BREAKING: Trump Announces Support for Red Flag Laws

Trump suppressor silencer atf

(Evan Vucci/AP)

After the weekend’s shootings in El Paso and Dayton, President Trump addressed the nation this morning. In response to calls from both Democrats and Republicans to do something (as well as being blamed directly by some for the shootings), he said that . . .

Our nation is overcome with shock, horror and sorrow.

He called the shootings an attack on our nation and a crime against humanity. Trump then vowed “to act with urgent resolve.”

The President said that he’s been in contact with the Attorney General and the FBI director and condemned racism, bigotry and white supremacy. He noted that the internet has provided a dangerous avenue to radicalize individuals. “The perils of the internet and social media cannot be ignored and will not be ignored.”

He said “We must seek real, bipartisan solutions…we must do a better job of acting on early warning signs.”

He then said that we must . . .

  • Work with social media companies to detect mass shooters before they strike.
  • Stop the glorification of violence, including gruesome video games. Cultural change is hard, he said.
  • We must reform our mental health laws to better identify mentally disturbed individuals to give people treatment and, when necessary, involuntary confinement.
  • Enact red flag laws with due process.
  • Use the death penalty for those convicted of mass murder.

In closing he noted that his administration has enacted Fix NICS legislation and outlawed bump stocks. Despite earlier tweets that appeared to indicate support for “stronger background checks,” he didn’t mention so-called universal background checks. That may be due to the fact that virtually every mass shooter in history has purchased the gun(s) used legally.

The big news here for gun owners is the President’s support for a so-called red flag laws or gun violence restraining orders. These laws allow firearms to be taken from individuals who are deemed to be a danger to themselves or others.

The problem with these laws is that they rarely provide due process protections for the targets of the orders. Depending on the language, family, friends or even co-workers can ask for confiscation and the gun owner frequently isn’t informed until they get a knock on their door from police.

It’s only after the fact that they can argue for the return of their firearms in a subsequent hearing. The devil is in the details as to how these laws have been written in various states around the country.

Trump didn’t specifically propose a national red flag law, only his support for the laws in general. Whether that means he’d support a federal level red flag law isn’t clear.

Also don’t look for Trump to get any credit for his support for a red flag law from, well, anyone. Democrats and the civilian disarmament industry are probably already tweeting their outrage that he didn’t call for other steps such as universal background checks, a new federal “assault weapons” ban, or his failure to call for Congress to reconvene to consider gun control bills that have already been introduced.

 

 

 

comments

  1. avatar rip_vw32 says:

    And here we go…. the downhill slide just got steeper.

    1. avatar I Haz A Question says:

      Speaking of ERPO laws, a co-worker of mine with whom I’ve worked for about two decades has caused many problems for others within the company over the years. Now she’s about to retire, and an unfortunate side-effect to her announcement is that a few of us she doesn’t like (including me) are choosing to be completely silent, avoiding her until she retires and absorbing her comments and behavior. And then we need to hold our breath for six months afterward.

      Why? Because CA Red Flag law – recently enhanced and expanded, thanks Dems (sarc) – allows for any person with whom you’ve worked for the past six months to file an ERPO complaint against you, and there’s absolutely nothing you can do when the LEOs show up at your door with a warrant to search your residence and remove any guns. Then you’ll have to expend your own time and money to fight it in court and try to get your guns back.

      Pure unconstitutional violation of your 2nd, 4th, 6th, and 7th Amendment rights. All in the hands of one vindictive co-worker.

      This infatuation with Red Flag/ERPO laws across the nation will not last forever. Once a series of lawsuits spearhead their way up the ladder to SCOTUS, they’ll be knocked down. They’re just too obviously unconstitutional. Unfortunately, we’ll be dealing with them in the meantime, and that could be several years.

      1. avatar Karl says:

        For those of in states that don’t have these things we need to contact our legislators to oppose these for that reason and urge some kind of penalty for people who enact these for vindictive reasons, perhaps $1,000 per day plus any legal fees associated and cost of any damage to come from whatever department was entrusted with stealing your property.

      2. avatar Ragnarredbeard says:

        Sounds like you need to turn her in for one first. Take any remotely hostile thing she’s said and use it.

      3. avatar User1 says:

        Sounds like the old days of communism. You must stay silent to protect yourself from the snitch that will inform the government about you being a threat.

        Good ol’ Murica. Land of the free, home of the brave.

        1. avatar The Crimson Pirate says:

          Used to be snitches got stitches and wound up in ditches. We need to bring that back.

        2. avatar Dew says:

          And Trumps true colors shown thru, he just lost my vote, he’s trying to out-communist the communist democrats.

        3. avatar Fudds McKenzie says:

          May the Wings of Liberty never lose a feather.

      4. avatar Feet or Knees says:

        “and there’s absolutely nothing you can do when the LEOs show up at your door with a warrant to search your residence and remove any guns”
        US code 18 242 makes it legal to use deadly force on a public servant, who is trying to deprive a Citizen of their rights under color of law.The Second Amendment is meant to be invoked, to defend against tyranny by law.
        A rifle and standard capacity magazines would stop the state thugs from coming into your home.
        Prohibition of alcohol taught Americans how to deal with government sanctioned thugs, you make it dangerous for them to come to work and at their homes, and then they become Constitutional supporting Americans again.

        1. avatar I Haz A Question says:

          In theory, yes. But in reality, any LEOs (at least here in SoCal, I can’t speak for other localities) suit up and act in force regarding any situation involving potential guns at a residence. I’m sure they’ll be fully aware that a private citizen will be thoroughly unhappy with the sight of men coming to his home to remove him and search his premises to deprive him of his property. They will not come to your door in normal uniforms to perform a knock-and-talk.

          Even if you went all John Wick on them and neutralized an entire 8-member SWAT team as they infiltrated your house, the SO of the bunch would have certainly called in for backup and aerial oversight. Then you’d have thirty angry cops defending their thin blue line and not caring one whit about the unconstitutionality of the original warrant. Their tear gas and/or burn down your home.

          You know this isn’t an exaggeration. The only way for true change to happen is for such a standoff to be streamed live via the defending homeowner directly to the Web (bypassing the MSM). And you’d have to be willing to die as a martyr for the cause. How many of us are willing to place our wives and children in that danger?

          This isn’t an excuse. It’s just the reality of things. Not an easy thing to navigate.

        2. avatar Howdy1 says:

          That’s not what it says. It states there are penalties meted out by the government to those that do these things. Nowhere does it give a free pass to use any force to keep it from happening.

          How you choose to react during an event like this is your own business.

        3. avatar DingDongDitch says:

          Go ahead. Shoot a couple cops. See how that ends for ya.

        4. avatar Manse Jolly says:

          …..”The only way for true change to happen is for such a standoff to be streamed live via the defending homeowner directly to the Web (bypassing the MSM). …”

          A very valid point. Would have to get it out on a platform that won’t block or delete the feed and enough viral output to spread it quickly.

          After New Zealand and a couple of others, major platforms are on the look -out though.

        5. avatar Cloudbuster says:

          “Go ahead. Shoot a couple cops. See how that ends for ya.”

          A right nobody’s willing to die for isn’t much of a right.

        6. avatar Sam I Am says:

          “A right nobody’s willing to die for isn’t much of a right.”

          That may be true, but…

          Dead people forfeit all their rights.

      5. avatar Donttreadonme says:

        We, in NY, are in the same boat with these blatantly unconstitutional RFLs. I have the same hope that they will get to SCROTUS and be crushed, but until them we have to walk on egg shells around all the snowflakes.

        1. avatar User1 gets banned says:

          I thought I heard Kavanaugh say he supports red flag laws. I know the AG does.

          I wouldn’t depend on the government to return the power back to the people because they don’t believe in doing that. This is why once a law is passed it’s almost impossible to get rid of it even when Republicans are in full control.

          Even if the courts wants to do the right thing, it will take many years and convictions to get there.

          Who wants to live 15 years of silence in a country with a law recognizing free speech? I can tell you — from personal experience — that it isn’t a good feeling not being able to inform the people of the truth.

      6. avatar Mark N. says:

        Ease up Haz, the law has only been proposed, but neither passed nor signed by the Greaser. It is currently on suspense in the Senate until after the summer recess. If it goes into effect, it will not be until September 1, 2020. Moreover, this retiree would have to get the approval of the employer before filing. “A coworker of the subject of the petition, if they have had substantial and regular interactions with the subject for at least one year and have obtained the approval of the employer.” I have no idea where you get this six months post retirement authority; there is no such language in the proposed statute.

        http://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id=201920200AB61

        1. avatar I Haz A Question says:

          Interesting. Thanks for the update. This is different from the text I’ve read concerning CA ERPO law.

          CA’s penal code is a veritable labyrinth of code, a shifting sand. It’s a challenge just to keep up with it.

    2. avatar Garrison Hall says:

      Looks like Trump just lost the 2020 election.

      1. avatar guest says:

        Nope. Lip service.

      2. avatar Gov. William J Le Petomane says:

        Because Shotgun Joe (‘nobody needs an AR’) is a better choice for gun owners?

        1. avatar Blue says:

          Tulsi Gabbard could cause some problems if she can stick around long enough. The Donnie will lose several states if he throws in the with the gun ban lobby. I could see Tennessee, AL, AR, Mo, KS going against him like they did George Herbert Walker Bush because he was for the Clinton Ban before Clinton was elected. Furthermore, Florida, Texas, and Arizona would be in play as well. His rust belt miracle from 2016 won’t be able to help him.

        2. avatar Blue says:

          BTW, Shotgun Joe is very shakey and if the DNC figures out how The Donnie takes it on the chin from flipping on gun control, they could pull a surprise. Don’t forget they play with super delegates.

      3. avatar Theguywiththegun says:

        That was the goal here; carve off a sizable leg of Trump’s support. Trumps in a jam, support the 2A people and he gets roasted for not caring about gun violence victims. Try to ride the fence a bit and he gets roasted by the 2A people.
        I hate incremental gun control as much as anyone. But this was the dems plan: to splinter support. The dems know outside this they lose 2020 in a big way. If they get RFLs, that’s a bonus. Turn on Trump and you just gave the progs what they wanted.

        1. avatar George from Alaska says:

          Your logic is correct. Trump is in the same position that Obama found himself in during his second term after a series of massacres….. “DO SOMETHING”! The public screams. It’s a no win situation. I’m not happy with Trump and the unilateral “bump stock” ban. No matter what you think of the pieces of plastic or metal (I had a Fostech) it was patently wrong and illegal for him to ban a firearms accessory by Executive Order. It was wrong and disappointing of him when asked by Piers Morgan about silencers (and by the way, what the fuck was POTUS thinking even going on that idiot gun hater’s show?) and Trump answered “I don’t like them and will be looking into it”… He is rapidly showing what a fat, soft city boy he really is – what next? Perhaps an endorsement for soy drinks? Perhaps he can craft a “Red Flag” law that will attack the problem at the roots and guarantee peace of mind to the rest of us but I’m not holding my breath. I still have a psycho ex-wife who totally lost everything during the divorce who could invent a lie about me and like most DV laws, the law would have to act and “Do Something”, at least at first until I fought it with facts and documents I have.
          I will not be shooting the first police officers that drive up to my house. That is a stupid response and you will not have much of a life to enjoy or protect after that. Some of you may not have families or wives or girlfriends and can fantasize about what you will do after a decade of GTA and Socom and whatever else they play nowadays…

      4. avatar LifeSavor says:

        Watch what Trump DOES, do not worry much about what he says on this (guns) topic. He LOVES to send mixed signals, misleading signals, and keep his adversaries confused, off-balance.

        No matter how annoyed we may get with Trump ( and he has been annoying me quite a bit, lately), there is NO CHANCE that we would get any support from a Democrat, especially not the left-wing clown show currently pedaling their tricycles and honking their horns toward the primaries.

        1. avatar ScottMc says:

          I think you have a point. If something is proposed and can’t pass both houses then Congress is to blame.

          … Mitch McConnell will not let any legisltion get to the floor of the Senate between now and the 2020 election that doesn’t pass muster with Kentucky’s very conservative, 2nd Amendment friendly base as he is up in 2020.

      5. avatar PATRON49IFT says:

        Will you then be supporting Biden, Warren, Mayor Pete, Harris? Who do you prefer since you’re off the Trump train? Do you think any of those will be better for your gun rights? Get real, he’s the only choice; warts and all.

