TTAG Daily Digest: First Florida Gun Confiscation, A Voluntary Opt Out and Common Sense in the Equality State

Police seize first firearms under Florida’s new gun-control laws – That didn’t take long . . .

A Broward County judge on Friday issued the state’s first order temporarily removing guns from a person under Florida’s new gun-control laws.

Four firearms and 267 rounds of ammunition were ordered removed from a 56-year-old Lighthouse Point man who was determined to be a potential risk to himself or others.

The guns and ammunition have been temporarily removed from the man under the state’s new “risk protection” law, which is also sometimes called “red flag” legislation, Lighthouse Point City Attorney Michael Cirullo confirmed.

School-walkout unity also lays bare division among students – There are two Americas, even in high school . . .

The walkouts to protest gun violence that mobilized students across the country also created tensions in hallways and classrooms as a new generation was thrust into the debate over guns. While those calling for new restrictions stood in the spotlight, the surge of youth activism has exposed sharp differences of opinion.

Administrators and student leaders are also sorting through the fallout as some schools hand out discipline for those who defied school instructions and participated in the walkouts exactly one month after the massacre of 17 people at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Florida.

In some cases, personal relationships have been strained.

What gun-control supporters don’t mention: The U.S. rate of gun violence has dropped sharply – Now you’re just baffling them with confusing facts and stuff . . .

The rate of gun violence is almost half of what it was in 1993. This has occurred during a time in which millions of law-abiding citizens have purchased guns — many of them “assault rifles” — and concealed carry limits have been relaxed all over the country.

Even if you fulfilled every gun grabber’s fantasy and went house to house confiscating every assault rifle in America, mass shootings would still occur. The terrorist at Ft. Hood, Texas, killed 13 Americans with a pistol and a revolver. In the largest recent mass murder a gun wasn’t even used. A terrorist in France killed 86 people using a truck.

A new way to reduce gun suicides, and maybe mass shootings too – Putting yourself on a do-not-sell list . . .

Mass shootings dominate the headlines and seem to drive the movement to change gun policy, but reducing gun suicides could save many more lives. More than 20,000 people each year kill themselves with a gun; that’s twice the number of gun homicides. The Parkland, Fla., massacre claimed 17 lives; roughly 59 people die by gun suicide each day.

An innovative new law could bring down this tragic death toll. Washington will soon become the first state in the country to enact a “firearm choice” law. It passed by wide margins in the state Senate and House, with support from Democrats as well as Republicans, and is now awaiting Gov. Jay Inslee’s signature.

The idea is simple: Give people who believe that they may become a risk to themselves or others a way to put distance between themselves and firearms. Under the new law, Washington citizens can add their names to a do-not-sell list, thereby suspending their ability to buy guns from licensed dealers.

School officials worried about Nikolas Cruz and guns 18 months before mass shooting – This was a sh!t show from top to bottom . . .

Eighteen months before Nikolas Cruz shot up Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School, staff were so worried about his fascination with guns that they banned him from practicing shooting skills with the JROTC, according to mental health records obtained by the South Florida Sun Sentinel.

A safety plan created by the school for Cruz in September 2016 also prohibited him from carrying a backpack on campus.

Cruz is charged with 17 counts of murder and 17 counts of attempted murder stemming from his Feb. 14 shooting rampage at the Parkland school.

Lacey Township Students Targeted by NJ’s Anti-Constitution Mafia, NJ2AS Vows to Fight Back! – This seems ripe for a court challenge . . .

After weeks of irresponsible and false attacks on Second Amendment supporters for educating uninformed teenagers, New Jersey’s anti-Constitution mafia is now targeting high school students for lawful behavior off-campus.
Two students at Lacey Township High School were placed on 5 days of suspension, plus Saturday suspension, for posting pictures on social media of firearms with the caption of “fun day at the range,” according to NJ101.5. Apparently sharing a photo from a shooting range on social media disrupted the “school climate,” one of the students facing punishment said. Not only are they after the Second Amendment, they are also after the First Amendment.

