence.
This certainly brought out the gun nuts huh?
So which particular parts of that bill do you oppose?
Certainly not the raising of the age to buy assault weapons to 21
Certainly not keeping guns out the hands of people with mental issues
No a retard would use the word gun nutSo you're a troll ...ok
Show us a case where that has happenedBasically: if a woman reports domestic violence, the man WILL be arrested, even if he is injured and she is not.
A lot of times that does happen. To get one out of the houseShow us a case where that has happened
Then he was still a danger to himself and/or others. He should have been committed until it was certain he had no issues.
The only petitioning will be by the conservative gun owner begging government to give his guns backThis guy is a retard. Petitioning a court IS due process.
"Take the guns first. Go through due process second, I like taking the guns early. - Donald J. Trump
So, you leave him out where he can have access to clubs, hammers, knives and automobiles which have all been used to murder? Then your goal is not public safety, it's to merely grab a gun.It depends on which state you live in, but involuntary commitment to a mental facility is difficult for the state to do, as it should be. Pretty much if he calms down and exhibits no sign of violence then they'll probably discharge him. He goes home and if his weapons are still there then as soon as something sets him off again there could be a shooting(s). I'm not sure it's that big a deal to deny him his weapons for a few weeks until he shows himself to be in control of himself. If he can't even do that then maybe everybody is better off if he doesn't have any weapons.
Even if it poses a danger to society we must err on the side of individual rights. We withhold the death penalty in order to ensure that we don't mistakenly execute someone, while imprisoning them for life. We also let others out of prison knowing that they will likely reoffend, often violently.The domestic violence decision would have to be on the cops on the scene IMHO. If they arrested the person, then they must've thought the persons was dangerous enough to take into custody to prevent future violence. If so, I think that right there is good enough reason to confiscate any guns. And if not, well then they leave the person there without confiscating the guns.
If the person's mental state is in doubt, I would think the cops are not up to making that call. If they take the person to a mental ward or facility then a mental health expert would have to make the call over any weapons confiscation. And obviously any confiscation ought to be reviewed after 14 days or whatever the period of time is before the person can make his/her case to get his/her weapons back.
Do you not think we ought to try to keep guns out of the hands of those who would do harm to themselves or others? Or do we just let shit happen?
Society recognizes that guns are not only far more dangerous, but that they have no other use than to do damage to other human beings.So, you leave him out where he can have access to clubs, hammers, knives and automobiles which have all been used to murder? Then your goal is not public safety, it's to merely grab a gun.
I have used guns all my life for hunting and target shooting. Haven't damaged a human yet (although I am prepared for that as well).Society recognizes that guns are not only far more dangerous, but that they have no other use than to do damage to other human beings.
IrrelevantI have used guns all my life for hunting and target shooting. Haven't damaged a human yet (although I am prepared for that as well).
Most gun owners are like me. Very few shoot people. Guns are only dangerous in the hands of dangerous or careless people. Also, gun deaths are just a blip compared to other causes of premature and unnecessary deaths.Irrelevant
You are one person out of 300 million
Guns are inherently more dangerous than knives or clubs and have no other use than to do damage to humans
And this is about keeping guns out of the hands of dangerous peopleMost gun owners are like me. Very few shoot people. Guns are only dangerous in the hands of dangerous or careless people. Also, gun deaths are just a blip compared to other causes of premature and unnecessary deaths.
This is an attempt to identify people who might become violent at a later time. A very slippery slope.And this is about keeping guns out of the hands of dangerous people
So there’s that
Even if it poses a danger to society we must err on the side of individual rights.
You know his is false.And this is about keeping guns out of the hands of dangerous people