        1. avatar NoSir says:

          Need I remind you that the people who would normally stand up against this are all sleeping through trump. There’s a reason reagan banned machine guns and got away with it still being loved by the republicans. Put a Democrat in office and all these people crying tread on me harder daddy will be out there stomping on this red flag garbage and any republican siding with them is on the unemployment list. At this point I wish we had a Democrat just so people would fight this garbage.

        2. avatar Sam I Am says:

          “At this point I wish we had a Democrat just so people would fight this garbage.”

          Winning by losing; interesting concept. Been tried before, without success, but it always remains a popular belief.

    3. avatar Craig in IA says:

      “Enact red flag laws with due process.” (I also heard the president live.)

      If complete due process is followed the ERPOs wouldn’t be all that onerous. The fact that he stipulated “due process” seems to be lost on many. Observing such would mean none of the other Constitutional protections would be violated, and it would put a much larger burden on officials seeking ERPOs.

      It’s true that there are states that appear to be circumventing the US Constitution with ERPOs but that is not what Trump suggested this morning. When someone makes threats over and over on internet forums, social media and the like, it shouldn’t take a decent prosecutor long to at least put together a case. People here, on the one hand, sit around and bitch that so and such shooter provided ample warnings beforehand yet officials did nothing, then decry it when someone does try to act. How it all comes about is the issue- if enough evidence is presented in a hearing which would adhere to Constitutional protections and if laws are also in place to punish those who would use protection orders of any kind as a form of harassment or punishment, with stiff penalties for attempting to do so, I think it could work. I know we can’t have it both ways- complain about knowledge by officials ahead of time yet not allowing them to act. I still believe it would be a better solution to use the normal 72 hour hold on someone making outrageous or dangerous claims or threats rather than round up the person’s property first. This is done all the time in most states where one threatens suicide, for example. Take the individual into protective custody, then prove he/she/it is a hazard to self or others in the general public. If they can’t make the case in the 72 hours the person is released. No property is confiscated, and making that case can be quite difficult. Getting back property of any kind is always a tough one.

      I have to wonder how many of those around TTAG and other sites would be making a lot of the statements they do if things weren’t anonymous…

      1. avatar LifeSavor says:

        AND mandate that the plaintiff pay all legal fees if the charges are dismissed…maybe even pay treble legal fees. We have to make certain such laws cannot be weaponized against us.

      2. avatar Sam I Am says:

        EPROs are pre-crime punishment. Never considered an American principle, and certainly not something permitted in the federal or state constitutions of the founders.

        1. Why would you oppose using red flag laws against the Crips?

        2. avatar Sam I Am says:

          “Why would you oppose using red flag laws against the Crips?”

          I would endorse laws that declare people with gang tats “outlaw”, and executing then without trial. But….who would seriously try to serve an EPRO on a Crips member?

          Still and all, pre-crime punishment is too dangerous a concept to let loose. If the theory behind EPROs is that someone will do serious bodily harm, or kill, that should be sufficient justification to issue an arrest warrant. Think about it…victims of domestic abuse have been personally threatened with grievous bodily harm or death. Such threats are crimes in and of themselves. So….rather than an EPRO, issue an arrest warrant, and put those persons through the full legal process, which protects the potential victim, and protects the rights of the individual charged.

    4. avatar Cliff H says:

      As it always does following these sorts of events, however, even after posting the direct quote the writer neglected to emphasize what Trump emphasized: “…red flag laws WITH DUE PROCESS.”

      Those three words make all the difference.

  2. avatar Biatec says:

    You can’t have red flag laws with due process. If you arrest someone for doing or planning something violent they already become prohibited. Red flag laws are soviet anti due process tyranny.

    It’s more centralization of government power and abuse of innocents.

    1. avatar Dude says:

      How do you ever get an arrest warrant before a trial?

      1. avatar Biatec says:

        With evidence. That’s the problem. If you have evidence you don’t need new red flag laws. Not saying warrant systems have never been abused either.

        1. avatar Dude says:

          I agree! So why isn’t law enforcement doing their job? Why not work toward more prevention? When you call the police and say someone wants to kill me, they say, “Yawn…..Uhmm go to court and get an order.”

          I heard a new either state Atty Gen or DA list how she was reforming criminal prosecution. Among the list was to stop prosecuting threats. The reason the red flag laws calls are increasing is the current laws in place aren’t being used by the system.

        2. avatar Biatec says:

          Yeah. That’s the problem. It will just be used on anyone who has ever been on depression meds or had tried committing suicide as a teen or an ex wife making up lies. The bar for confining people, making them prohibited and such will endlessly be pushed.

          I am in illinois. They let hard core criminals go way to easily. Remember those teens that tortured the mentally challenged kid?

          I knew people that wanted them let off the hook. They would hands down support red flag laws that meant because someone was on depression meds or made a mistake in their past though had their guns confiscated. We already have laws on the books.

          If we made red flag laws that actually followed due process they would be redundant. I don’t believe for one second that is ever what will be passed.

          My worry is the gun community will throw people under the bus. mental illness does not mean you should lose your rights. It will only mean people who have a problem will not seek help because they could lose their rights. We already saw that happen with Obamas infringements of making veterans seeking help at the VA become prohibited.

      2. avatar Johnny Go Lightly says:

        You can get arrest warrant from the Office of Pre-Crime.

    2. avatar MB says:

      Looks like no support for “Red Flag” laws in Texas, I doubt it could ever pass nationally. https://www.usnews.com/news/us/articles/2018-08-05/texas-republicans-squelch-red-flag-gun-law-prospects

      1. avatar Biatec says:

        I really hope it doesn’t happen. How ever my expectations get lower every year.

      2. avatar Ed Schrade says:

        Hope you are correct but our governor, whom I do like, was not defending constitutional carry. I am concerned that he will cave to political whim and change his stance. Trump has stated at his rallies that he defends our second amendment rights but I am still waiting for this to happen. I am not a never Trumper, I voted for him and he has done great things for the country. Hopefully he ties national red flag laws to immigration reform like he said, this would insure that no action would be taken.

    3. avatar Mark says:

      “Take the guns. Due process later.” – Donald Trump

      1. avatar Eric in Oregon says:

        Exactly. The idea of these so-called ERPOs is abhorrent but the pearl clutching from our side just isn’t warranted. He didn’t say a single thing new today.

      2. avatar Wiregrass says:

        “I will never let you down.” -Donald Trump to NRAAM 2016

        I guess since Cox backed Red Flag laws too, he probably thinks he’s keeping his end of the bargain.

      3. avatar GluteusMaximus says:

        Trump talk and talks and talks. It’s his MO. Wait to see if anything comes of this.

  3. avatar Steven Lynch says:

    Already happening in the H.R. 1585 and S7 introduced by Senator Marco Rubio and gun reform just announced by President Trump

  4. avatar MB says:

    When your property can be seized, and you arrested for something you “might do” it’s tyranny. Minority Report Science Fiction.

    1. avatar Baldwin says:

      Un. Cons. Ta. 2. Shun. Al.
      But, we all know this is gonna fly anyhow. How do we know? Because feelz. When are we gonna make the 2nd great again???

      1. avatar CarlosT says:

        What does it matter what the Constitution says, if no one abides by it?

    2. avatar User1 says:

      The older NRA member thinks ERPOs are not gun confiscation powers. They actually believe there is due process of law.

      Let’s not forget that America is supposed approach the individual as “innocent until proven guilty.” Turning someone into a felon without a conviction is a perversion of law.

      Giving government workers the power to confiscate guns is undoubtedly tyranny.

      The ERPO idea came out of California and the gun confiscation groups. They were one of the first states to give themselves such powers. It’s now advocated by the NRA and Republicans.

      I think the NRA took down their video in support of gun confiscation after Trump’s speech! Damage control.

      1. avatar Aaron Walker says:

        Chris Cox is no longer available…ease leave a msg. after the ERPO….

    3. avatar Mark N. says:

      BIG mistake. The red flag laws result in the confiscation of arms, BUT DO NOT RESULT IN AN ARREST. This is a CIVIL, NOT A CRIMINAL proceeding. The police are only involved in confiscating the firearms, not obtaining the order, although most of the red flag laws I have read also allow the police to seek one–but they don’t.

      You only have to worry about arrest if you have committed a crime. Being a danger to oneself or others is not a crime. The police in every state I know of have the authority to “detain” an individual and take that person to a mental health facility for” evaluation and treatment,” and possible involuntary admission when that person is a threat to him/herself others, and do not need red flag laws to do so.

      1. avatar MB says:

        Confiscating is stealing.

        1. avatar Chris Mallory says:

          So is taxing.

      2. avatar That One Guy says:

        If it’s not a criminal proceeding, why are the cops involved in it? Let the plaintiff take me to court, get a judgement against me, and come collect my guns.

        The moment cops get involved, it becomes a criminal proceeding. This logic is on par with Civil Asset Forfeiture..which also only ever seems to involve cops. No random person gets to find thousands of dollars in someone else’s possession and just take it when that person can’t explain why they have it.

  5. avatar Aaron Walker says:

    …And here it is…Freedom dies with thunderous applause….Didn’t I say it’s all about “Authoritarianism…” Both political parties appear to be one in the same…And more and more, this has the footprint of a One-World Global Governance…At the expense of Freedom and Liberty, why…Because nobody in the general public can be trusted according to the government…Soon you WON’T be able to post on TTAG because you might trip a “National RED FLAG” because YOU were politically incorrect!

    1. avatar User1 says:

      Google and other tech companies have AI that scans videos, images and text. They can censor lives streams and chats in real time. They can identify people and weapons in videos and images with their recognition software.

      Tech companies also spy on your private conversations using things like security cameras, home assistant devices and cellphones. The NSA does the same thing. Even the CIA/NSA used smart TVs to spy on people.

      As of now it’s technologically possible for tech companies to help the government confiscate guns using their AI to locate the people and weapons. Facebook and Google have what is necessary.

      1. avatar Miner49er says:

        Exactly correct, and POTG intentionally post pictures of themselves with their weapons on their Facebook page, fascinating.

        This is the glorification of guns and worship of weapons that I have spoken of.

        POTG who post photos of their weapons on their Facebook page are providing the intelligence gathering function all by themselves, but their ego and vanity force them to post their selfie’s.

        They should’ve listen to grandma. ..

        “Fools’ names, like fools’ faces, are often seen in public places.”

        “Vanity of vanities, all is vanity”

        1. avatar User1 gets banned says:

          When I used to work with recognition software it was very basic, at least what the public had. We used it to scan images/videos and pull the text. It allowed us to create a transcription and time code. At times we had to correct the software when it got confused about what it was seeing, but it was mostly automated.

          Now the recognition software has vastly improved in recent years. It can scan videos and images real time and alert the user upon detection. We can now use software to detect guns and identify people in the frame.

          Google uses this AI software to censor content without the need for humans. They scan videos for things like swastikas and other prohibited symbols and speech. The software automatically flags the video/channel for demonetization, removal, bans, etc. You then have to appeal to a human to manually review what the software did.

          Google has setup the AI software to censor right wing and conservative content. They have white listed other channels from this AI, such as all the corporate media channels. Part of the software recommends white listed content to the user and pushes black/grey listed content away from recommendation and search results. Google gives out a list of prohibited speech/words that can help you self censor in order not to trigger the AI negatively.

          The older generation thinks you need a vast amount of people to conduct such a “conspiracy” and it would be impossible to keep them all silent. Well, software has replaced the need for many humans and it has filtered undesirable candidates out prior to hiring. There are “departments” for different software development that inherently creates compartmentalization.

        2. avatar Sam I Am says:

          The older generation knows more than you think. The secret of the F-117 was kept secret for a decade by fighter pilots, people who wanted everyone to know about their cool airplanes and other toys. The older generation knows about exception handling, and how to apply it.

          We also know a conspiracy needs only two people “in the know”. The rest is done by the unwitting.

        3. avatar Sam I Am says:

          “This is the glorification of guns and worship of weapons that I have spoken of.”

          Does posting pictures of caught fish amount to glorification of something, or other? Or pictures of car owners sitting on, or in their prize car?

          “POTG who post photos of their weapons on their Facebook page are providing the intelligence gathering function all by themselves..”

          That may be foolish, but foolishness is not a synonym for “glorification”?

        4. avatar Miner49er says:

          Sam, my concern is for the internal motivation to post the pictures, especially those that feature the individual pointing a gun at the camera. Or the individual in full tactical gear glaring at the camera, weapon in hand.

          Search pictures trouble many regular citizens, they wonder about the thoughts going on in the head of the individual posting those pictures.

        5. avatar Sam I Am says:

          “Search pictures trouble many regular citizens, they wonder about the thoughts going on in the head of the individual posting those pictures.”