A person with knowledge of the situation told NJ2AS that someone (obviously unfamiliar with firearms) saw the picture and contacted the school (“see something, say something”) and stated that the picture offended them, scared them, and appeared to be threatening. Superintendent Craig Wigley said all claims of threats are referred to the police.

‘CNN’s Been Pretty Bad’ — Ben Shapiro Straight Up Calls Out CNN’s Gun Coverage To Brian Stelter’s Face – You don’t say . . .

Conservative commentator Ben Shapiro called out CNN’s coverage of gun rights to host Brian Stelter’s face in an appearance on “Reliable Sources.”

Stelter asked Shapiro “Where do you see the most egregious media bias right now?”

“Well, over the last three weeks, obviously, the coverage of the gun debate has been absolutely egregious. I mean, I don’t want to single out your network, but CNN’s been pretty bad on this from a conservative perspective,” Shapiro responded.

‘Stand Your Ground’ Bill Becomes Wyoming Law – Common sense in the mountain west . . .

The ”Stand Your Ground” bill approved by the Wyoming Legislature has become law without Governor Matt Mead’s signature.

The governor on Wednesday evening declined to either sign House Bill 168 or veto it. That decision means the bill became law without his signature. The bill essentially extends the ”Castle Doctrine,” which says Wyoming residents have no obligation to retreat when attacked in their homes, to public places as well.

It offers protection in both criminal and civil court cases.

The measure will take effect on July 1, 2018.

 

[courtesy MADEbyJIMBOB]

comments

  1. avatar Rusty Chains says:

    So since the rate of violent crime of gun violence is now half what it was in 93 before the assault weapon ban ended, and considering AR-15s are now the most popular rifle and the number of ARs is many multiple higher in the US than previously, we could argue that AR-15s have reduced the rate of gun violence. Maybe we should make that argument just to watch them have a coronary.

    1. avatar Geoff PR says:

      “…and the number of ARs is many multiple higher in the US than previously, we could argue that AR-15s have reduced the rate of gun violence.”

      No, but you can state as a *fact* that AR-platform firearms haven’t *increased* ‘gun violence’.

      The same way that the tens of *millions* more guns in citizens hands since the early 90’s haven’t *increased* ‘gun violence’….

    2. avatar davida says:

      no the hughes amendment to 1986 gun law had a perfect record with civilian machine guns made no difference.

      Start signing petitions in favor of rights. All rights . Less chat more action .
      Get involved .
      Its kinda like pre voting on an issue . 1 issue at a time . once per person.
      Read the rules.
      Find or make one for your discussion .
      No more wasting time arguing.
      Scroll down on link to find others.
      URL: Oppose Gun Control and Weapons Ban Legislation (https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/petition/oppose-gun-control-and-weapons-ban-legislation)
      Facebook Email Twitter

      permission to copy paste where ever you want to.

      1. avatar Gonna KeepEm says:

        I will be attending the gun rights rally March 31 starting at 1:00 PM at the Capitol building in St. Paul, MN.

  2. avatar John Thayer says:

    Let’s make one thing absolutely clear: Being stark raving crazy does not, by itsekf, make a person a danger to himself or to others.

    Let’s say that I declare myself to be a shape-shifting reptilian life-form from the planet Zoltan, temporarily residing here on earth in human form.

    While certainly weird, such a statement in no way represents an actual threat to anyone, irregardless of how uncomfortable it may make you feel.

    1. Are assault weapons legal on Zoltan?

      1. avatar ORCON says:

        Holy shit, it’s Dan. Who let you out?

        ;D

      2. avatar ATFAgentBob(Zoltanian studies PHD) says:

        No they are not. The Zoltanians banned any semi automatic ballistic weapon holding over 5 rounds in its magazine that possesses the following: Pistol Grip, Shoulder thingy that goes up, bullet button, 30 caliber clipazines, is black in color, and makes loud bang noises when trigger is pulled. Weapons banned by name include the AR15, AK47, Mini 14, SCAR, G3, Cetme, Galil, and any other weapon originating from Earth.

