With the Gun Rights Rally Over, Virginia Senate Passes ‘Red Flag’ Confiscation Bill

Amanda Chase

Virginia State Sen. Amanda Chase, R-Colonial Heights (AP Photo/Steve Helber)

From the AP:

The Virginia Senate approved legislation Wednesday that would allow authorities to take guns away from people deemed dangerous to themselves or others, as the state moves closer to joining a growing number of states enacting so-called “red flag” gun laws.

The Democratic-led Senate voted for the bill despite fierce resistance from Republican lawmakers. GOP Sen. Amanda Chase called supporters of the legislation “traitors” and said the proposed law would embolden criminals and hurt law-abiding citizens.

Democrats said the bill could help prevent mass shootings and said similar laws have worked well in 17 other states. Democrats said the bill had been carefully crafted to preserve due process and protect individual rights.

The bill now moves to the House. It is one of several gun-control measures the new Democratic majority at the General Assembly is set to pass this year.

comments

  1. avatar MICHAEL A CROGNALE says:

    There is only one remedy left. The traitor’s fate.

    1. avatar Hannibal says:

      sure buddy. Voter turnout hovered around 40% but you think you’re gonna be tarring and feathering people.

      It isn’t that the ballot box doesn’t work, it’s that gun owners don’t use it.

      1. avatar Chief Censor says:

        I have seen a lot of Republicans saying they lost Virginia because of voter fraud and minorities/immigrants. That voting doesn’t work anymore.

        Of course winning elections doesn’t happen when you don’t show up. It’s like saying your car doesn’t work when you actively refused to put gas in it.

        Unfortunately, Americans think down party lines and can’t come up with pragmatic strategies. It’s been far too long to continue to fall for the same trick.

        1. avatar Mike Hawkizard says:

          The biggest part is the VAGOP left nearly 30 seats uncontested.

          Lots of people are gonna stay home if they feel they don’t have a choice to vote for.

          The biggest problem isn’t immigration or fraudulent votes. It’s the VAGOP doesn’t have its act together.

        2. avatar Chief Censor says:

          @Mike Hawkizard

          Maybe it’s time for the average man and woman to run for office?

          Why do we mostly see failed business owners, lawyers, etc, run for office? It’s not like those people represent the average person. They want the position for the money it will make them. It should be more like jury duty than a career move.

      2. avatar Southern Cross says:

        If you don’t vote, don’t complain about the result. If there’s no GOP candidate, vote for the least-worst non-Democrat alternative. The GOP needs to pull it’s head out the sand, or wherever else it is stuck and start fielding candidates. Otherwise there will be a one-party state.

        If you don’t win, you can at least make the incumbents know there is opposition and make them work harder.

        1. avatar Rev. Philip E. Evans says:

          A one-party state is “communism”!

        2. avatar I Haz A Question says:

          “Otherwise there will be a one-party state.”

          Welcome to the CA experience.

        3. avatar Kyle says:

          One party states are pretty common. They happen all the time, all over the world. They are always overthrown…and nearly always through force of arms.

          America is making their march towards one party state in many locations. CA, NY, Mass, NJ, HI, etc.

          They’ll be overthrown as well. And ya, probably through force of arms.

        4. avatar UpInArms says:

          ” If there’s no GOP candidate, vote for the least-worst non-Democrat alternative ”

          I disagree.

          I would be the first to argue that the only way to waste a vote is to not use it. However…
          If the only choice on the ballot is an unopposed Democrat, I’d skip that one and move on. The evil Democrat is going to win no matter what. That’s a given. Voting for the single-choice candidate creates the illusion of a popular mandate which the evil one will doubtless use to promote his/her evil doings. If the total turnout is, say, 10,000 voters and the evil one wins with only 2,500 votes, the claim of a mandate has been denied. Small victory, but it’s better than just handing over a PR talking point.

          Vote Republican. If there is no Republican but there are third-party candidates, vote third-party. But don’t ever, ever, ever throw a vote to a Democrat.

        5. avatar Cowgirl says:

          I agree with you 100%. I have never and will never vote for a democrat, no matter what.

        6. avatar UpInArms says:

          ” If there’s no GOP candidate, vote for the least-worst non-Democrat alternative ”

          Ooops. Sorry. Reading too fast (or too sloppy), didn’t see the “non” in front of Democrat.

          Never mind.

        7. avatar Anymouse says:

          If there’s no GOP candidate, make a run yourself.

        8. avatar Victoria Illinois says:

          Chicago mayoral election doesn’t even have a Republican candidate anymore. The GOP has given up.