          And?

          Thought crime is for novels and thrillers, not real justice. Inferring thought from a picture is bordering on clairvoyance. People should be suspected because of a picture few really understand? Let me tell you…look at any picture of mine that might be posted, and you will be convinced you saw my wanted poster hanging in the post office. From that, what would you conclude I was thinking? Have me over for beers, and you wouldn’t want to join any club that would have me as a member (neither would I).

          Now, post my picture, holding any firearm, accompanied by a narrative that declares my intention to do harm to others, whole ‘nuther story….sorta. Used to have a T-shirt that proclaimed “Kill ’em all. Let God sort them out.” From that, what would you conclude? Would you have me arrested for what I might, somehow, someway, someday do? Would you conclude that I was glorifying murder?

  6. avatar Chris T in KY says:

    Someone please show me when Libertarians Liberals and the Left supported locking up and forcing a dangerously mentally ill person to be medicated?

    After the Joyce Brown case in 1987 The Three L’s celebrated the right of a mentally ill person to be homeless. Fast forward decades later and now you have the mentally ill defecating in the streets in San Francisco and tent cities of homeless all up and down the West Coast.

    The there L’s believe you have a right to urinate and defecate in public.

    I believe President Trump just lost the gun vote. He certainly lost my vote if this is his intention to pass red flag laws.

    However no one wants to really ask the questions how did we get to this point in our society???
    I believe it’s because we are “tolerant”. Instead of being intolerant and not putting up with anti-social social destructive Behavior.

    Nearly all of these recent Mass shooters were known to the authorities prior to their mass murders. And yet there is no mechanism in the justice system that have them arrested and placed in custody.

    Because they have rights? Then you should have no problem coming before a microphone and stating that mass murders are just something we have to get used to.

    I know Libertarians of already publicly said and promoted the idea of giving free shotguns to homeless people.

    1. avatar User1 says:

      There are already mechanism to use for problems like mass shooters. However, that isn’t the most important part because it’s not a solution it’s a reactionary approach. Also, the government has no intention to do their job because failing allows for more power to be attained for themselves, as America does not hold their government accountable for failure.

      We need to return to a high standard of morals via culture/parenting. The older generations have done a very bad job at parenting, they created the collectivist snowflake safe space generations. Look at the age of all these people causing riots and doing mass shootings — they are the kids of the previous generations. Where are their parents?

      1. avatar I Haz A Question says:

        I remember this story/vid. Love it. Kudos to that mom.

        If anyone recalls, the news reporter caught up with both them, and the son later admitted he was glad his mom did what she did and showed she cared about his behavior.

        Kids will *not* crumple up and wither away if you show tough love.

      2. avatar RidgeRunnnner says:

        Agree. When did it become a rule that every father has to call his son “Buddy?” If you pay attention, every single young white father calls their son “Buddy.”
        “C’mon, Buddy, it’s OK! You tried, Buddy! Don’t cry, Buddy, winning isn’t everything. You have to go to school, Buddy. Get in the Prius, Buddy. Here’s some ice cream, Buddy. Eat your Happy Meal, Buddy.”
        That’s what’s wrong with these a$%holes. Too much “Buddy,” not enough ass kicking.

        1. avatar I Haz A Question says:

          Ugh, you just reminded me of my brother-in-law. That’s the exact nickname he used for his little 5-yr-old, and how he speaks to him. No spanking, no time-outs, nothing. The kid is my nephew by marriage, but is the #1 wimpiest little crybaby I’ve ever encountered in my entire life. I always have to walk out of the room during family gatherings when the father starts up his “what’s the matter, Buddy?” routine.

        2. avatar RidgeRunner says:

          I’m telling you, it’s epidemic. Pay attention to fathers/young sons in public settings, Buddy this, Buddy that. I got news for ’em, he aint you’re Buddy. You’re supposed to be the BOSS!

      3. avatar Aaron Walker says:

        She Problably went to jail for child abuse. At least in my state..She would have been charged as an abusive parent…Dept of Soc Svss would have been their…Yup…My stats is a LibTARD state….

      4. avatar Pg2 says:

        Priceless. Congrats to the mom.

      5. avatar Guesty McGuesterson says:

        Priceless. Congrats to the mom.

      6. avatar Chris T in KY says:

        user1
        I was surprised this mother wasn’t brought up on charges by the tyrannical city and state government of maryland. I have no problem with parents physically disciplining their children. Also known as spanking. Sadly parents have been arrested for spanking their own children.

        And sadly the three L’s support the welfare Industrial Complex. They replaced the father and his guns with government $$$ and the guns of a big city police department. The problem is the sexually Liberated only care about getting their rocks off. And they want everyone else to do the same. So they support single motherhood by subsidizing a woman having multiple children from different men.

        Memphis Man Owes Child Support to 15 Women; Has 20+ Kids
        https://wreg.com/2012/06/13/memphis-man-owes-child-support-to-15-women/

        When a white man does it the press treats him with humor. These single mothers are racking up quite a lot of the welfare $$$ aren’t they???
        https://nypost.com/2016/06/24/baby-crazy-women-are-begging-donor-dad-for-his-famous-sperm/

        When it comes to sexual gratification the words accountability and personal responsibility never leave the lips of the three L’s. But the rest of us will have to deal with the social repercussions. There are very few men who (legally) live in “gun free zone” public housing projects. Mostly single mothers and their children.

    2. avatar Casey says:

      You know, I see you spout a LOT of bull about libertarians, and I let it go because I know there’s nothing Ic can say that won’t make you call me a progressive leftard commie kitten hater, but I can’t let this one go.

      No libertarian.. ever… is going to demand giving free shotguns to homeless people.

      Because who is going to pay for those shotguns? The manufacture has to pay for labor and materials, and forcing a business to provide work to “the public” is 100% the opposite of “libertarian”. I mean, we get shit all the time because of Atlas Shrugged, which is about exactly that.

      Will taxpayers pay for it? What if they don’t? Will they be fined? And arrested if they don’t pay? And jailed if they resist? And murdered if they fight tooth and nail during their incarceration? Because that’s how the government uses its monopoly on force to make people do things. Which libertarians are, by definition, against for anything save hurting people and taking their stuff. It’s right in the name.

      Now if someone or group of someones wants to VOLUNTARILY buy a bunch of shotguns and give them out, that’s a different story.

      But then when the hobo with a shotgun does what a mentally deranged drug addict with a weapon is going to do, it will be entirely just to ask what other bad ideas they have that are going to get more people killed, and what we, with out monopoly on force, are going to do about it.

      What’s your alternative? Don’t let people do what they want? Don’t hold people responsible for their actions? Force people to do things your way at the point of a massive criminal justice system?

      Because that’s democrat government 101.

      1. avatar Ton E says:

        BOOM the only thing Chris demonstrated in his rambling is he knows jack and zilch about libertarians.

        1. avatar Chris T in KY says:

          I wonder how many homosexual Libertarians have voted for and helped to elect Dudley Brown in Colorado???
          If I lived in this state I would not be voting for this MF’er.

          “Top 5 Gun Rights Organizations Better than the NRA”
          The National Association for Gun Rights is number 4 according to Libertarians. This is what happens when you smoke to much dope.

          https://thelibertarianrepublic.com/top-5-gun-rights-organizations-nra/4/

        2. avatar Chris T in KY says:

          Ton E
          btw
          This was part of a TTAG story. It contained a Link to the Libertarian website. But I do agree the Aircrew should be armed. Passengers I’m not so sure. On a Bus .Yes. But an airplane is very different at 30,00 feet altitude.
          https://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/libertarian-arm-airline-passengers/

          Several years ago a deranged passenger killed an entire cockpit crew. I believe 45 souls were lost.

      2. avatar John in Ohio says:

        Although I am no longer libertarian, you hit the nail right on the head. When I was involved, what you described is pretty much the view held by everyone I knew.

        I’m not going to pick on Chris. Although him and I disagree on a lot of things, I don’t doubt that he has liberty at heart. However, what I think he unintentionally leaves out of some of his writings is the balance that was (perhaps now but I couldn’t say) built into libertarianism. In this case, that would be strong support of self-defense. For example, a mentally ill hobo makes a credible threat of death or serious bodily harm to another, it shouldn’t be a legal ordeal for an individual when they defend themselves with deadly force against the deranged hobo. Leftists would demand that the hobo be given free reign to violate the rights of others whereas liberty loving individuals, like the libertarians I used to know, would’ve been steadfastly against that position.

        Where I politically and philosophically stood then and continue to stand now is: Shall not be infringed and remove most of the legal barriers to individual self defense. This solves a myriad of societal issues without intervention of government. However, as you aptly point out, it removes a large chunk of government’s monopoly on force. Tyrants don’t like that.

      3. avatar Chris T in KY says:

        I have a very long memory. Others have a very short one.

        “Why do Libertarian Party candidates hate guns so much?”

        https://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/boxer-tactical-daily-digest-5-31-16/

      4. avatar Chris T in KY says:

        casey
        Perhaps you are new to TTAG? I’ve been here since 2010. This has already been discussed.
        Free shotguns from the Libertarian Party, for the homeless. My comments are included from 2018.

        https://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/guns-for-the-poor-quote-of-the-day/

  7. avatar Jay in Florida says:

    Same crap different day.
    Red flag laws passed already in 15 states or so. Are unconstitutional as written. Without due process 1st. Or anyone being able to accuse anyone they want to. These laws create more issues then they solve.

    1. avatar User1 says:

      Last I checked it was about 17 states.

  8. avatar User1 says:

    Told you…

  9. avatar Auxwood_rebel says:

    The somewhat right leaning New York Post is calling for a return of assault weapons ban with updates including caps on “muzzle velocity”…

    1. avatar Geoff WWJWD - "What would John Wick do?" PR says:

      ” …including caps on “muzzle velocity”…”

      Then my build will be cool, a sub-sonic .300 BLK with a pistol brace.

      And shotguns with slugs will be good-to-go… 🙂

      1. avatar Baldwin says:

        Stand by on that pistol brace. It looks like the Ohio shooter used an AR pistol.

        1. avatar Auxwood_rebel says:

          Those arm braces were begging for a trump bumpstock style ban anyways. My sympathies to those who own one. On the other hand Trump doesn’t really seem like a gun guy so maybe he hasn’t heard of them yet.

        2. avatar I Haz A Question says:

          Mebbe, mebbe not.

          There were no ARs offered for sale (that I know of) by manufacturers with bump stocks. In fact, I’ve never seen one in person in any form. But there are many, many arm braces out there, either as replacement accessories (SB3 Tactical) or part of complete guns/builds (Palmetto, Springfield). They’re in common use now. Two very different legal arguments with different requirements.

  10. avatar Aaron Walker says:

    I think its time for Libertarians to pull their heads from their @$$€$ and get the Freedom train running…Cause the USA is heading fast down the “paternalistic drain!” All leading to both political parties to institutionalize “Authoritarianism…” Due process and the US Constitutional-Bill of Rights be damned…As if the were just a brochure handed out to the General Public! Don’t let the “feelz mob” rub out YOUR Constitutional Liberties for the actions of others (especially if it turns out to be the Deep State all long…)

    1. avatar Chris T in KY says:

      The only thing Libertarians believe in is the right to shoot up crystal meth to improve their sexual experience.

      With rights come personal responsibilities. And Libertarians have shown they certainly do not believe in being held accountable for your F*ck ups.

      Nor do they believe parents should have control over their children. Elliot Rodgers in California and Adam Lanza in Connecticut both have their parents call authorities to say that their own children were a danger to them and other people. But because of the laws that have been supported by Libertarians over the decades it is now impossible for parents to have their dangerous children committed.

      Now it’s coming out that this shooter at the Ohio nightclub when as a teenager had put together a murder list and a rape list of his fellow students. He was actually arrested taken off of a school bus in front of his classmates. Days later he was back in school as if nothing happened. And because he’s a juvenile his record was sealed. So he was able to buy a gun with no problem.

      1. avatar Mack Bolan says:

        Its actually coming out that the Ohio shooter whom authorities named as Connor Betts died in 2014.

        https://www.legacy.com/obituaries/hartfordcourant/obituary.aspx?n=connor-d-betts&pid=169819779&fhid=4102

        The shootings this weekend were scripted, and the deep state script writers shit the bed.

        1. avatar Scot Harvath says:

          For goodness sake, don’t even go there.

        2. avatar M1Lou says:

          Derp…

        3. avatar I Haz A Question says:

          You absolutely sure there aren’t two people named Connor Betts out there somewhere?