        However, as a nod to their EWA (Energy Weapon Association) all plasma, laser, and energy based weapons are still legal if one can obtain the correct permits and the bureau of pre crime doesn’t have you listed as a perpetrator in any cases within the next 40 years. Least they can still get full auto.

        1. avatar rt66paul says:

          And they sent representatives to Calif(they use females) who then entered politics and use mind control on their subjects, they like the cool air and crowded conditions of foggy cities near bays. . San Fransisco was their starting point, but also landed in freshwater port cities as well as areas of high population on the Eastern Seaboard.

    2. avatar MarkPA says:

      I think you are simply confusing the issue.

      We PotG need to stand up and do our best to appear to be the adults-in-the-room.

      First and foremost, we need to rally with those who suffer from forms of mental illness that do NOT correlate with harm to-self or to-others. We need to make ourselves allies of those who shouldn’t be stigmatized or discouraged from seeking professional help. In so doing, they will ally with us to prevent legislators from over-reaching in depriving civilians from their gun rights for merely being politically-incorrect (e.g., registering as Republicans).

      Second, and nearly as important, we need to advocate for effective help for all those who suffer from mental illness. Again, we will allies. Secondarily, there is some potential for reducing the number of suicides or homicides if those with mental illness are treated. As a tertiary phenomena, we MIGHT be able to prevent a few tragedies if we can get those who exhibit violent tendencies listed with the FBI on the NICS system.

      Third, we have to bear in mind that we aren’t going to get support from voters on gun rights by advocating guns-for-ALL-crazy-people! The gun-controllers WANT us to make statements that could be construed as advocating guns for “those who shouldn’t have them”. We do not want to play into-their-hands.

      We really ought to be advocating to our fellow gun owners that they move their guns out of their homes should they have thoughts of suicide. Likewise, advocate that people evidencing violent acts ought to be listed in NICS. The combination of violence, mental illness and drugs/alcohol seems to be particularly potent.

      A rational step in this direction would be advocating for relief from mental disability. “The system” is somewhat reluctant to take action to list a candidate for mental-disability in the NICS system because it is a life-time “stain”. Wouldn’t we be better off if it were NOT NECESSARILY a LIFE-TIME scarlet letter? If we got people listed in NICS – for GOOD reason shown in court – they might be motivated to straighten-out their misbehavior. After behaving themselves for a few years they might be able to persuade a judge to withdraw the NICS listing.

      1. avatar John in Ohio says:

        The tl;dr version: A lot of words to write, “I support gun control.”

        1. avatar Stereodude says:

          Keep holding out for 2A purity and perfection. You’ll get your all your gun rights back in one fell swoop eventually, somehow…

        2. avatar John in Ohio says:

          It stands a better chance than cowardly bending over for the ass raping.

        3. avatar Stereodude says:

          Well, you’re going to lose your gun rights too if you decide the gun rights of the mentally ill (and dangerous) are the hill you’re going to die on. After enough shootings are perpetrated by the mentally ill (and dangerous) enough of the public will be willing to throw the baby out with the bathwater and your intransigent quest for 2A purity will have cost you your gun rights.

          You and the 2A purist/”absolutists” might be right in an absolute theoretical sense, but you’re terrible tacticians and are going to lose the debate and your gun rights due to a total lack of understanding reality.

          Feel free to write a well reasoned and convincing argument why the mentally ill (and dangerous) should retain their gun rights and prove me wrong.

        4. avatar John in Ohio says:

          Shall not be infringed. Unless someone is in the lawful, legitimate custody of another, they are free to exercise their rights.

          Unless, of course, you want that ass raping…

          “Well, you’re going to lose your gun rights too”

          That is not possible. The right is unalienable to the individual. Perhaps you mean that I will lose the ability to exercise my right. That may well be the case but your course of action leads to generations after us losing even more of their ability to exercise their rights.

          Incrementalism rarely ever is successful for restoring the full exercise of unalienable individual rights. (As I posted for you elsewhere.) Normalization and tendency of governments towards more power (aka tyranny) makes it highly unlikely. Each generation can choose to stand for liberty. If it does not, the stand is that much more difficult for subsequent generations.