      3. avatar RedRed says:

        Wrong. The problem is that the ballot box is not transparent. We have to believe the result, but no one can actually verify it. Also, the UniParty is worst than useless. Go out to vote and what’s going to change? The GOP actually had the nerve to crow about sending taxpayer dollars to Amazon and Micron, buying jobs. When they were in power, they never seriously tried to pass Constitutional Carry. Most Virginia GOP are log rollers. Amanda Chase, my Senator, is true Patriot. She doesn’t care if she makes the GOP mad. She sticks to her principles, which is awesome as you see that so very rarely. And for the other silly comment about her preferring revolvers, who really cares? There are much better issues. Get a life.

        1. avatar Doesn't matter says:

          If you vote Democrat you’re just going to get slimed faster. We need a new party. Democrats are crazy and the Republicans only tow the line. I see Patriots frustrated in GOP. Libbies are leaving their promised land and moving and ruining other states. All part of the demoncrap plan if you ask me.

      4. avatar Everyday_Carrier says:

        Wasn’t it less than 3% who fought tyranny to establish the rights we currently take advantage of everyday? Just sayin… Keep trying to play that minority card and see how well it works out.

    2. avatar Vic Nighthorse says:

      You be the first to do something so incredibly dangerous. Simply trying to incite others to do it for you isn’t ethical.

      1. avatar Everyday_Carrier says:

        Ethical. lol. Nice joke. Lets just keep playing nice and see how far it gets us. A whole ONE DAY protest without ANY violence, especially compared to the left sided protests that trash local communities, and they still passed the law. The pen is indeed mightier than the sword, unless the sword is used to stop the pen. We might as well be carrying around broomsticks as far as these idiots are concerned. A show of force from the very ones they expect to protect them and enforce their tyranny needs to happen. Quit acting like it doesn’t.

  2. avatar Jonathan Long says:

    as expected, I dont know what made people think a “protest” was going to make the democrats actually listen to the people. These people are in fact being dictators and need to be removed.

    1. avatar Everyday_Carrier says:

      It should have been much longer than a day. Camps need to be setup and those barriers need to be broken down. LEO’s who would uphold protection orders of such tyranny either get out of the way, or be the first to die. Nothing short of that will change anything. Hell, we can show up dressed to play nice and simply start “non violently” forcing ourselves beyond their level of comfort, and I am willing to bet that once the LEO’s on the other side of those barricades are told “move, or die” they will move. THEY WILL MOVE. Make them move. These tyrants are too comfortable. Take it from them and show them what it feels like to be scared, the way we are scared for our freedoms and families.

  3. avatar gene says:

    The main thing I question about Amanda Chase is her seeming preference for revolvers… But, to each their own in a free society. VA is lucky to have her.

  4. avatar RGP says:

    They’re not going to give up because they’re exactly like everyone else who ever tried to achieve world domination and they know they’ll eventually end up at the wrong end of a lynch mob.

    1. avatar Chief Censor says:

      History will always repeat itself.

  5. avatar Cowgirl says:

    Wow, there are just no words. Yes there are, but I’m a lady and shouldn’t be talking that way.

  6. avatar Chris T in KY says:

    Pray for the families of law enforcement when their husband chooses to carry out an unconstitutional order.

  7. avatar Dennis says:

    They still dont get it! Wonder who they’ll blame when they’re unemployed in November? I remember, Trump!!!

    1. avatar Michael in AK says:

      While I hope you are right, The West Coast tends to prove that it won’t happen.

    2. avatar Chief Censor says:

      Yes, blame Trump. After Trump became president, and called for massive gun control, within a year or two 17 states now have gun confiscation powers. Some states also increased the age to buy guns like Trump wanted. Funny they federally raised the age for smoking and vaping too. Trump also put in anti gun AG and ATF, then he ordered them to aggressively enforce gun control within the states and to reclassify Obama’s ATF approved firearms and accessories as illegal.

      So, yeah, they should blame Trump for encouraging them to push more than they did under Obama.

      1. avatar neiowa says:

        You’re really a special kind of stupid.

        1. avatar Chief Censor says:

          So Trump didn’t call for the gun control that is now passing more than under Obama? He didn’t make the left scream out in joy when he opened his mouth in support of their ideas? He didn’t give the okay to the ATF to go against the way the law works in the U.S.? He didn’t setup a task force of feds to go into the states to enforce federal gun control laws?

          So he isn’t responsible for things like this federal gun control task force shooting dead people who may have broken gun control laws, then police lying about what actually happened? It’s not like he ordered his AG to create these teams and send them into the states to enforce gun control.