          There’s a man with my same first and last name living less than 30 miles away from me. He’s only a year older than I am and attended a high school less than five miles from where I grew up. We don’t know each other, but a person looking up our names in news articles wouldn’t know the difference unless he took the time to delve deeper.

        4. avatar Miner49er says:

          So the Dayton shooter, a ‘Warren-supporting Democrat” is actually a false flag operation by the right wing intended to unfairly smear liberals? Good research, comrade!

          So once again the right wing is generating fake news to support their anti-freedom agenda, fascinating.

      2. avatar Ton E says:

        Amazing two separate comments about libertarians and you end up demonstrating know nothing about them. Besides libertarians warned people about Trump back in 2016. So quit deflecting it’s okay to admit you believed Trump when he vowed the attack on the 2nd amendment is over.

        1. avatar Chris T in KY says:

          Libertarians put a gun grabber on their ticket in 2016. You have very dirty hands. And refuse to be honest about it.

          I will continue to bash Libertarians Liberals and the Left who hate my civil rights. And provide Links to back up what I say.

          I have yet to receive Links to backup what the three L’s say is their support for civil rights.

    2. avatar Ton E says:

      OK I’ll bite. What in name of Zeus does libertarians have to do with Trump being in support of red flag laws?!

      1. avatar Swarf says:

        Because all the “libertarians” are just Republicans with Punisher skull t-shirts.

  11. avatar Missouri_Mule says:

    Probate law cannot be properly administered by the Federal Government and is not an enumerated power.
    Every single county in America has Probate Judges to handle issues with persons who are an immediate is to themselves or others.

    If you want the IRS in charge of your family mental health issues, go for it!

    1. avatar Ed Schrade says:

      What you say is true, but gun control is illegal, murdering babies is illegal, socialized medicine is not legal, not allowing Trump on the ballot in Commiefornia is illegal, etc. but we have it.

  12. avatar Nanotech says:

    The overall tone and content of the speech should appeal to many Americans on both sides of the political divide. I think the President’s statement that “mental illness and hatred pulls the trigger, not the gun” bodes well for what ideas the current administration may be open to considering.

      1. avatar Nanotech says:

        To clarify, the statement infers that inanimate objects don’t control themselves. It’s people with bad intentions who commit crimes, not guns. The fact that this was stated in this morning’s speech is positive evidence that this administration won’t be considering restrictions on tools, but will instead focus on people. Now, the manner of which the surveillance, identification, and intervention against potential bad actors is conducted could indeed be unconstitutional and thus invalid. We must all stay vigilant and make our voices heard.

        1. avatar User1 says:

          Bump fire stocks…

      2. avatar Hannibal says:

        People will continue to hear what they want to hear. He was right when he said he could shoot someone in Times Square and not lose his supporters. They’re on another world.

  13. avatar Bob says:

    Asshole better try something else, I won’t be voting for him if this is his answer.

    1. Well, it time for a new presidential candidate.

      1. avatar Victor says:

        Primary him.

    2. avatar Hugh Glass says:

      Yeah, Kamala Harris will be so much better. Is Kamala even a real name?

  14. avatar Green Mtn. Boy says:

    “The President’s support for a so-called red flag law or gun violence restraining orders. These laws allow firearms to be taken from individuals who are deemed to be a danger to themselves or others.”

    UnConstitutional as lacking in due process,look for Negotiating Rights Away to come out in favor of this un Constitutional act.

    1. avatar User1 says:

      They are now hiding their support. At least on their Youtube channel. They are scrubbing.

    2. avatar Ed Schrade says:

      Two solutions ; Legislate morality which is impossible, national constitutional carry which is almost as impossible. The real problem as I see it is that we have several generations with no moral compass which comes from religion. Read the 10 commandments and try to find one that is not a good rule to live by. To fit this article, ” Thy shalt not kill ( murder )’.

      1. avatar Sam I Am says:

        “Legislate morality which is impossible.”

        Really?

        Murder
        Theft
        Lying
        Prostitution
        And more….

        All “moral” issues, yet legislation regarding does exist.

      2. avatar Wiregrass says:

        It doesn’t have to come from religion, but it needs to come from families. These kids have never been shown love. And I don’t mean touchy feely cuddly love. I mean real love by a parent that cares for them not just to meet their needs but to set them on the right path. And so that they know what love is and how to love others. When a 21 year old decides his life is already so fucked up that he can see no other way, that kid never knew love.

        I don’t believe blaming video games for violence is the answer, but when parents use video games or organized sports or anything as a substitute for spending time with their crotch fruit and teaching them love by example, then this is what we get.

        1. avatar User1 gets banned says:

          Today’s parents put a cellphone or tablet in their kids hands and walk away. They are more worried about making that paper than raising their children. They rely on government socialist schools to teach their kids.

          The outcomes…?

          BANG, BANG, BANG!

  15. avatar Roland says:

    Just a matter of time, I suppose. Neocon Don never was on our side.

  16. avatar pwrserge says:

    We’ve already discussed how “red flag” laws are not necessarily unconstitutional. The issue is that, as currently written, they are. The “with due process” bit is going to kill any attempt to get them passed on a federal level.

    1. avatar Jason Higgins says:

      The due process comes sometime after they have taken your guns and or killed you

      1. avatar BLAMMO says:

        … and shot your dog for good measure.

        1. avatar User1 says:

          And the dog’s owner, which could be your child. Because officer safety.

        2. avatar User1 says:

          We have to deal with these people.

        3. avatar Aaron Walker says:

          Yup! I can still hear the P/O in the video yelling at the small dog 🐕 as he’s shooting it!
          “STOP RESISTING !!! STOP RESISTING !!!!
          BANG-BANG !!!!” With little kids in the line of fire…! These Keystone cops should be strung up by THEIR [email protected]££$ !!!

        4. …and these will be the kinds of cop commandos that come to YOUR home to enforce a future Heresay based Prez Trump Federal Red Flag Order ! To nullify your constitutional rights…And of course, you won’t be able to pay for the justice to clear your name and retain your property or your rights!

        5. avatar SkyMan77 says:

          The lack of any remorse after shooting that little girl is disgusting… He REALLY f*cked up and thinks he’s just going to play that sh*t off.

    2. avatar UpInArms says:

      ” The “with due process” bit is going to kill any attempt to get them passed on a federal level. ”

      I picked up on that too. Trump is playing both sides of the street here. His call for red flag laws is a pander to the left. The “with due process” qualifier gives him an instant out to veto anything coming out of congress– red flags and due process are mutually exclusive. It’s a shitty situation and he’s playing this about as good as it can be played.

      After all– who we gonna vote for? Joe Biden? Or maybe everyone will just sit this one out. Yeah, that’ll fix him.

      1. avatar Garrison Hall says:

        It sure looks like Trump has deserted us. I don’t see how he can be elected now. I’ll probably still vote for him, but now I think he has seriously alienated his base. Just a few days ago he was proudly telling us how he supported the 2nd Amendment. And now he does this. . .

        1. avatar UpInArms says:

          Does what? Trump gave up exactly nothing. He threw a bone to the gun-grabbers by saying red flag laws. Then he promptly gave himself an out by qualifying it with due process. The only joker in the deck is what he means by due process. If he holds a strict line, red flags go nowhere. If he backpedals, then we can legitimately call him out for selling out. As it stands now, he hasn’t given up anything. Wait and see.

          What he has done is box in the Democrats. He’s made a few (hopefully) tepid and useless proposals that give him a cosmetic gloss of actually doing something when in fact he has done nothing. Predictably, the Dems are over-reacting– Harris is already on record for door-to-door confiscation, and if the rest of the Dem candidates stay true to form, they will all try to out-do her. Basically, he’s pushed the entire field of Dem candidates into the confiscation camp.

          Believe it or not, there are some centrist liberals who have at least a luke-warm support for 2A and are not afflicted with Trump Derangement Syndrome . The more rabid the Dems get on confiscation, the more likely they will move in to the Trump camp, reluctantly so. It’s a calculated risk, and it might not work in Trump’s favor. Then again, it might. Wait and see.

          So, inquiring minds want to know— given the shitty situation and a razor-thin margin of popularity, what would you have done differently than what Trump did?

      2. avatar Jack says:

        “His call for red flag laws is a pander to the left. ”

        Trump has to be way stupider that even I believe him to be to believe that anyone on the left would ever vote for him. So either this is what he really believes or he’s deflecting because the guy in TX was a white supremacist who probably believes that Trump secretly supports what he did.

        1. avatar pwrserge says:

          Given the number of Berniebros that came out for Trump in 2016 that’s a bullshit argument and you know it’s a bullshit argument. What he’s doing is exactly as described above, trying to drive the DNC into full blown confiscation mode. He did it with immigration, he did with the Stalinist / Islamist of the DNC. Now he’s doing it again. 2020 is not going to be won by how much of the base turns out. Both sides know the score at this point. 2020 is going to be won by Trump seeming like a sane moderate while the left goes completely off the rails into Maoism / Stalinism

      3. avatar Wiregrass says:

        it would be nice to think he’s that clever but I don’t think he thinks beyond 5 minutes into the future. You really think he understands what due process is well enough to make that argument when he’s already on record saying “Take the guns first, go through due process second?

        1. avatar pwrserge says:

          Have you seen the DNC debates lately? They are currently a caricature of what the party was in 2008. You can thank Trump for that.

  17. avatar Rusty - always carry - Carry says:

    Although he did call for due process, it will be a major fight to force that into legislation since the House is unlikely to cooperate.

    1. avatar Geoff WWJWD - "What would John Wick do?" PR says:

      At least the Senate can perform that function…

  18. avatar Dude says:

    “Stop the glorification of violence, including gruesome video games. Cultural change is hard, he said.”

    This is #1 Bullshit. Almost all young men play these games. That whole correlation causation thing and statistics ya know. How about we rule by logic instead of emotion?

    Since when has the threat of the death penalty ever deterred a crime? Most of these people are willing to die anyway.

    1. avatar Roland says:

      “Since when has the threat of the death penalty ever deterred a crime? Most of these people are willing to die anyway”

      This. Any mass shooter knows he is on a suicide mission.

    2. avatar Mark says:

      Violent video games alone in a mentally sound person = no problem. Violent video games in a young man with mental health issues on psychotropic drugs = possible big problem. Dave Grossman touches on this in one of his books. As I health care provider, I can say that psychotropic use is out of control and definitely a contributing factor.

      1. avatar BLAMMO says:

        Also, we now have an entire generation (or two) of young people who are institutionally unprepared to face adversity, failure or loss. Life is full of those things and they have been protected. When they do have to face it, and everyone does, they are emotionally unequipped.

      2. avatar I Haz A Question says:

        A few years ago, we had a neighbor who had her kids prescribed on ADHD drugs as a way to get more money from the State via the CA welfare system. During the first few days of a new school year, a new school counselor reviewed the situation and determined that her kids were indeed normal and didn’t need pharmaceutical intervention. He rescinded the ADHD order. I personally spent time with these kids, and they clearly only needed wholesome interaction with the “real world” and a father figure influence, neither of which the mom provided.

        The mom got pissed at the loss of that branch of income and immediately took her kids to a health clinic, where she found a doctor who rubber stamped her request to put them back on the meds. She also applied for the classic “Obamaphone” during that same time period, and was proud of it.

        When I voiced my disagreement with her decision to put the kids back on the meds, she never spoke to us again. Fortunately, she moved to another neighborhood soon afterward.

    3. avatar Geoff WWJWD - "What would John Wick do?" PR says:

      “Stop the glorification of violence, including gruesome video games.”

      Like Hollywood is gonna stop making action films, their bread-and-butter?

      Nice two-step, Mr. President, you deftly threw the ball right back into the Leftist’s hands…

    4. avatar Chris T in KY says:

      Art visual or written is a danger to someone. Of course it all depends on Whose Ox is being gored. While some people said rap music lyrics and video games are a danger to children. Others disagreed. And call them stupid. But those same righteous leftists also said that the book Meine Kampf written by Adolf Hitler should be banned because it was a dangerous book.

      Yes it all depends on Whose Ox is being gored.

  19. …It also very convenient that the NRA had a sudden train 🚆 wreck! Or is anyone starting to get really worried that something is amiss in the USA…That “Something Wicked this way comes!”

    1. avatar Roland says:

      Meh, Negotiating Rights Away brought that on themselves. Wayne couldn’t quit lining his pockets and snubbing anyone who said mean things about them.