          Now, regardless of any constitutions, I have an unalienable individual right to keep and bear arms. Fortunately, this nation’s Constitution has limited government on paper/parchment/vellum to shall not be infringed. If you or anyone else is concerned that it will “hurt your cause” or it just makes you butt-hurt. Tough. Statists will do worse.

          With that, I bid you… NO! and shall not be infringed. 🙂

      2. avatar Alex in Oregon says:

        You want us to support Democrats having guns?

        1. avatar John in Ohio says:

          Is that question for me?

    3. avatar Stereodude says:

      Let make another thing absolutely clear. Regardless of your personal feelings and 2A “absolutism”, the vast majority of people think the mentally ill who are dangerous shouldn’t be allowed to have guns. You can try to change their minds, but in the mean time you aren’t going to win the argument. So, you can either:

      1) Let them take his guns and try to make sure that the legislation that allows it to happen is as tightly written as possible and minimizes the potential for abuse.

      2) Fight for his right to keep his guns both you and he will lose your guns when public opinion eventually gets to the point of throwing the baby out with the bath water.

      Is protecting the guns of the mentally ill who are dangerous the hill you want to lose your guns on?

    4. avatar Jonathan-Houston says:

      Yeah, but……..if you declare your neighbor, whom you cannot identify by name or address, as a shape-shifting Obama bim Laden look alike and then proceed to shut off your entire condo building’s master electrical switch, then the circumstances have changed.

      Your delusions have focused on external, phantasmal threats. You’re overtly and dangerously lashing out at others. You’re devolving….and you’re armed. You’re now a danger to yourself and others. Involuntary commitment for you, crazy man.

      But you, like TTAG, won’t tell that whole story, will you? They’ll link to it, but ignore the pertinent details. You’ll sort of reference it, but distort and rewrite the details. Keep it up, POTG, keep it up…..

      You keep playing games, keep running around refusing to do anything about the crazies, then whine and cry when the crazies go crazy. You know, ’cause that’s their thing. Then the antis come for your guns and all that’s left is more crying.

      America needs crazies control, not gun control. Unless and until we get that through our heads and work to clear the crazies from our midst, abiding by due process, you’re going to keep losing the PR war and your gun rights.

      1. avatar The Sand Man says:

        No kidding Jonathon. This whack-o-doodle does not need firearms. He is straight -up confirmed crazy, beyond a reasonable doubt.

  3. avatar john says:

    “but reducing gun suicides could save many more lives”; It has shown in multiple databases that total suicides do not decrease with strict gun control. Those who want to commit suicide just find another way.
    Knife assaults have increased so much in the UK that now they are going to ban certain knives. They are looking at blade length restriction. More murders are committed with screwdrivers than knives when will they restrict those to 3cm blades.
    London news paper headline
    Knife crime in London increased by 25% in the year to September 2017

  4. avatar Hank says:

    Last time I went, they weren’t. Rather Draconian laws I might add.

  5. avatar S.Crock says:

    Who owns 4 guns but only 267 rounds of ammo? I think I have more ammo for guns that I don’t even own. (yet)

    1. avatar anonymoose says:

      Someone who’s down on their luck and hasn’t been stockpiling like the ammo-hoarders who caused the Great Ammo Drought?

    2. avatar 2004done says:

      ME !!!!! (On my way home from the bullet/ powder/ primers stores). I might have a few more brass though.

  6. avatar Big Al says:

    The Federal income tax started as a “TEMPORARY” also. Reading not so between the lines – temporarily B/S!!!

  7. avatar former water walker says:

    If some suicidal person wants to put themselves on a “don’t sell me a gun” list it’s A-OK with me. Get on that cattle car while you’re at it…

    1. avatar pwrserge says:

      Pretending that gun control is a way to combat suicide is an abject insult to the tens of thousands of people struggling with depression all over the country. A smart person doesn’t need a gun to commit suicide. This just seems like another way for virtue signaling attention whores to get more street cred.