          What’s going to happen to those “sanctuary” areas with these guys following orders like it’s their job? Is it okay because the guy killed was probably a felon or prohibited person in possession of a constitutionally protected handgun?

          https://www.ksat.com/news/local/2020/01/13/sapd-us-marshals-investigate-deadly-shooting-in-southeast-san-antonio/

          https://www.liveleak.com/view?t=PRrE_1579738668

  8. avatar kahlil says:

    This is a comment from Colonial Shooting range in Richmond (their facebook page). Granted, the statement can’t be validated but it is something I struggle with…

    “Well it might be enforced in some counties and pertain to some people but when my ex husband puiled a gun on my daughter and I and three to kill us when Louisa county sheriffs dept arrived in scene they said they didnt see a gun and there was nothing they could do. Told me go to the magistrates office and get a warrant. I went was denied said they d’dnt think he was an eminent threat and refused a warrant and a protective order. So yeah there is that.”

    In my mind this would be the ideal time for a red flag law. As a government/system we take people’s rights/privileges all the time if they are deemed a threat to themselves or others. This proposed system does address a concern but it also is a tool that can be abused quite easily. In the anecdote above the woman in the home could have been further victimized by her ex stating she was the threat and requests a red flag against her…she’s not only been domestically violated but then is left without a means to defend herself. From my 20+ year career in domestic and international mental health and human services I don’t believe there is a black/white answer to red flag proposals. IF used appropriately and not abused they could save lives or avert more crises, but they also open the door to the erosion of individual rights and safety.

    Honestly am torn over this one. I have personally worked with a client’s family in securing his firearms, he had a history of ECOs and TDOs and most recently was threatening to shoot his sister and nephew. When making a home safety check it was clear he wasn’t capable of caring for himself and we were arranging a mental health evaluation. As I looked through the house I found a double barrel 20ga, thankfully no ammo. The family had taken his other firearms but missed this one. I asked the gentleman if I could take it to his sister and he agreed, so I walked next door, shotgun in hand, and gave it to his sister. No police, no crisis, no red flag. family supported and issue averted. Had a red flag enforcement been enacted against this man I am certain someone would be injured or killed. However, the approach we used ensured he got his mental health treatment and is back in the community. I don’t believe he is safe around firearms and this seems to be a family matter that is constantly monitored with his sister and nephew holding onto his guns for safe keeping. He’ll likely go to an assisted living facility very soon and couldn’t take them there anyway.

    1. avatar uncommon_sense says:

      Kahlil,

      If a person is determined to harm a victim, they will succeed unless they are in prison.

      That is one ginormous fundamental problem with Red Flag orders: they do not imprison the subject of the order. (Nor should they.) The subject of a Red Flag order is free to use bludgeons, edge weapons, vehicles, fire, and poisons to attack their victims. Furthermore, the subject of a Red Flag order is free to use a firearm that he/she hid offsite, purchased from a criminal, borrowed from someone, or stole from someone.

      The second ginormous fundamental problem with a Red Flag order is that it violates multiple bedrock principles of our criminal justice system:
      (1) The subject is guilty until he/she proves he/she is innocent.
      (2) Proving innocence for a hypothetical future event is impossible.
      (3) The subject has no opportunity to confront his/her accusers.
      (4) The subject has no jury of his/her peers.
      (5) The subject has no guarantee of legal representation.

      And then there is the ginormous problem that it is exceedingly easy to abuse Red Flag orders.

      Finally, given that the subject of the order is free to use alternate weapons or easily acquire additional firearms (see above), Red Flag orders may actually INCREASE the danger to the victims because:
      (1) The victims have a false sense of security and may let their guard down.
      (2) The order enrages the subject of the order and actually pushes him/her over the edge to harm victims when he/she would not have otherwise harmed anyone.

      1. avatar kahlil says:

        the spam/comment filter is pissing me off, seems to prevent reasonable discussion but allows knee jerk reactions. Mods…can you fix this?

        Second time trying to add this comment. I don’t disagree with much of what you say, I just don’t think there is an easy, cut and dry answer. If someone is going to do harm they will do it, and this red flag movement can easily be abused. If a person is known or strongly suspected to be violent and a risk to others then a gun allows a quick and efficient way to intimidate or harm someone. They also allow harm to be conducted more impulsively and in a send, impersonal way. bats, knives, fists, bricks, etc can all kill and maim. I don’t think I am against limiting the tools that a dangerous person can use but I also don’t think this is the best way to go about it. As I said, many questions with little to no easy answers.

        1. avatar Truth Teller says:

          Whatever choad nobody cares what you have to say so piss off traitor!

        2. avatar uncommon_sense says:

          Kahlil,

          Allow me to point out the factual errors in your response:

          “If a person is known or strongly suspected to be violent and a risk to others …”
          How does an accuser or judge come to KNOW that a person is violent and a risk to others if the person has not actually harmed anyone yet? Answer: the accuser and the judge do not know. They cannot know. No one is clairvoyant.