  20. avatar Marcus says:

    This is a brilliant play as Trump wants it to include immigration reform in the same bill! All they have to do is pass it in the Senate and the House will reject it as dems won’t give one inch to any immigration reform. Trump looks like the great compromiser and the Dems are the obstructionists before a major election next year!

    1. avatar Dude says:

      The media will downplay it as usual. Remember all the talk of the dems wanting amnesty for 1 million dreamers? Trump said he wanted to offer citizenship to TWO million dreamers and their family as long as we reform the system so we’re not in this same position again. The liberal courts said you couldn’t overturn Obama’s policies because….reasons? Since the can was kicked down the road, the dems could care less about the dreamers. Where’s all of the press on that? Trump still looked like the bad guy somehow.

    2. avatar pwrserge says:

      caught that little detail did you?

      1. avatar Geoff WWJWD - "What would John Wick do?" PR says:

        Yep, slick move, and no bans mentioned… 😉

    3. avatar Political gristle says:

      4-D chess, right?…….
      Like with with the Mexico border wall…….nope
      Like with Iran……….nope
      Like with China…….nope
      Like with North Korea……nope
      Like with general motors….nope
      Like with bump stocks……..nope
      Like with Immigration …….nope
      Like with pro-gun rights…..nope
      Like with draining the swamp…nope
      Like with NAFTA…..nope
      Like with “lock her up” …….nope
      How many time do we need to be lied to?
      “Art of the deal” ……yeah right, more like
      The “Art of the FlimFlam man”.

      1. avatar pwrserge says:

        Wow… the commietard trolls are coming out in force today with their shiny new accounts…

        I could take the time to debunk your bullshit point by point… or I could just tell you to sit the fuck down and shut the fuck up.

        1. avatar Political gristle says:

          @ pwrserge
          I’ve been on this forum for a while.
          I’m not a commie, on the contrary I’m quite conservative.
          I usually agree with what you say.
          I don’t like being lied to.
          Trump IS a FlimFlam artist.
          I never trusted Trump but I voted for him because he wasn’t Hillary Or a commie Dem.

        2. avatar Pg2 says:

          Serge will call anyone he disagrees with a commietard….even as he pushes his own leftist agendas. It’s a troll fest here.

        3. avatar Guesty McGuesterson says:

          “Serge will call anyone he disagrees with a commietard….even as he pushes his own leftist agendas. It’s a troll fest here.”

          ****
          Boy, you got that right, Vlad.

      2. avatar Dude says:

        The dems approve of the NAFTA reform, they just can’t stomach giving Trump a win, especially with the election around the corner. So they will do nothing because it’s about power, not helping Americans.

  21. avatar nanashi says:

    Traitor.

    1. avatar pwrserge says:

      For what? Giving the Demokkkommies an impossible standard that they will never meet?

      1. avatar Nanashi says:

        For levying war on the United States.

        1. avatar John E> says:

          Nanshi, you’re an idiot. I support Red Flag laws tempered with due process. Having worked in the Criminal Justice and Psychiatric Field for almost 30 years I have seen many instances where this could be used to avert disaster. I am usually an absolutist with regard to the 2nd Amendment as well. But, the devil is in the details, and it certainly cannot be the Cali version of due process.

        2. avatar Biatec says:

          Buying a gun should be like buying a power drill. You are not an absolutist in anyway. Red flag laws will change nothing and help no one and only hurt the innocent.

        3. avatar Sam I Am says:

          “Red flag laws will change nothing and help no one and only hurt the innocent.”

          Definitely a feature.

        4. avatar Someone says:

          John E>
          Constitutionality aside, if someone is so dangerous that his firearms need to be taken away, he’s too dangerous to live free amongst us. Red flag laws basically say that by removing firearms from dangerously deranged people, they are rendered harmless and cannot hurt themselves or others anymore. Like there is no other way to commit violence.

        5. avatar John in Ohio says:

          “I am usually an absolutist with regard to the 2nd Amendment as well. But”

          There’s your statement in a nutshell. Red Flag laws are unnecessary and are contrary the very essence of a free society. There are already processes in place to have people looked at. You should know that if you were even marginally competent in your profession. Red Flag laws are about a government power grab and nothing more. Supporting Red Flag laws means you, Trump, or anyone else doesn’t support the Second Amendment. It really is that cut and dry.

        6. avatar pwrserge says:

          So nobody sees a reason why somebody should be denied easy access to firearms without being locked up like an animal? Really?

          My problem with “red flag” laws is the ex parte nature of the proceedings, not with the underlying concept.

        7. avatar John in Ohio says:

          “So nobody sees a reason why somebody should be denied easy access to firearms without being locked up like an animal? Really?”

          Seriously, yes. Unless someone is in the legitimate custody of another, they retain the exercise of their unalienable right to keep and bear arms. That’s precisely what “shall not be infringed” means. Of course, the custodian of the individual then becomes responsible for their charge’s reasonable safety.

        8. avatar pwrserge says:

          So… Schizophrenics who are just fine when properly medicated but who are prone to relapse should have unlimited free reign no questions asked? Or should we lock them up even though they are perfectly functional and harmless when they take their meds?

        9. avatar John in Ohio says:

          “So… Schizophrenics who are just fine when properly medicated but who are prone to relapse should have unlimited free reign no questions asked? Or should we lock them up even though they are perfectly functional and harmless when they take their meds?”

          If they aren’t under the guardianship of someone to mind them and they commit a violent act, their life may very well end right there in an armed and free society. That’s the way of things. That”s freedom.

  22. avatar Leighton says:

    So guilty until proven innocent…. seizures of private property without warrants?
    But illegals can’t be held without warrants?
    Gotcha…. I see the RINO in the room now.

    1. avatar pwrserge says:

      Where exactly did he say that? Did you miss the entire “with due process” part of the statement?

      1. avatar Aaron Walker says:

        Oh wait! ✋ I see now! He’s playing 4D chess with Big Blue! Is that it…Not much of a reassurance they were not just heading into authoritarianism….

        1. avatar pwrserge says:

          He also tied it to immigration reform, which we both know isn’t going to happen. As far as the 2nd amendment community is concerned that “announcement” was a nothingburger.

    2. avatar Ed Schrade says:

      Years ago when the idea of confiscating property was being considered, as a way to take away money and property from drug dealers etc., there were thoughtful individuals that warned that this could get out of hand. Now this has ben proved true. Property is being seized for no auto insurance and now red flag laws. The old adage about the came getting his nose in the tent……..

      1. avatar Sam I Am says:

        “Years ago when the idea of confiscating property was being considered, as a way to take away money and property from drug dealers etc., there were thoughtful individuals that warned that this could get out of hand.”

        There is nothing humans will not corrupt “for a good cause”.

  23. avatar GS650G says:

    The left was hoping for a NZ style response this week with turn in and confiscation next week.

    Once they get back in control that will happen.

    1. avatar Geoff WWJWD - "What would John Wick do?" PR says:

      That takes the trifecta of holding the House, Senate, and White House, at the same time…

    2. avatar Cooter E Lee says:

      And they should expect the same compliance rate. Molon labe.

  24. avatar former water walker says:

    Well that’s IT…I ain’t voting for Drumph. HOW is this different from communism?!? Stock up kid’s. Bumpstock’s were just a start. And my “social media” participation will drastically decrease.

    1. avatar User1 says:

      It sucks that it took so long for some people to start to see through Republicans’ and Trump’s BS. At least you have eyes and ears that still work.

      We are in this together even if you don’t like me or agree with what I say.

      1. avatar Miner49er says:

        Trump don’t give a shit, he is all about greed and self-dealing.

        “President Trump offered prayers for “those who perished in Toledo.” The Ohio shooting took place in Dayton, which is about 150 miles south of Toledo. The Texas shooting took place in El Paso, which is about 1,600 miles from Toledo.”

        1. avatar User1 gets banned says:

          It’s true that Trump uses the presidency for his personal benefit at the expense of America. He is not actually trying to make America great, it’s not about America first.

          I don’t support a man that puts America so far down the priority list.

        2. avatar Dude says:

          moneynation.com : As of 12/13/16, Trump makes at least $476 million a year and probably as high as $600 million. That’s straight from his U.S. Government financial disclosure forms, which he could go to jail for falsifying.
          https://moneynation.com/how-much-money-does-trump-make-in-a-year/

          politicalwire.com : (2019) Trump’s income fell last year
          https://politicalwire.com/2019/05/16/trumps-income-fell-last-year/

          How is Trump making more money? His biggest money maker was his brand which took a massive hit (and most likely won’t recover) because of the intolerance of the left. Unlike the usual suspects like say, Joe Biden, Hillary, and Obama, Trump made his fortune in the private sector long before he was president. The listed dems are the ones that enriched themselves by holding high office. Take off your blinders and check out your left wing heroes.

        3. avatar User1 gets banned says:

          @Dude

          It’s not only about money. I said “personal benefit,” which isn’t all about money. Maybe you think about money all day, but there is more to someone’s motivations than money.

          I won’t get into it because it requires a lot of posting of videos for evidence, which will probably lead to me getting banned.

  25. avatar Aaron Walker says:

    Time to start communicating with CB again

    1. avatar Geoff WWJWD - "What would John Wick do?" PR says:

      With no sunspots and a solar minimum not seen since solar observations were a ‘thing’, decent local range can be had during daylight…

      1. avatar Klaus Von Schmitto says:

        Are you old enough to remember cycle 21 (1978) ? Those were the times to be an amateur or a SWL.

        1. avatar Geoff WWJWD - "What would John Wick do?" PR says:

          Late 70s was when I was first introduced to the glories of the ionosphere.

          But now that the solar cycle has collapsed into nothingness, I seriously doubt I will ever see what we once had on the high bands in the remainder of my lifetime.

          It kinda sucks, QRP to Australia was kinda fun. US to Europe was everyday, as was the Bahamas and South America. But no more, outside a little scrap now and then of sporadic ‘E’. Or the few minutes chasing the ‘grey line’…

        2. avatar Aaron Walker says:

          Hell, I had a lot of fun in the CB era! I had “Moon Talkies ” in my truck. A CB base and mobile unit, a couple of high power cobra and Midland CB talkies…Used to talk with people in Texas and down South from the Northeast… as long as I didn’t get knocked off the air by someone with a 100w kicker and an echo gen. ….

        3. avatar Miner49er says:

          With no skip to confuse RDF, locating transmitters will be easier.

          One must be frequency agile these days, Or use an audio editing program on your computer to produce burst transmissions, encrypted of course.

          Directional antennas are better at confusing RDF, beam or quad, just not ground planes or quarter-wave whips..

        4. avatar Geoff WWJWD - "What would John Wick do?" PR says:

          “…as long as I didn’t get knocked off the air by someone with a 100w kicker…”

          A lousy 100 watts?

          There are folks pushing more than a few *thousand* watts, nowadays. Using broadcast station ‘pulls’ snuck out the back door of the station…

        5. avatar Miner49er says:

          Mmmm, 5kW water-cooled… into a terminated rhombic…Good times.

    2. avatar User1 says:

      You can use encryption for chat and emails. You can also use a bouncer/VPN and IRC. But there are chat apps now that have encryption using keys/passwords you should personally hand to your trusted friends.

      We have to start building a private network for communication. Invite only for trusted people. We can’t wait until it’s too late then try to setup our communications. We should already be doing that with all the NSA spying going on.

  26. If I had the money 💰. Is leave my socialist police-state , state…So I could move to a free state and exercise my lawful 2nd amendment rights before its to late…

    1. avatar Pg2 says:

      A free state? That’s laughable Aaron.

      1. avatar Aaron Walker says:

        Oh there are definitely plenty that are hell of lot more free than mine. Mines ranked at number 48# on the G&A state guide…Hell, my state only as of 2014 deregulated pepper spray and mace…And bb/pellet guns….
        Which is not 2nd Amendment compliant….The best over the counter self defense someone can get immediately would be a “batlight ” from Wal-Mart or a baseball bat…..

        1. avatar I Haz A Question says:

          I have one of those “batlights” from Walmart in the map pocket of my driver side door. In case I can’t reach my other PPE in the event of a carjacking, I can grab the batlight as I’m forced out of the driver seat, and clock the assailant upside the head.

          I also carry it openly when hiking.

  27. avatar Moltar says:

    O.K. Here’s the thing those first two should help plenty if you just tweak them a touch:

    ORIGINAL:
    “•Work with social media companies to detect mass shooters before they strike.
    •Stop the glorification of violence, including gruesome video games. Cultural change is hard, he said.
    •We must reform our mental health laws to better identify mentally disturbed individuals to give people treatment and, when necessary, involuntary confinement”

    MODIFIED:

    •Work with social media companies to detect mass shooters before they strike.
    •Stop the glorification of violence. Cultural change is hard, he said.
    •We must reform our mental health laws to better identify mentally disturbed individuals to give people treatment and, when necessary, involuntary confinement.