      1. avatar Gov. William J Le Petomane says:

        It’s like saying that raising the toll on the Golden Gate Bridge will prevent suicides.

        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suicides_at_the_Golden_Gate_Bridge

        1. avatar huntmaster says:

          I bet if we raised it to like $5000 cash we could end suicides on the bridge altogether. Hey, if it saves one life…

      2. avatar Joe R. says:

        “Pretending that gun control is a way to combat suicide is an abject insult to the tens of thousands of people struggling with depression all over the country.”

        ANYONE saying they are going to “fix” or “reduce” suicides is just like anyone in government saying they can protect anyone on the individual level, THEY are crazy.

      3. avatar MarkPA says:

        Read: “Guns and Suicide; an American Epidemic” by Anestis. He provides a lot of insight; albeit his solutions and assessments are not necessarily correct.

        OUR problem, as the gun community, is that suicide-by-GUN is the BEST available tool. Moreover, this author claims, that substitutability is NOT as strong an influence as we imagine. IF you are a long-term gun owner who has suicidal ideation AND the will to carry-it-out then you are much more likely to: have fixated on your gun as your means-to-your-end; use your gun (vs. any other alternative such as finding a near-by bridge).

        This insight is testable. All we have to do is promote to our fellow gun-owners some alternate means to plan-on to commit suicide. E.g., promote keeping a length of rope at home. After a successful campaign, we should see either a SHIFT / NO-shift in the rates of suicide-by-means.

        If we REALLY believe in substitutability then we ought to strive to disprove his thesis. On the other hand, maybe we should see that he HAS a point. Gun-owners have a strong propensity to attempt suicide-by-GUN, and, they succeed.

        Only IF and WHEN we recognize that there is some logic to using guns-as-a-means will we begin to try to figure-out how to persuade our fellow gun-owners to get help.

        Anestis has a lot of useful insight. One fact is that the “professionals” have NO evidence-based treatment for people with suicidal ideation. Another is that they have NO screening/testing tools to identify individuals with suicidal ideation. Our “professionals” seem to be relying on referrals from Emergency Rooms, almost exclusively, to identify those who need help.

        Our problem is that ER referrals for suicidal ideation based on:
        – a drug OD lead to successful treatment;
        – gun-shot-wound lead to the morgue.
        Thus, our fellow gun-owners rarely get a second-chance to deal with their suicidal ideation. Non-gun-owners with suicidal ideation usually DO get a second chance.

        Gun-controllers view the solution as getting-rid-of-the-guns. A competitive alternative solution MIGHT be to find ALTERNATE means-of-suicide that are AS EFFECTIVE as are guns. Once put in this light, it’s clear that neither is the “right” answer.

        The “right” answer is to be found in identifying, and successfully treating, the few individuals who have suicidal ideation. THIS is NOT a problem for PotG; rather, it’s a problem that belongs to the public health professionals. Unfortunately, so long as we PotG have the most effective, and prevalent, means of suicide, it is WE who are “under the gun” to address the issue.

    2. avatar Nick says:

      Until you get mistaken for someone who did so, or someone with a grudge against you fakes the paperwork so that “you” add yourself.

  8. avatar lookandsee says:

    Sad thing is; What is stopping you from being baker acted out of spite by family members or a police officer having a bad day.

    Or worse being wrongfully diagnosed as suffering from mental illness by a psychologist with an agenda.