          “… then a gun allows a quick and efficient way to intimidate or harm someone.”
          So does a blow torch, knife, machete, ax, baseball bat, hammer, brick, vehicle, bottle of chemicals, and box of rat poison.

          “[Firearms] also allow harm to be conducted more impulsively …”
          No, they do not. Firearms have no mystical powers which alter the psyche of a person. An unstable person can act just as impulsively with any alternate method of attack/harm.

          “[Firearms] also allow harm to be conducted … in a send [sic], impersonal way.”
          I will grant that this is the case in a minority of attacks. Much of the time a deranged attacker is going to shoot the victims at nearly point blank range which is, in those circumstances, an up-close-and personal affair.

          The answer is simple. Red Flag laws are so wrought with problems that they should never be contemplated much less implemented. Given their huge problems, we should apply the simple maxim: when in doubt, side with liberty and freedom.

        3. avatar Cowgirl says:

          Very well said!

        4. avatar neiowa says:

          Kahlil – this platform always has been a pisspoor tool. Apparently the newish owner has no interest in improving it or keeping up with the times.

        5. avatar kahlil says:

          @uncommon_sense,
          again, not arguing…just stating I am wrestling with this issue in a personal and professional context and don’t think it is as clearly explained as people make it out to be. You do make articulate and good points that I generally agree with.

    2. avatar Phil Wilson says:

      When my grandfather started to lose it mentally (in his mid 90’s), my father took his gun. Grandpa was talking about having to go out and put down a sick old dog that had been dead for 35 years, and couldn’t be convinced otherwise. I guess those inclined to psychoanalysis could read all kinds of things into that particular delusion. Regardless, that was another example of a valid intervention I think. It was handled quietly within the family, which is the best possible solution in my opinion, but I can see how that isn’t always going to happen.

      Bottom line, so-called red-flag laws could be used to do some good, and might even save some lives. As many have said, it all comes down to whether you trust the authorities to use the law responsibly. History doesn’t make me optimistic in that regard. Even if you trust the current gang in office, how long until a gang you don’t trust comes along?

      1. avatar Cowgirl says:

        The problem with this law is that if your neighbor or family member gets angry at you for something, they can turn you in as being unstable just for spite. Then you’re gonna have your guns taken away and you’ll be in for some evaluating. This law can hurt a lot of people.

    3. avatar Curmudgeon says:

      Mao, Stalin, and Adolf would show you that your personal story is less important than you think. Mass graves aren’t worth anyone’s comfort.

      1. avatar ava8harrierusmc1 says:

        thank you

    4. avatar Jeff says:

      That sounds traumatic; I’m sorry to hear that.

      Maybe the government should be able to seize guns. But they pay you $100/day per gun until either they return your guns or your trial is concluded. No charges/trial? Better return the guns quickly or the taxpayers will start asking questions.

      Red flag orders should be rare anyway, so it won’t cost much if used properly. And it solves the problem of using them to punish people you don’t like — who wants to give their enemy money? And it solves the problem of long delays for justice — courtroom calendars will all of a sudden free up when they are paying for each day of delay. They also won’t “lose” your guns, either.

  9. avatar TheUnspoken says:

    “Democrats said the bill could help prevent mass shootings and said similar laws have worked well in 17 other states.”

    Meaning they have successfully taken the guns away from hundreds, maybe thousands of people who have committed no crime, and so far, those non-criminals have continued to commit no crimes. Maybe they would have, maybe not, no one will ever know, but good to do, just in case, right? Gotta “do something, ” and this one is nice because since it is all theoretical pre-crime you don’t have to deal with inconvenient facts to justify it.

    1. avatar Barnbwt says:

      FL has executed thousands of confiscations…crime rate, mass shooting or otherwise, hasn’t changed accordingly. THOUSANDS of would-be shooters each year, they say. Yet no change in the stats; every last one a false positive, apparently.

    2. avatar Someone says:

      Funny how the leftists don’t try to emulate states with constitutional carry. After all, it have worked well in 17 other states.

      1. avatar Dude says:

        Virginia wants to emulate states with higher homicide rates.

  10. avatar Chief Censor says:

    They used the killing of a law enforcement officer to pass the bill.

    They don’t want those people saying they will fight the government with deadly force to be armed. Red flag laws is gun confiscation powers for the government. It has nothing to do with your ex wives.

    During the Virginia lobby day attendees were being facial scanned and cell phones were being tapped. Now there is a huge list… Don’t be surprised when the government knocks on your door in the future, if you live in a state with red flag laws, if you continue with the boogaloo rhetoric. They already went a knocking on doors of people they thought were dangerous in Virginia (someone recorded their interaction with the “oath keepers”).

    The Virginia government was arguing that law enforcement may not have initially wanted red flag laws, but once they got that power they used it to great effect and are happy to have been given it.