    This isn’t because some kids played Duke Nukem, Doom, or Turok back in 1996. These event occurred because the perpetrators were/are nuttier than a squirrel turd and allowed to walk free without treatment. People knew most of these shooters and would straight out tell you they were nuts look at Florida, Colorado, California, Texas all these recent shootings back to Sandy Hook have one common factor, the shooter had some sort of underlying mental illness. Yet instead of picking up the mantle and saying it’s time we actually address mental health in this great nation our president and elected leaders focus on the tools used. I’ll admit mental health is a VERY tough nut to crack (damnit Moltar stop with the nut puns), but there has to be a way forward we can all agree on without these damnable red flag laws that allows for the accused to make their defense in court after a fair notice is given and before anything is confiscated give the accused 2 weeks (maybe 2 months) to get an evaluation performed through a court appointed or private mental health professional and if proven to not be a threat all the accused costs will be reimbursed and nothing goes on your record however, if after all that you are proven to be unfit your guns are confiscated and you are red flagged in NICS.

    You may not agree on the social media part of it but if you post about mowing down them foreigners or how you just idolize those Columbine kids that should probably be a clue that you need a little help. I’m not saying we lock up Alex Jones by no means but if you make credible threats online, if you post pictures of yourself torturing animals, and if you glorify a mass shooter then yes you should be evaluated.

    Y’all we may not like this position we’re in but we have got to get out ahead of it and start finding ways to work together (as nucking futz as that sounds) to solve this issue and stem the tide of mass shootings or we’ll quickly find ourselves on the wrong end of the law. Sure the Constitution favors us but as we should have learned by now that doesn’t always mean we win and sometimes the best we can hope for is a compromise. Now I’ll say those expanded background checks won’t work and banning the tools used and violent media won’t either but this mental health reform coupled with a DUE PROCESS RED FLAG law just might, just ensure any red flag law notifies the accused and gives them ample time to compile a defense that must include a mental health examination and will only bar this person should they have a condition that even with treatment cannot make them capable of holding a job or being an otherwise responsible member of society. Conditions that can readily and reliably be treated and controlled (depression ADHD PTSD and such) will not bar you from possession so long as you are under treatment for the condition or show no other signs (social media posts, journal entries, and the like) of being a violent threat to others and yourself.

    If y’all have a better idea please let me know I’m open to all suggestions and would love to see us come up with an idea that actually works.

    1. avatar Geoff WWJWD - "What would John Wick do?" PR says:

      “Work with social media companies to detect mass shooters before they strike.”

      You think the social media companies don’t know who the right wing is?

      Expect all kinds of ‘reporting’ on us, and jack shit on Antifa, ‘Betsy Riot’ and the rest of the Leftist terrorists…

      1. avatar Moltar says:

        “You may not agree on the social media part of it but if you post about mowing down them foreigners or how you just idolize those Columbine kids that should probably be a clue that you need a little help. I’m not saying we lock up Alex Jones by no means but if you make credible threats online, if you post pictures of yourself torturing animals, and if you glorify a mass shooter then yes you should be evaluated.”

        Where in all that explanation does it include anything political? Well aside from the Alex Jones part but he’s already banned. Note it also included handy dandy terms and conditions CREDIBLE THREATS, TORTURING ANIMALS, IDOLIZING FORMER MASS MURDERERS. i.e. not because you posted some Hillary Clinton meme or some joke about Bernie Sanders and Joe Biden sitting in a nursing home.

        I will concede that it may turn that way social media being what social media is which is why your defense costs should be reimbursed by the accuser and since most red flag laws already require a personal relationship between the accuser and the accused (ex, coworker, mom, dad, some other close relationship) I chose not to include it in my draft, but your comment has made me rethink that and silently mourn the absence of the edit function. Also as with anything pertaining to the human mind it is rife for abuse but there really is no way around that other than do nothing and I’m fairly certain my idea will never pass congress if by some miracle it is presented by some lawmaker. The dems won’t go for it because there are too many checks and balances built in and the repubs will hate it because it costs money that they may not recover and it is rife for abuse by some over zealous court appointed shrink or any left leaning shrink.

    2. avatar John in Ohio says:

      “If y’all have a better idea please let me know I’m open to all suggestions and would love to see us come up with an idea that actually works.”

      Force government to abide by “shall not be infringed” and remove most legal barriers to legitimate self defense. The “problem”* would disappear in short order. See… that nut wasn’t so tough to crack after all. It just means living like free individuals in a society instead of like children living in daddy government’s house. Liberty is not without its perils. Government needs to get the hell out of the way.

      *I put problem in quotes because it’s actually not a significant number of deaths per capita compared to other causes of death.

      1. avatar Moltar says:

        Annnnd we’re still in the same spot only now maybe 2 more folks carried and were shot with everybody else, did not return fire, or still weren’t present. Constitutional carry does not guarantee more folks will actually carry. Elimination of nfa and Hughes does not guarantee more folks will buy full auto. Cancellation of NICS does not mean more folks (criminal or not) will buy a gun and returning to the strict definition of the 2A does not guarantee the good guys will live and the bad guys will die. So still in the same situation but now there’s an option for the nutter to have full auto and the folks that don’t carry now still ain’t carrying.

        Oh also the news people and Democrats will still want to bend gun owners over a barrel and rape them with a barbwire wrapped cactus soaked in hot sauce and gasoline. Oh and they still won’t buy you dinner, tell you you’re pretty, or give you a reach around.

        1. avatar John in Ohio says:

          “Constitutional carry does not guarantee more folks will actually carry.”

          Then that’s their problem, now isn’t it. You can lead a horse to water but you can’t make them drink. If they foolishly decide not to be prepared to defend themselves then that’s on them. What you are advocating is that government needs to take up the slack for slackards who won’t do for themselves. This is how government’s “safety net” came to be. Individuals are responsible for their own safety. Where there is no legal bar to them being armed and they choose not to then they own their own stupidity.

          And, I don’t give two shits about what leftists think about it. They can pound sand.

  28. avatar pwrserge says:

    Ok… I’ll be back tomorrow. Hopefully by then that never-Trump retards will quit running around like their asses are on fire.

    Here’s the bottom line. Trump is the nominee. Not voting for Trump makes you no better than some Demokkkommie scumbag that votes for whatever socialist they decide to put on the ballot. You want somebody “better” than Trump? Put up a candidate in the primaries who isn’t a spineless choad and who is willing to fight for Americans against the commies in the DNC and the MSM. Until then, shut up and pedal.

    1. avatar User1 says:

      Brother, we need you here to explain to us dummies Trump’s high level 4D chess. If not you, who?

    2. avatar Jack says:

      Ahhh, it is so amusing to observe the small mind of the TrumpTard as it tries to deal with the cognitive dissonance of having voted for a “conservative” Manhattan liberal.

    3. avatar Trollolol says:

      Voting for Trump males you an anti gunner communist as far as I’m concerned.

      1. avatar pwrserge says:

        So you’re going to throw a childish hissy fit over something Trump said and throw the White House to the actual open commies? Really? How are you any different from the blue hair feminazi brigade?

        Here’s the takeaway. Trump says a lot of shit.

        1. avatar MB says:

          Exactly….

        2. avatar Trollolol says:

          Support your anti Gun president all you want. Dont pretend he and you arent traitorous scum.

  29. avatar MDH says:

    Defacto red flag laws are already on the books nationally. All someone has to do to (temporarily) remove an individuals gun rights is to file a restraining order against whomever.

    Naturally, this does absolutely nothing to stop criminals from doing harm or killing people, but in an atmosphere of national knee jerk “we have to do something”, that fact has no effect upon mob mentality.

    1. avatar Dude says:

      Not really. People like that often have a violent past, and are already prohibited from buying a gun. That doesn’t mean that they don’t have a gun in their possession. There’s always private party sales, the black market, and theft.

  30. avatar Auxwood_rebel says:

    How about an obama style “nudge” campaign to shame the hollywood actors who are anti-gun but love doing the cool movie posters where they’re holding guns with stuff blowing up in the background…

    1. avatar Geoff WWJWD - "What would John Wick do?" PR says:

      No.

      Hollywood is the 2A’s best buddy. They are addicted to the money, and we get the exposure. Leave ’em alone…

  31. avatar Jim Warren says:

    If you’re surprised, you haven’t been paying attention.

    1. avatar Pg2 says:

      Some clarity in a sea of troll static.

      1. avatar Geoff WWJWD - "What would John Wick do?" PR says:

        And nobody knows ‘trolling’ like you do, with your bullshit you constantly peddle… 🙂

        1. avatar Pg2 says:

          Says the leg-humping, multi profile Geoff,guesty troll profile pushing leftist agendas.

        2. avatar Guesty McGuesterson says:

          **fist bump to Geoff**

          So, Pg2, this must be what it’s like for you and your several Pg2/Vlad voices to be talking in your head…

          When are you going to actually talk about guns?

        3. avatar Geoff WWJWD - "What would John Wick do?" PR says:

          *Fist-Bump* back ya, Guesty.

          Yep, pg2 is back spewing his crap and not talking guns.

          Like that’s not a real surprise… 😉

  32. avatar Joatmon says:

    I’m kinda scratching my head right now.
    So if I understand this correctly, immigration reform is hooked to this Red Flag bill? In hopes that the Democrats won’t sign off on it because it’s immigration?
    What if they do pass it? What if it becomes law?
    The old adage comes to mind, “Throw shit against the wall and eventually something will stick”.
    Let’s say it does pass. Then Trump sees that he can pass what he wants if he gives up someone else’s rights. You think if it ever came to a New Zealand type confiscation that the Secret Service would disarm?
    2020 is going to be a very interesting year.

  33. avatar Carl B. says:

    Civil war is inevitable.

    1. avatar John in Ohio says:

      It has been for some time. People will either fight for their liberty or they won’t and liberty will wither and die in this nation.

  34. avatar S R says:

    I would not object to red flag laws IF the following conditions are met:
    – The government will pay for the accused to have licensed armed security guards of the accused’s choice at the accused’s requested time(s) until the accused gets his guns back or the matter is resolved
    – if it determined by a jury of the gun owners peers that the accusations were false or unreasonable, then the accuser will pay a fine of $10,000; pay for loss of income due to damaged reputation; and pay for pain or suffering (psychological or otherwise)

  35. avatar Dan says:

    “Another quaalude they gonna love me again.” Trump
    https://youtu.be/MdzdgwfYV94

  36. avatar The Crimson Pirate says:

    Aaannnddd I’m back to not voting for Trump again. Jumping back and forth as Trump convinces not to vote for him and the damn dems convince me to vote for him makes me feel practically schizophrenic. I hope that isn’t grounds to confiscate my guns.

    Moloney labe. Lay in what you can before the shooting starts.

  37. avatar enuf says:

    I’d be fine with such laws provided lawyers for our side write the due process protections.

    1. avatar Fudds McKenzie says:

      Any lawyer who’d touch this isn’t on my side. Alan Gura won’t.

  38. avatar Andrew Lias says:

    Welp, he’d better hope that the candidate for 2020 is a shitshow candidate if it’s ol crazy Joe I may just stay home.

  39. avatar Sam I Am says:

    It is said that only Trump can separate Trump from his voter base. More entertainment coming up.

    Pass the popcorn, please.

  40. avatar Dr. Schmancy says:

    Here’s a deal:

    Suppose there are 20 false positives per one real mass shooter. Suppose half of those false positives die during a red flag operation. As a result, we have 10 innocent gun owners vs 20 innocent bystanders. Sounds fair?

  41. avatar CLarson says:

    A pretty generic, no action statement. Seriously blaming video games. 🤡 Tying anything to immigration is a certain poison pill for any bi-partisan legislation. Trump is punting and waiting for the outrage to blow over. This is probably the best a 2nd amendment supporter can hope for wanting to preserve the status quo.

  42. avatar Ralph says:

    “Red Flag Laws” and “due process” need not be mutually exclusive IF ex parte orders are issued by a judge based on probable cause, and the owner of the firearm is afforded a rapid and fair hearing where the burden of proof is on the State.

    1. avatar Carl B. says:

      Yeah, just like the FISA Court wasn’t abused by the FBI/CIA/NSA/Clinton Crime Machine.