    I had a friend who committed suicide due to his life being utterly ruined by false diagnosis along with having his rights stripped from him and the fact he was stuck with an emotionally and mentally abusive mother that treated his sisters better than him and leeched off him. His mother tried to force him against his will to go on SSI despite the fact he was capable of holding down a job and managing his own money and affairs and that after his father’s death his mother continued to make one poor decision after another and had the nerve to blame him for every incident she caused that he had no involvement against and constantly stole money from him, killed his pet dog by intentionally running it over, threatening him at knife-point over a can of kidney beans, injuring his wrists and even threatening on occasions to have him baker-acted over the most trivial things such as accidentally forgetting to get an item of a shopping list. After half a dozen failures with psychologists who found nothing wrong with him. His mother took him to a shady psychologist who had him wrongly fully diagnosed as suffering from paranoid schizophrenia, ptsd & bi-polar against his own objection and numerous paperwork that proved he never displayed an symptoms of psychosis and never was a danger to himself and others. Once he got the SSI that he has no control over, He was not allowed to leave his home without supervision by his sorry excuse of a mother going into panic mode if he so much as went around the block for a walk. Not even allowed to continue his education and had to give up his driver’s license which he never got to use much. After a few years he killed himself because the lifestyle his mother forced him into caused him to develop health problems and the fact he was scared of trying to do anything else about it due to fear of people not believing him due to said wrongful diagnosis, being forcefully arrested, committed to rot in some hospital or group home since his mother was controlling. And she sadly got away scott free with doing this to him as she now leeches off her daughter and her brother in law.

    1. avatar Gralnok says:

      I would have killed the bitch long before offing myself. People like her make normal people insane and it’s no surprise he couldn’t take it anymore. My sympathies for your friend.

    2. avatar John in Ohio says:

      I have seen situations like that but, as far as I’m aware, the victims haven’t committed suicide or homicide yet. Lives have certainly been destroyed though. Some of those situations were in my own extended family. It’s unnerving to witness such evil against another, let alone among family members.

      1. avatar Slicer87 says:

        There was a study where a doctor and some participants checked themselves into a mental hospital to see how long it would take the doctors to identify that they were sane. They believed that they would likely be quickly identified as pretending to be insane. The mental hospital doctors could not identify the participants as sane and even saw sane behaviors as insane. However, the geniue patients spoted they were posers right away. That is pretty scary. What they found was the hospital situation framed any and all behaviors as insane to the doctors and staff including normal sane behaviors like eating lunch.

        1. avatar Jonathan-Houston says:

          I know that study. It’s the 1973 Rosenhan experiment by a Stanford researcher of the same name. That was a era of “gotcha psychology” experiments when outrageous, poorly designed studies made rock stars of researchers. See Millgram’s shocking 1963 obedience to authority study at Yale. See Zimbardo’s 1971 evil-within-us Stanford Prison experiment. Geez, that hack Zimbardo’s study not only inserted himself as a protagonist, but failed to assert any testable hypothesis.

          Anyway, the Rosenhan case only proved that people well coached in psychiatric symptoms can fake them for a while; in this case, an average of 19 days before being discharged. Much of medicine, mental or otherwise, relies on self reported information. Plenty of lives have been saved because persistent patients have, well, persisted, in seeking treatment for real diseases, despite lab results and tests revealing nothing. It can work both ways.

          A famous criticism of the Rosenhan study poses the scenario of someone deliberately ingesting a quart of blood, then running into the ER to vomit it. The staff naturally would diagnose and treat for a ruptured peptic ulcer. That doesn’t mean that ulcers, their treatment, and diagnosis are all B.S.

        2. avatar Mark N. says:

          That was indeed a fascinating, and scary, study that demonstrated beyond a doubt that shrinks have no idea what they are talking about, most of the time, except when they are dealing with cases of true paranoid schizophrenia.

  9. avatar Gralnok says:

    I first thought that this first confiscation would be the shot heard around the nation. Then I read the linked story. I still think this is a slippery slope we’re on, but I have to admit that the guy sounds crazy enough to be a threat. Still, we should pay close attention to Florida for now.

  10. avatar El Loco says:

    Quote:

    The man told officers he “was being targeted and burglarized by the Federal Bureau of Investigation and a neighbor who lives in [his] building,” the judge wrote in his order. “[He] could not describe the neighbor but stated that the neighbor [can] ‘shape shift, he can change heights and I’m not sure where he comes from’ and ‘to be honest, he looks like Osama Bin Laden.’”

    He also told officers that he had to turn off the electrical breakers because “they are electrocuting me through my legs.”