    Where is the NRA? Doesn’t matter… You can see what a local gun rights organization and the GOA can do without the NRA. You can clearly see the difference between the NRA’s gathering and the VCDL/GOA’s.

    1. avatar kahlil says:

      This is exactly why the crazy talk of the next civil war or “keep your powder dry” needs to be used cautiously, if at all. Why give the ones that want to limit 2A rights ammunition to take your guns/rights? it is almost like those claiming they’ll open fire on any cop trying to take their guns are wanting a conflict. Childish and shortsighted.

      1. avatar Hush says:

        Kahlil is giving good advice. What ever your thoughts are it is best to keep them to yourself. Broadcasting one’s thought pertaining to action of some sort under certain circumstances can and will be held against you in a court of law. Take Miranda rights seriously and remain silent keeping your thoughts to yourself before and after any shooting event. Living and regretting words spoken in the past cannot be a fun exercise.

        1. avatar Ragnar says:

          Some dead guys may not agree with keeping your intentions a secret:

          When once a Republic is corrupted, there is no possibility of remedying any of the growing evils but by removing the corruption and restoring its lost principles; every other correction is either useless or a new evil. – Thomas Jefferson

          Guard with jealous attention the public liberty. Suspect everyone who approaches that jewel. Unfortunately, nothing will preserve it but downright force. Whenever you give up that force, you are inevitably ruined. – Patrick Henry

          If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude than the animated contest of freedom – go home from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains sit lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen! – Samuel Adams

          The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants. – Thomas Jefferson

    2. avatar Southern Cross says:

      Not hard to match scanned faces to driver’s license records and tagged for follow up if anything else noted.

      1. avatar Chief Censor says:

        Modern DMV machines scan your face, it’s not simply a photograph for your license. The social credit score system has already been created for Americans. Do not be surprised when more states pass laws against covering your face to hide your identity.

        People are silly enough to allow corporations to scan their iris and fingers to unlock their phone.

        The future is now.

  11. avatar Hannibal says:

    Will this galvanize the electorate in Virginia and lead to an overwhelming turnout in rural areas?

    Probably not. The reason ‘red flag laws’ are so pernicious is because they don’t effect the average gun owner’s life at all.

    Until they do, of course.

    1. avatar Phil Wilson says:

      Exactly. Most probably won’t even be aware of the new laws.

    2. avatar Chief Censor says:

      What I saw at Virginia’s lobby day was a lot of outsiders coming to protest Northam. The majority seemed to be from other states. Most of those that were from Virginia didn’t vote. The crowd was mostly older.

      So, what does that mean? Logic says Virginia is going down in flames while a few scream. The laws will pass and law enforcement will do their job. VCDL and GOA will try to sue in a futile attempt to save Virginia. Years later another election will happen with Democrats coming up against weak opposition.

      1. avatar Dude says:

        Did you take a poll?

        1. avatar Chief Censor says:

          If you ask people who went around interviewing the crowd they will tell you that most of the people they talked to were from other states. They couldn’t fill the capital grounds even after the government limited the area.

          It’s nice to see outsiders coming in, but that won’t save Virginia from itself.

        2. avatar Someone says:

          @Chief
          They couldn’t fill the capital grounds BECAUSE the government limited the area. Only disarmed people were allowed to enter the corral. Most refused to be disarmed and stayed outside.

      2. avatar Aaron says:

        you are full of it, doubt you were there.

  12. avatar Erik in AZ says:

    Meanwhile, they voted against a bill that would extend the sentence criminals get when they are convicted of crimes with firearms. So much for sensible gun laws that will stop crime!

    The democrats are effing hypocrites and liars.

    1. avatar Chief Censor says:

      It’s not a crime to have a firearm. Don’t make it one just because you want someone to get a longer sentence.

      Each crime should be judged for what it was and punishment befitting.

      When Republicans call for extreme mandatory punishments they appear to others as a police state loving group who wants brown and black people to be put in prison for life, then they can be put into slavery under the 13th Amendment. Statistically those are the people who will get charged and convicted for those crimes. Democrats will point out most of the people calling for such laws are white Republican men and they will point out how white Republicans complain about minorities’ children committing crimes because they lack fathers in their homes. Well, how did the father end up in prison for life under a gun charge?

      Instead of arguing for the life imprisonment of those that commit crimes with guns you should call for proper justice befitting the crime. Then give the person an opportunity to reform their life for their sake and their families. Christians would not turn their back on a person that needs saving. America should try to fix families so crimes won’t happen in the first place.

      When laws past outlawing the guns you own guess what will happen to you under your idea of justice. Well, a very long prison sentence for gun crimes. Guess what is going to happen to your young children after you get put in a cage for the rest of their childhood.

