Red Flag laws.

[MRH]

Pretty sure you already know where I stand in regards to red flag Flaws. Extremely dangerous waters. Treaders gonna tread.

 

[Fatal_Bert]

If they're gonna take the guns away from domestic abusers the police force is going to be cut almost in half.

 

[palmettomoon]

You really a lawyer? Damn.

He can be yours too if you get in trouble with the law over guns. Makes you all warm and fuzzy inside just thinking about it, doesn't it?

 

[Sharpsburg]

For an example of a person who was weird, but who violated no laws and DIDN'T make any terroristic threats regarding specific people or institutions, see this article about Kim Gill Singh, a "goth" young man from Canada whose morbid fascination with death and frequent glorification of violence and grizzly murders & the macabre had a bunch of his friends and acquaintances wondering about him.

But nobody could do anything because he hadn't made a specific death threat to a specific victim.

He was obviously mentally unstable, and should've been barred from owning any sort of weapon, but the legal system didn't have any "red flag laws" in place at the time.

He later bought guns, posed with his guns (aiming them into the camera in a menacing way) all over social media, joined a shooting club to practice with the guns, and then went to his local university and murdered a bunch of people there before killing himself.

https://www.nytimes.com/2006/09/15/world/americas/15canada.html

IF YOU SAY that unless and until a person actually commits a crime that would disqualify him from owning guns, the government should stay out of his life and let him do what he pleases ... you're saying Mr. Gill has a license to commit a murder-suicide any time he wants and without any interference.

If someone is “obviously mentally unstable” (your words), every state has laws to commit a person. Period. Once adjudicated mentally unstable with proper due process, then take the guns and enforce CURRENT FEDERAL LAWS.

Otherwise, you seem to be supporting the position that the government should be able to take guns from anyone they suspect to be mentally unstable—whatever that happens to be defined as based on the powers in control at the time. From what I am reading lately, any Trump supporter could be a red flag person.

You should be ashamed of yourself for advocating such nonsense.

 

[Fatal_Bert]

If someone is “obviously mentally unstable” (your words), every state has laws to commit a person. Period. Once adjudicated mentally unstable with proper due process, then take the guns and enforce CURRENT FEDERAL LAWS.

Otherwise, you seem to be supporting the position that the government should be able to take guns from anyone they suspect to be mentally unstable—whatever that happens to be defined as based on the powers in control at the time. From what I am reading lately, any Trump supporter could be a red flag person.

You should be ashamed of yourself for advocating such nonsense.

He's already suggested in this thread that someone with an avatar pointing the middle finger shouldn't have guns. And based on his body of work around here I don't think he was kidding.

 

[GAgunLAWbooklet]

If someone is “obviously mentally unstable” (your words), every state has laws to commit a person. Period. Once adjudicated mentally unstable with proper due process, then take the guns and enforce CURRENT FEDERAL LAWS.

The current federal laws are worded to disqualify people who have been declared to be insane. Or incapable of handling their own affairs, living independently. Not people who are paranoid, unstable, irrationally angry, or "just ain't right in the head."

Another set of laws can only be invoked if the person presents a clear and present danger to himself or others. That's also a high standard to meet. I think red flag laws should aim lower, thus [legally] disarming some people who are too crazy to have modern firearms, but aren't so crazy that they need to be locked in a padded cell in a strait jacket.

 

[Sharpsburg]

The current federal laws are worded to disqualify people who have been declared to be insane. Or incapable of handling their own affairs, living independently. Not people who are paranoid, unstable, irrationally angry, or "just ain't right in the head."

Another set of laws can only be invoked if the person presents a clear and present danger to himself or others. That's also a high standard to meet. I think red flag laws should aim lower, thus [legally] disarming some people who are too crazy to have modern firearms, but aren't so crazy that they need to be locked in a padded cell in a strait jacket.

If they are “clearly mentally unstable” they can be hospitalized against their will. Every state has such laws. Follow the current laws. Once a state commits you based on your “clearly mentally unstable” situation, why wouldn’t the federal laws kick in? If you are not mentally unstable, you should not have your constitutional rights thrown in the toilet.

 

[GAgunLAWbooklet]

He's already suggested in this thread that someone with an avatar pointing the middle finger shouldn't have guns. And based on his body of work around here I don't think he was kidding.

It's one factor, one bit of evidence to take into consideration, when you want people's first image of your online presence to be somebody screaming F******* Y******! Ditto for having a skull tattoo on your face, choosing "Walking DeathDealer" as your screen name, and bragging how you dip your hollowpoint bullets in your own feces and seal the tips with wax to make them more lethal to the people you'll shoot. All are signs of people who have mental problems.

 

[palmettomoon]

Hmmm....a lawyer and a psychiatrist.....hmm....

With folks like you looking out for us I feel safer already.

 

[GAgunLAWbooklet]

If they are “clearly mentally unstable” they can be hospitalized against their will. Every state has such laws. Follow the current laws. Once a state commits you based on your “clearly mentally unstable” situation, why wouldn’t the federal laws kick in? If you are not mentally unstable, you should not have your constitutional rights thrown in the toilet.

You're wrong.
Look it up.
"Clearly mentally unstable" is not the current law. Google a Georgia Form 1013 snd read it for yourself. The person to be detained against their will and subject to a mental health evaluation must either be expressly violent and threatening, or suicidal, or they have to be so utterly brain dead that they cannot feed or clothe themselves.