    Officers said they saw weapons in his home after they were called to check on his welfare. They also found evidence he had “a voluminous amount of notes containing numerous references to former President Barack Obama, that he was killed in the 1980s but came back and now murders children to place their spirits into [the man’s] head, is a member of [al-Qaida], and is [the man’s] enemy,” the judge wrote in his order.

    ‘Red flag’ laws allow police to take guns from people who show signs of violence
    The man was involuntarily committed for treatment in a separate proceeding and it is not yet known when he would be eligible for release, records show.

    1. avatar Nanashi says:

      One: That’s what the state says in the first report. What the state says in the first report is virtually never true.
      Two: He did just get targeted and burglarized by some law enforcement group, so…

      1. avatar John in Ohio says:

        You aren’t paranoid if they really are out to get you.

        1. avatar 2004done says:

          John in OH: “Guns had better make you paranoid, because apathy will take them away from everyone but government and criminals.”

    2. avatar MarkPA says:

      Seems to me like there is NOT YET a really good solution. Nevertheless, we do have a solution; the adversarial court hearing. A prosecutor either CAN or can-NOT produce lay witnesses to testify against a respondent.

      Is the respondent accused of “hearing voices”? Committing acts of violence? Making threats? Or, do you just have a “diagnosis” from a “professional”?

      Can we sift through the notorious cases? Lots of not-so-notorious cases? Were there friends, family, neighbors, classmates, co-workers who could be interviewed and subpoenaed to testify as to the evidence that the individual was a danger to himself/others?

      I suspect that there was evidence of serious mental disease and violence that was discoverable before many – even most – killers flipped-out. Muster this evidence and like tragedies could be prevented; or, likely victims could be warned to prepare. Where prosecutors can’t muster this quality of evidence then we wouldn’t have sane people deprived of their rights or liberty.

  11. avatar Andrew Lias says:

    Although I consider him kind of soggy on 2A at times, Ben Shapiro is always a hoot to watch go on networks like CNN and lay bare the biases of the people in those networks. Stelter just took it too, which makes me chuckle even more.

  12. avatar Shawn says:

    For those of you in Arizona today is still Sunday, March 18. Governor Doug Ducey is going to ram through an extreme risk protection confiscation order tomorrow. And he’s going to rapidly do it forcing full house and senate votes and signing it by the end of the day. Meaning Arizona might have the same laws Florida has by the end of tomorrow.

    1. avatar Nanashi says:

      So much for hoping McCain’s replacement would be better.

  13. avatar Joe R. says:

    WHEN GUN CONFISCATION GETS AROUND TO THE COPS, they’re going to bitch like little school girls, so, save your guns for that day, bc we’re going to have to use extreme force.

    And, when gun confiscation gets around to the cops, no one will be around to protect your self-important aholes who needed a job (your government) that started this sh_t. They’ll be a (very) brief amount of bitching then too.

  14. avatar J says:

    Please help save our 2nd Amendment rights. Please pass the first link to others so we can get this petition sent to the White House.

    Oppose Gun Control and Weapons Ban Legislation

    https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/petition/oppose-gun-control-and-weapons-ban-legislation

    https://petitions.whitehouse.gov

  15. avatar pg2 says:

    Reducing suicides, and even gun fatalities is not the goal. Disarming the law abiding public is the goal. Assuming or pretending the people that want to disarm the public care about facts or logic is driving asleep at the wheel.

  16. avatar Gunr says:

    About this adding your name to the “Do not sell” list. In some states, I believe Washington included, as well as My state (Oregon), you don’t need to do that. With the new relatives can get your guns taken away, because you gave your wife the “finger”, law, it’s all taken care of. All you gotta do is piss your old lady off, and instantly your gun safe can be turned into a broom closet.

  17. avatar Sid says:

    How are the police certain that he only has 4 firearms? That issue is my only concern in the matter (if reported accurately). Does this new law allow them to search the primary residence? If this leads to gun registry, then we all have a significant problem.

Write a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

button to share on facebook
button to tweet
button to share via email