      1. avatar Sam Allen says:

        Exactly right. I’ve got plenty of friends who could get stopped and searched with a dime bag of weed and face way harsher sentences. Why? The gun and the drug should be totally separate charges. I don’t touch the shit, but come on…

        1. avatar Chief Censor says:

          Imagine how many men wouldn’t be in a cage if there wasn’t prohibition laws for adults. Violent crime is going down in America, yet the prison population is still very high.

          What kind of Republican wants to limit freedom and liberty? Prohibition laws go against liberty and leads to the removal of freedom and sometimes life.

        2. avatar Dude says:

          Possession of a joint will get you a slap on the wrist (if even that) almost everywhere. In the 2-3 states that are super strict, maybe be aware of the local laws, and if you can’t live your life without drugs, then move somewhere else.

        3. avatar Southern Cross says:

          CC, it is because prisons are a growth industry.

  13. avatar LifeSavor says:

    This is going to test the 2A sanctuary positions most VA counties have taken. If LEOs refuse, en masse, to enforce these laws, the Dems in Richmond will escalate and do all they can to punish non-compliant police. Then, the LEOs protect each other…it will be interesting to see where this leads.

    Of course, that is assuming law enforcement non-compliance. Jobs, pensions, could be on the line.

    Then again, it could be dangerous to confiscate firearms.

    I have to think the police do not like the situation the Dems in Richmond have forced upon them.

  14. avatar Tec's Dad says:

    deocrits do not understand what a “representative” means…they are self serving communists….ballot box, jury box, cartridge box… you choose it. we will oblige….

  15. avatar GS650G says:

    My state has a red flag law. I keep to myself and don’t get into discussions at work. Wife and I get along fortunately and I don’t have any crazy liberal relatives. So I don’t worry about the state booting the door. But the odd thing is an agency could decide to troll gun buys and 4473 checks then decide I’ve too many guns. Or just be a R in a blue state. This law is there for future options and we all know it.

    1. avatar Phil Wilson says:

      “This law is there for future options and we all know it.”

      ^This. Even of some (hell, even most) of the people pushing the law have good intentions.

    2. avatar gene says:

      Unless, like in NY, the mere purchase of ammunition is sufficient: “Evidence of recent acquisition of a firearm, rifle, shotgun or other deadly weapon or dangerous instrument, or any
      ammunition therefor”

      Oh, also the violation of other ERPOs count… yes… if you violate ERPOs, you can have another ERPO against you…

      – “A violation or alleged violation of an Order of Protection”
      – “A history of a violation of an Extreme Risk Protection Order”

      https://www.nycourts.gov/legacypdfs/forms/erpo/Application_Temporary_ERPO_(UCS-6341)_fillable.pdf

      1. avatar JP Ruiz says:

        So owning a gun and/or buying a gun makes you a risk and therefore you need to have your guns confiscated from you (self fulfilling prophecy).

        It’s ok though; The Scumbag Maoist and Stalinist Progressive f***-ups are honest when they say “no one wants to take your guns”.

    3. avatar Sian says:

      Things like red flag laws enable and encourage self-censoring, a top tactic of the statists to maintain control.

    4. avatar uncommon_sense says:

      GS650G,

      My state has a red flag law. I keep to myself and don’t get into discussions at work. Wife and I get along fortunately and I don’t have any crazy liberal relatives. So I don’t worry about the state booting the door.

      So, your state’s Red Flag law suppresses free speech: it enables coworkers and crazy liberal relatives to send government after you and cost you significant amounts of time and money if you express the “wrong” politics.

      It requires a significant amount of time and money proving your innocence for something that has not actually happened. And the mere application of a Red Flag order (regardless of the outcome) could cost the subject of the order their job or business.

      For these reasons alone, Red Flag orders are obscene and should never be enacted much less used/enforced.

  16. avatar Dan W says:

    Does anyone else see the obvious danger of having the police going to a known location to do something unconstitutional on flimsy possibly anonymous evidence?

    1. avatar Dude says:

      This one is a little different. You go to court first where the prosecutor has to prove that you’re a risk. The judge can then give an order that lasts up to 6 months. You can turn the firearms over to someone other than law enforcement, if they’re approved.

      1. avatar Dude says:

        So you would be aware of the order before law enforcement shows up.