      1. avatar Ralph says:

        Anything can be abused — such as your ability to comment here.

      2. avatar Blue says:

        FISA court and any secrete court should be broken up. SCOTUS was supposed to be overseeing FISA courts and clearly haven’t been.

    2. avatar Sam I Am says:

      “IF ex parte orders are issued by a judge based on probable cause, and the owner of the firearm is afforded a rapid and fair hearing where the burden of proof is on the State.”

      If Red Flags are a good idea, then just arrest people on suspicion, and be done with it. Full due process is then available, starting with separating the suspect from weapons, separating the suspect from the potential target (and others), providing for a complete run through the criminal process, up to and including trial. A person too dangerous to be allowed access to weapons and targets is too dangerous to be walking around free.

      1. avatar pwrserge says:

        Um… we do arrest people on suspicion. That’s basically all an arrest warrant requires. Articulable probable cause.

        1. avatar Sam I Am says:

          “Um… we do arrest people on suspicion. That’s basically all an arrest warrant requires. Articulable probable cause.”

          Agree. If suspicion that a person might, may, have committed a crime is good enough for an arrest warrant, why the namby-pamby EPRO? Just arrest the suspected violent person, and use the existing “due process” already in place.

        2. avatar pwrserge says:

          Because a simple arrest isn’t enough to hold somebody to put a hold on their property.

    3. avatar Gov. William J Le Petomane says:

      And punishment is adjudicated upon those who file false reports.

      One problem with these laws is it can give the local SWAT club an excuse to suit up and play their games, since they’re going to take guns away from people who have been deemed ‘dangerous’. It was good to see that asshole gamer in LA that got that guy in Kansas killed had to make a plea deal for I think 20 years in prison. Abusing red flag laws needs to be treated just as seriously as Swatting.

  43. avatar Timothy Toroian says:

    yeah, the downhill slide just got slipperier but something should be done or the left will go absolutely bonkers and pass all kinds of restrictive bills and then go totally nuts when SCOTUS rules on their unconstitutionality. If the left would be bi-partisan something legal and effective could be accomplished. Playing win or die accomplishes nothing now or for the future. The left knows it can’t get an amendment ratified to reverse the 2nd they may start calling for a Constitutional Convention which would be extremely dangerous because the current one could be invalidated and new laws take effect and that is not dangerous to gun owners but every Tom, Dick, Harry, Jose, Mohammed, Pierre,Ian, and Ivan is going to want his group specifically protected in a constitution.

    1. avatar John in Ohio says:

      Leftist are not going to be satisfied. The best thing that could happen would be for them to over-play their hand. What you call for is appeasement and it will absolutely not work out in liberty’s favor.

      You are advocating letting a thief steal a little bit so the thief doesn’t steal a lot. Think about that for a moment.

  44. avatar Gun Owning American says:

    President Gun Grabber is at it again.

  45. avatar ozzallos says:

    “Trump didn’t specifically propose a national red flag law, only his support for the laws in general. Whether that means he’d support a federal level red flag law isn’t clear.”

    Which means half the people here will be all “RAAWRTRUMPTEHFALSEFLAGBUMPSTOCKSWTFBBQ!!” when in reality you should be looking at congress as the originator of these BS laws.

    1. avatar User1 gets banned says:

      I think it was the Brady Campaign that helped pass these laws in California many years ago. Then Trump, Republicans and the NRA called for the expansion into the rest of the states after Parkland. Now Republicans are trying to pass federal confiscation laws through bills like the TAPS act and other bills.

      This is a collective effort by anti gunners. It’s not one sided. It’s a power expansion that both parties like. When both parties agree it benefits their government power increases they will pass it. Good old Patriot Act…

      Back when Bush was president the Democrats were fine with setting up DHS and ICE. Now they complain that Trump is using DHS the wrong way, but when they get their hands on the power they will enjoy it. Look at Kamala saying she will use her executive powers once in office after 100 days.

      It’s the government united against the people. That’s how all government eventually function. They say every great nation starts to collapse around the 200 year mark.

      1. avatar Blue says:

        NRA didn’t call for red flag laws in other states and in fact have opposed them because few have true due process including the one Rick “Skeletor” Scott signed in Florida. Due process happens FIRST, not after the fact.

        1. avatar Sam I Am says:

          “Due process happens FIRST, not after the fact.”

          Think about it…

          First, a warrant is obtained to arrest a suspected criminal. Then the suspect is jailed pending arraignment. Then the suspect is bonded-out, or remanded to jail. Then a trial, or plea bargain ensues. Then the suspect is released, or not, depending. Then the trial. Then the verdict. If the convicted person believes he/she/it is innocent, then the appeals process begins (proving “innocence” and seeking restoration)This entire procedure is “due process”. The only difference (and it is a big one) is that with EPROs, there is no formal charging of the suspect.

          If there is probable cause for an EPRO, that should be probable cause for an arrest. EPROs are judicial “warnings” that are run amuck.

  46. avatar Jaque says:

    The slippery slope of the abandonment of the US Constitution continues. Add the public knowledge of the FBI’s Russiagate tools, tactics and acts to the Red Flag laws and anyone can be framed and locked up, and their firearms confiscated and destroyed by government. Framed by the people who swore an oath to the constitution. Its a perfect tool for communists.

    Why wouldn’t the government destroy the firearms they confiscated. It fits the agenda of both political parties, Republicans and Communists. Magazines are another thing that will be banned and destroyed. The promise that you can keep your 10 rnd magazines will be temporary, because crazed killers can shoot 10 people in 10 seconds and keep changing magazines as long as they are alive.

    So then magazine fed firearms will be banned, and only bolt action rifles and revolvers will be legal in America. Shotguns with multi shot capability will be banned after crazed killers resort to them, leaving only manual single and double barrel shotguns.

    That leaves bolt action rifles, until crazed killers use them to snipe their victims. A scoped 30.06 bolt action rifle can be bought at Wall Mart with a couple of boxes of for under $500. And then the traditional hunting rifle will be banned from civilian ownership by the communists.

    And so it goes. Unless the revolt by Americans over communist gun control lights the fuze of revolution and from there America will either turn into an oppressive police state or be remade into the country Americas founders had had hoped for.

    1. avatar Blue says:

      There are 2 basic kinds of rifles to leftists: assault rifles and sniper rifles. These fall into 2 categories, the ones that have been banned and the ones they are going to ban.

  47. avatar Mad Max says:

    “The devil is in the details as to how these laws have been written in various states around the country.”

    Consider (these dangerous) red flag laws under a strict scrutiny regime. Eventually, the standard of evidence will be required to be set high.

    I think red flag laws are dangerous because they will exchange El Paso for Oklahoma City and Dayton for Happy Land.

    People found to be dangeruous enough to have their natural rights to self-defense stripped are dangerous enough to be committed for evaluation or incarcerated for making threats until trial.

  48. avatar Chris Morton says:

    This morning Hugh Hewitt said that “red flag” laws would not be abused.

    I wonder if he feels the same way about the FISA courts…

    1. avatar Sam I Am says:

      “This morning Hugh Hewitt said…”

      Always thought Hewitt was one of, if not THE, most dangerous “conservative” on the radio.
      1. He is a lawyer; word games are stock-in-trade
      2. He is all about trusting government and politicians
      3. He recommends supporting and defending the rules of the deep state
      4. He makes gratuitous “conservative” statements, always surrounded by reasons people should not disrupt the status quo in politics
      5. He lives/lived in Californication way too long

  49. avatar B.D. says:

    Lol @ all u Trump morons. How much u like him now?

    Fucken idiots.

    Come and take them.

    1. avatar Auxwood_rebel says:

      Funny thing is, I don’t like trump, but the more I see of the ENTIRE democrat party field of presidential hopefuls, the less I dislike trump. But barring any better options I’ll probably give ole gary (what’s aleppo) johnson a third try.

  50. avatar strych9 says:

    Hardly surprising at this point.

    In other news, at least for the immediate 8chan is actually gone. Their hosting and security support company, Cloudflare, shut them down for “lawless” behavior resulting in deaths that, supposedly, 8chan, is “responsible” for according to a blog post by Matthew Prince, CEO of Cloudflare.

    1. avatar User1 gets banned says:

      I don’t blame 8Chan the website or its owners. However, it is true that 8Chan users are white ethno state terrorists, whom radicalize each other and plan terror attacks, then do coordinated damage control afterwards.

      The FBI posts and lurks on 8Chan. They got some “kid” to attempt a bombing. Then they arrested him with the fake bomb.

      The Chans are simply a platform, not an ideology. Free speech is not to blame. Taking down free speech zones only redirects the ideas to another place where we can’t see. Censoring the internet doesn’t stop the acts and can lead to further attacks.

      1. avatar strych9 says:

        When free speech is basically verboden you’re going to end up concentrating unpleasant speech in the areas where it’s allowed.

        That’s what happened with 8chan. People with unpopular opinions congregated there specifically because they were not free to speak somewhere like 4chan.

  51. avatar DingDongDitch says:

    And it seems there is no limit to what Republicans will blame as the source of this problem, except for the obvious one. Throw due process and the First Amendment under the bus, go ahead.

    1. avatar User1 gets banned says:

      I’m hearing older Republicans blame videos games, prescriptions and mental conditions. The Democrats are actually calling out the problem for what it is, they are sounding more like Republicans of the past, but they still want gun control regardless of the facts they state.

      The Democrats were able to turn Republicans into the people they long accused them to be.

      Republicans are talking about getting rid of free speech and other civil/human rights. The Republicans don’t want to talk about white supremacy ideology/politics for some reason, as if Republicans support that or their party was created to advocate for that. Republicans are against “diversity” in their party and NRA while Democrats are reaching out to everyone they can get. I heard the only “black” Republican in the congress is going to quit, which leaves only 1 black Republican in the senate.

      Do Republicans even notice what they have become?

    2. avatar Someone says:

      What is the obvious source of this problem? Please tell. It’s not so obvious to me.

  52. avatar TheOtherDavid says:

    Is it possible that if a federal ERPO comes to pass it 1) might have better civil liberty protections than this hodgepodge crap shoot of state laws and 2) might attract a more fast-track SCOTUS review that god willing would find this type of policy unconstitutional?

    Believe me I’m not in favor of them – they are one of those “common sense” ideas that is a total disaster for individual freedom. I’m just trying to make some weak lemonade out of this bushel of lemons getting rolled our way.

    1. avatar Fudds McKenzie says:

      1) No. Why do you care, do you want it to run smoothly or taken apart by the courts? Both? You’ll probably get neither. 2) The court that might stay vaguely conservative thus very vaguely pro-gun if you keep voting for RNC candidates who put in place the laws you want taken down?

      Frankly I don’t believe you that you don’t favor red flag laws. You basically say that you’re being irrational, how can you be credible?

      If your not outright lying about not being in favor of red-flag laws, and are capable of doing so, I recommend taking yourself more seriousely. Don’t make excuses for people who screw you like a battered spouse. Trust yourself to handle the unpleasant reality.

  53. avatar Jack says:

    Yeahhhh…….

    What a surprise. A Manhattan liberal supports gun control laws. Who could have guessed?

    1. avatar Fudds McKenzie says:

      Yup, I lol at everyone saying they’ll stop voting for him now. Too late and if they didn’t want to drink his kool-ade the evidence was always there.

  54. avatar Manse Jolly says:

    The President has not signed anything yet.

    Hopefully he’s just talking as a politician right now and any Federal Red Flag law withers away like an unwatered house plant.

    If not he has only himself to blame for his reelection loss.

    1. avatar enuf says:

      So will you be voting for an anti-gun Democrat?

      I expect to have to vote for a third candidate. Either a conservative write-in or Libertarian.

      As for Red Flag laws, yes we need them. We should also be the ones writing the Due Process provisions of Such laws.

      1. avatar Manse Jolly says:

        Just won’t vote at all, certainly not for any Leftist Gun Control type.

    2. avatar User1 gets banned says:

      Trump has been pushing for gun confiscation powers since Parkland. He had meetings with his committee to prevent school violence and he met with the governors against guns.

      Now he is calling for gun control again after another political mass shooting. He already told Republicans to stop being afraid of the NRA, that he will get the NRA to support gun control one way or another. He gloats that he has done more gun control than Obama. He likes to remind people that he gave away Fix NICS and shelved reciprocity and suppressor legislation. The Republicans were trying to exchange Fix NICS for federal licensing of bearing arms or the total legalization of suppressors. Trump said no pro gun bills, only gun control should be proposed because that is what will pass.