  17. avatar conrad says:

    I had a neighbor who was a perfect church going victim, sweetness and light with a female following in the neighborhood. She and her husband wanted a piece of our property (adverse possession), and they wanted us dead, or in jail to get it. They destroyed our fences, planted stuff on our land, and accused me of pointing guns at them (which never ever happened), she assaulted me three times, and lied, lied, lied. Had these red flag laws been in place at that time I would have lost my stuff, my wife would have lost her security clearance at work and we would have had to move to another State. I am grateful for the discretion of multiple Sheriff’s Deputies who visited us for her complaints, and the Judges who saw to the heart of the matter at hand.
    Let me tell you in no uncertain terms, there are people out there who are absolutely innocent, we were, but nobody will believe that because you’re in the system.
    If they can pass Laws protecting “even one child” then they can refrain from passing laws that will totally destroy entire families.
    There is never a rationale good enough to deny a person their Rights, but there will always be ways to leverage ones self into a situation to prevent innocents from being harmed.

    1. avatar Sam Allen says:

      I don’t doubt that at all. I wish people would realize what a problem that becomes when dear leader is the one pointing the finger. Oh how we forget history.

    2. avatar Sian says:

      Your story makes a valuable point.

      Red flag laws assume and require good faith in both the complainer and the enforcer.

      In practice neither of these is reliable.

  18. avatar Jay in Florida says:

    Resist
    No due process. d\
    Don’t give an inch, take some of them with you.
    Might change a few libitard minds when they are in the way of some lead.
    Then whats left of the folks in Virginia get off your butts.
    Vote them out and change the laws back.
    If the 22K that showed up Monday had all voted. None of this would be happening now the Dimwits would have won nothing..

    1. avatar Sam Allen says:

      Laws rarely go in reverse unfortunately.

    2. avatar conrad says:

      An attendee did (what I thought to be) a good analysis of the area and determined that 100 to 110K showed up. It was dRATS and dPRESS who minimized the numbers.

  19. avatar Sam Allen says:

    Notice how soldiers all have PTSD today? That’s a back door to push gun control. Think about it.

    1. avatar Chief Censor says:

      Iraq/Afghanistan vets have been saying it for many years. Do not label their trauma as a disorder/disease because it’s normal to be troubled by war. They are not crazy people that need their rights removed. They fought under the false notion it was for human rights and the defense of America. Now their government wants to remove them of their human rights because they no longer want to fight for the government.

  20. avatar Shire-man says:

    Surprise!
    Every face scanned and every cell phone pinged in the area of the demonstration gets a red flag.
    You get a red flag. And you get a red flag. Everyone gets a red flag!!!!!!

    1. avatar Chief Censor says:

      I don’t understand why people willfully continue to use a spy device all the time after being aware how it’s being used against them. At least pass some laws against corporations and government from using your cellphone as a spy/monitoring device.

      I remember some people I knew had a GPS tracker on their ankle. They were monitored all day and were only allowed to go to certain locations at certain times. Obviously they hated the government watching their every move. Now 99.9% of Americans have their own GPS device the government (and corporations) use to watch them.

      The government is even building DNA databases to go along with the facial, body, finger scans. If they can’t do it themselves they get the data from corporations that do it for them. For instance, the sister of the Youtube CEO runs a DNA collection business for ancestry database creation, she gives the government access to that DNA and identifying info.

      America needs to pass privacy laws to stop the tracking, the scanning, the spying, etc. Americans are supposed to be secure in their persons, houses, papers and effects.

  21. avatar RedRed says:

    As is usual for these stories, we are never shown any links allowing us to read the bill OR see how our Virginia Senators voted. The press is less than useless. With the internet, this should be easy. Without a bill number, it is not so easy.

    1. avatar Chief Censor says:

      SB 240.

    2. avatar Dude says:

      They voted strictly along party lines.

  22. avatar Prndll says:

    This had to be expected.

  23. avatar J says:

    Did anyone living in Virginia expect anything else? They said they were going to take our 2nd Amendment rights away and this is just the start for Virginians or anyone living in a Democratic controlled state.

  24. avatar Seizure Doc says:

    Go after them Virginia. Make a “red flag” complaint about every gosh darned liberal who owns a gun. “He makes me afraid.” And then report every gang banger and criminal too. The police may be brave coming to my house to take my guns but how about 1000 times in the hood ? We will see how anxious they are to enforce this. Tie up the entire court system with thousands of these cases. What is the average time before a good citizen can get his firearms back from a questionable accusation ? 6-12 months I hear. Make them choke on their own rules. That is from Rules For Radicals I believe. Use the rules against them.

    1. avatar Cowgirl says:

      Excellent idea. But I’m afraid the police would just ignore the calls for the real criminals. Especially if they are gangs. It’s definitely worth a try. I’m so glad that I don’t live anywhere near the east coast or the west coast.

  25. avatar MDH says:

    One more conservative justice, and we can get started restoring the Constitutional rights of all Americans. Two, and we can start sending pro 2nd Amendment cases to the supremes on a conveyor belt.

    1. avatar Dude says:

      It feels like we’re on the verge of getting at least one. If you thought the last confirmation was a circus, then just wait. They’ll be fighting tooth and nail on this one.

    2. avatar UpInArms says:

      The name that comes up most often for RBG’s replacement is Amy Barrett. She’s young — in her 40s I think — Catholic, mother of four, and a strict constructionalist. The Democrats will have a very difficult time doing to her what they did to Kavanaugh. They can’t come down on her too hard because she’s a woman, and they can’t leave themselves open to being anti-Catholic (still the largest single religious group in the US). On the other hand, they will go to the wall to protect Roe v. Wade. It will be interesting to see how they play it.

      1. avatar Cowgirl says:

        Don’t think for a second that they wouldn’t come down hard on her because she’s a woman…..the democrats will stop at nothing to get their way, no matter who is in their way.

      2. avatar MICHAEL A CROGNALE says:

        There is not a doubt in my mind that when Amy is nominated they will pay someone to come in and lie about her. I suspect that she will be accused of having an affair with either a man or a woman. Someone will come forward and lie about it the way those women lied about Kavanaugh. One woman actually admitted that she didn’t even know him but lied just to try to keep him off the court. Nothing happened to her.

        I would like to see Roberts resign and have Trump nominate her for Chief Justice.

    3. avatar Cowgirl says:

      When that day comes, it will be the second largest American celebration ever, the first was when President Donald Trump was elected.

  26. avatar possum and the Coons of Doom says:

    Lawman,,,,,, you know you look a lot younger then me aaaaand I’d hate to shootzen a baby, So don’t bring your face around here in the morning. /Oh sorry Jefferson Airplane just popped into my head.

  27. avatar Sian says:

    “Democrats said the bill could help prevent mass shootings and said similar laws have worked well in 17 other states.”
    It’s led directly to the deaths of at least 2 men who were no danger to anyone and so far as I know not prevented a single mass shooting.

    “Democrats said the bill had been carefully crafted to preserve due process and protect individual rights.”

    Red flag laws are by definition an abrogation of due process and tramples on at least 2nd and 4th amendment rights, based on hearsay of others.

    Of course anything leading with “Democrats said” is by default a lie.

    1. avatar Dude says:

      It appears this one was written “better” than the ones you’re referencing. You show up at court and the prosecutor has to prove you’re a threat.
      P.S. I’m not defending this.

      1. avatar UpInArms says:

        In other words, it’s still a turd, it just stinks a little less.

  28. avatar Anymouse says:

    Colorado had a red flag law for 9 days before its first abuse. A woman filed against the officer that shot her son in July 2017. The DA vouched for the cop and the order was denied.

  29. avatar Ronald West says:

    If the number of people out number the house, let the governor know if he attempts to pass a ban law on guns rights his ass is out the door and anyone else who stands with him, and not at the end of his term but immediately, file a injunction to have him removed from office ,you know and I know a good investigation would show ALOT of dirt,on a slime bag like him ,.

    1. avatar UpInArms says:

      Here’s a thought — once we get past this shit-show impeachment, Donnie is going to be out for a little revenge. He’s already weighed in on the Virginia situation. Maybe he’ll throw a few indictments in Ralphie’s direction for civil rights violations?

      Just dreamin’ …

  30. avatar JusDaFax says:

    Just have a big rally where all the tan pants cosplayers can strut their latest gun gear and hold cutesy signs in support of trans men and diversity.

    Alot easier than stopping illegal migrants from entering your state and voting in Democrats who vowed to ban guns.

  31. avatar Jim Bullock says:

    Protests, lobbying, sanctuary towns cities n counties, direct oposition by their own law enforcement…

    Well, it’s obvious who Gov Blacface and The Authoritarians think their constituency are not. (Support them accordingly.)

    1. avatar Jim Bullock says:

      “Gov Blackface n Authoritah: — Bad jam band.

  32. avatar The Truth About The Virginia Election says:

    For those discussing the Virginia election, you should know that throughout the Obama years both illegal aliens, and “refugees” were heavily settled in Virginia. Lots of leftist government employers and contractors were encouraged to settle in Virginia. Several Maoist communist organizations funded by the Chinese government poured tons of money into drives to get the illegals, and refugees to vote and vote democrat. Meanwhile the voting districts were redrawn by a California communist to favor democrats and handicap republicans or anyone else. On top of that Bloomberg poured tons of money in to democrat candidates campaigns.

    The republicans didn’t run anyone in many of the races because they didn’t stand a chance in hell in gerrymandered districts full of immigrants and they knew it. Why waste the resources? They concentrated on races where they had a chance.

    Of course, for all of their concern about non existent Russian meddling in our elections, the democrats have no issue at all with California and Chinese meddling in Virginia’s election since it favored them.

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