      At what point will Trump fans see reality? After he makes way for another modern rifle “ban” or restrictions on semi auto firearms?

      We need a true Republican conservative to replace Trump before the loud and proud Democrats take over again. The long game is now over, we ran out of time. We can’t push back the problem any longer. The NRA destroyed itself and Republicans don’t want to restore the Republic.

      1. avatar Sam I Am says:

        “We need a true Republican conservative to replace Trump”

        I’m thinking Jeb, Kaisich, Graham, Santorum, Christie, Romney, or a more recent establishment hack.

      2. avatar John in Ohio says:

        “The long game is now over, we ran out of time.”

        The long game favors tyranny. Individuals who cherish liberty were going to lose that game.

        AOC in 2020.

        1. avatar Fudds McKenzie says:

          Yup. Setting aside principle for vague, de-facto gains was never going to work. Now we don’t even get a chance at de-facto gains, talk a Trumpkin into a corner, which doesn’t take much, and they whine that Hillary would be worse. Or if you get yourself a real middle-aged adult with the mindset of a spoiled child, they demand a viable alternative that gets them everything they want, like you have to be Santa Clause. Like any scenario that doesn’t have a happy ending for them can’t possibly be true.

    3. avatar tdiinva says:

      Apparently, nobody seems to have noticed that he has tied support for gun control measures to immigration reform. He knows that Democrats won’t do that and as political maneuver it forces the Democrats to choose between open borders and gun control. They will choose open borders.

      The problem with ERPO as presently constituted is that they dispense with due process. The law could and should be written to require a hearing with the person subject to the order is represented by counsel and allowed to cross examine his accusers. The only situation where an ERPO might prevent a tragedy is a potential mass shooter and can be watched in period between the request and the hearing. An ERPO is really ineffective when the issue is suicide or domestic violence because there are other readily available methods to commit the act.

    4. avatar Fudds McKenzie says:

      I don’t know if he signed anything for the bump stock ban since it was badically done on fiat but he said he’d do it and, by god, he did it.

      This wait-and-see thing is hilarious. You either think you’re manipulating sincere gun-rights people or have your head in the sand.

  55. avatar Max says:

    Now that the false flags have all been committed: Las Vegas, Parkland, El Paso, the next logical conclusion is the national ERPO law. Trump is completely on board with the NEW WORLD ORDER, he is nothing more than a fake himself.

    Next steps will be to “suspend” the Constitution and impose martial law, and have another war to distract the peon populace.

    1. avatar enuf says:

      You are out of your mind and you are part of the problem.

  56. Potus should try to get the ones that really created the 2 shootings the CIA and the ElPaso shooters gun was registered to the FBI>>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CMIMBIYW-UA&t=3s for more #cirstenw on Youtube

    1. avatar Miner49er says:

      Hilarious, do you actually believe the stuff you say? I did watch your video, Man, I want to party with you lady!

      I do advise other folks to watch your video, some may actually enjoy your dragon lady Personna, I found it very entertaining.

      Of course, if you actually had evidence to back your outlandish claims, perhaps someone, somewhere would take you seriously.

      And I must say, in your case, I think gun control would be an excellent idea, I shudder to think of you with a 90 rd drum mag and your delusions in public.

      1. avatar Carl B. says:

        I’ve noticed you’re a liberal twit. Does that count?

  57. avatar Hannibal says:

    Yep, this is that 6D chess I keep hearing people talk about.

    Heh, every time there’s an article about gun laws in NY or CA a bunch of folks chime in with “well, move! You shouldn’t live there or elect those idiots!” I wonder how many of them voted for Trump.

    Selling out the 2nd Amendment for a symbolic border wall, what a timeline we’re in.

    1. avatar pwrserge says:

      Do you honestly believe the DNC would ever trade token gun control for meaningful immigration reform? They would be killing their own party.

  58. avatar Lee says:

    Everyone on here bashing trump is missing the big picture. Trump will be the last republican president. One year or five years left…that is still to be determined. Texas is soon to flip blue due to immigration and it will be mathematically impossible for a conservative to ever win the electoral college…ever again.

    The biggest threat to out country is immigration. Legal and illegal. All immigration must end and all immigrants must be sent home. 7/10 immigrants vote democrat. Even the progun immigrants vote democrat because HANDOUTS. These people will vote to take away your 401k. Americans need to wake up and realize that we are giving away the greatest country to ever exist to socialists who will vote to turn our country into the shithole they left. We care more about fairness, diversity, and equality….than our own grandchildren’s future. We let people come in with open arms even though they do not give us the same reciprocity back.

    Go ahead…talk about trump and red flag laws. But if you are not willing to demand a wall and an end to ALL immigration…you will still lose your guns.

    1. avatar Mark says:

      ^^^ I agree 100%. Spot on.

    2. avatar Bummed2ndAmamma says:

      Agree Lee…
      “Power is in tearing human minds to pieces and putting them together again in new shapes of your own choosing.” Orwell. The left is slowly but surely making that happen.. and the sheeps are headed to slaughter…

    3. avatar Someone says:

      “7/10 immigrants vote democrat. Even the progun immigrants vote democrat because HANDOUTS.”
      Are you sure they don’t simply vote against candidates who promise them to kick them or their families out of the country, like you do? Who wouldn’t? What did GOP do to earn their votes?

      1. avatar pwrserge says:

        The GOP earned my vote by fighting against the scumbags that murdered my family. The reality is that immigrating to another country is a privilege, not a right. We need to get rid of birthright citizenship and deport anybody who is here illegally. Then close the borders to failed states and only allow immigrants who are either exceptional or are from western countries.

        1. avatar User1 gets banned says:

          Communism was invented by Europeans. Do not allow those socialists into America in mass.

        2. avatar pwrserge says:

          Oh, I’m pretty sure most Eastern Europeans are about as anti-communist as you would like.

      2. avatar Sam I Am says:

        “Are you sure they don’t simply vote against candidates who promise them to kick them or their families out of the country, like you do? Who wouldn’t?”

        Conflating legal immigrants and illegal aliens is disingenuous, fraud. Legal immigrants can vote, and few are looking to deport legal immigrants just for being immigrants. Illegal aliens voting is a crime. Illegal immigrants should expect to be sent away. The people who should be sent away are not supposed to be voting for anything.

    4. avatar jwtaylor says:

      Nope, not reality.
      First, the majority of the immigration into Texas is not immigration from outside of the US, but American citizens from other states moving here. That’s happening at the rate of about 1,000 people a day.
      Second, by the second generation, people who have moved to Texas tend to vote with the majority party. Just take a look at the recent elections in San Antonio, some of which have gone Republican for the first time since Reconstruction.
      Finally, history proves the assumption that more immigrants equals less firearms freedoms is false. Texas has proven exactly the opposite. We have a lot more free exercise of our rights now than when we were a predominantly Anglo state.

      1. avatar MB says:

        @jwtaylor: As long as people fleeing Democrat utopias (like me) don’t bring their expectations to Texas hoping to make Texas look like the crap-hole they just left. We bailed out of New England because of the crazy militant liberalism, ridiculous taxes and expensive winters just trying not to freeze to death. Texas is a different world, embrace and enjoy the change. We love Texas and Texans, and will never live in New England again.

        1. avatar jwtaylor says:

          You’re spot on there. In fact, we Texans have a lot more to fear from people on the coasts moving here than we do people South of the Border moving here.
          I spend a lot of time in Mexico and I spend a lot of time in DC. Culturally, I have a lot more in common with the Mexicans than the swamp dwellers.

    5. avatar Tom says:

      That is FRIGGING BULLSHIT. As a legal immigrant – actually citizen for about 6 years, it never even came near my mind to vote for the communists. This country exists and grows because of LEGAL immigration, just look at all the great minds that migrated to the U.S. – ultimately, even including your beloved Trump. Was it his parents or grandparents that came from Germany? So, STOP ACCUSING ALL IMMIGRANTS OF BEING MENTALLY CHALLENGED COMMUNISTS THAT HATE GUNS.

      If you do that with the illegal ones, I am fine with it 😉

  59. avatar Shire-man says:

    So……what did either of these shooters do that would have triggered a red flag order? Nothing as far as I have seen.

  60. avatar Bummed2ndAmamma says:

    I always find it funny, whenever there is some sort of “large” shooting.. instead of figuring out the “why” behind the person holding the gun, people jump right to gun legislation, gun banning, red flags etc.. In very few cases, do shooters leave manifestos’ that may explain the why.. and really, if they end up dead, one would never know if that was the real reaon(s) for that day, that month, that morning.. etc… was it years? Guns have been around forever. When you were pissed off during the Wild West days, you either had a duel, or you had it coming for something you did. Matter settled, nothing to see here. Any yes, sometimes you went to jail.. Why no large shootings then? I mean everyone/anyone could have done it.. guns were carried out in the open.. EVERYWHERE….And every once in awhile, history had a Billy the kid type carrying on. So fast forward to 2000’s where “large” shootings all have one thing in common behind them.. ANGER.. Like rage.. Its too easy to blame it on the same ole’ excuses.. White supremacy, racisim.. blah blah blah.. no.. this anger has been brewing for awhile..you can be totally sane, no mental history,,, and then become really angry to the point your not going to take it anymore..Media Male bashing, hatred toward white men, the sudden loss of country morals, values, sanity, respect for one another, etc.. and the HATE being spewed from crazy people on the left.. well.. sends people over the edge. Until the haters stop hating (fat chance).. well, nothing is going to change.. and the anger will flow like lava.. Our politicians on both sides are lame.. they allow our country to implode into chaos, without an apology to the american people for their lack of ability to see how they are culpable for their own crazy actions, and allowing the crazy actions of others, such as Antifa. I am disgusted at this point with the nonsense in Washington, and throughout the “land that I love.” George Orwell was right, ” In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is revolutionary.” We are heading to 1984..

  61. avatar Dude Homie Buddy says:

    “Enact Red-Flag laws with due-process.”

    NOT possible.

    1. avatar pwrserge says:

      There have been long discussions on how this is entirely possible. Improbable, but not impossible.

      All you would need to do, is to get rid of ex-parte judicial orders.

  62. avatar Sven79 says:

    I grew up in California, and I still follow the news there
    years after I escaped. I know that some people may think that red flag laws are no big deal, because those that are innocent can get their weapons back. However this is an expensive and lengthy process in the Golden State. And, to add further insult to injury, law enforcement often will not return any ammunition that was seized. This even happened to Dan Bilzerian in a case that wasn’t ERPO related; he lost his ammo and many magazines when the police, responding to an attempted burglary, broke into a locked room (that wasn’t accessed by the burglars) and confiscated many of his firearms for “safekeeping,” supposedly in case the burglars returned. This was all done without the permission of his assistant, and without any warrant. He spent hours at the police station getting them back, but he discovered that many magazines and all of the ammo wasn’t returned. They told him that he’d have to wait another 3 hours and fill out different forms for the items they kept, but I don’t think he ever got all of his property back. Strangely, the police left behind a SCAR-17 with a thermal scope that was valued in excess of $20 grand in the now unsecured room they broke into.

  63. avatar Kyle in Upstate NY says:

    Contact your Senators, Congressmen, and Mitch McConnel’s office and RESPECTFULLY say that you do not support such a law

  64. avatar Hans says:

    The other day, Hew Hewitt said he supports
    “red flag” laws. Claims it has not been abused
    in Florida. Sure thing double H.

    I support them too, as long as they contain the
    hammer and sickle.

  65. Red Flag laws do not go far enough.

    * People subject to ERPO’s should have any licenses for the practice of law or medicine suspended.

    * People subject to ERPOs should be prohibited from any form of intimate contact or relationship.’

    * People subject to ERPOs should be required to wear a distinctive badge on the left arm while out in public.

    * The state should maintain a database of everyone who is subject to, or has been subject to, an ERPO.

    * The state should run a propaganda campaign to get people to fear those who are subject to, or have ever been subject, to an ERPO.

    1. avatar Sam I Am says:

      Red Flag laws do not go far enough.”

      I see what you did there.

      1. I took Red Flag laws to their logical conclusion.

  66. avatar Joe says:

    Trump is worse than Obama when it comes to protecting our 2nd amendment. I was an idiot believing he would stand up for us and keep his promises. I hope that by 2020 there will be a third party and we will not be left with the choice between dumb and dumber.

    1. avatar Sam I Am says:

      “I hope that by 2020 there will be a third party…”

      There already are:
      American Conservative Party
      Constitution Party
      American Solidarity Party
      Reform Party
      America First Party
      Independent American Party
      Jefferson Republican Party
      Libertine Party

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