Red Flag laws.

[Sharpsburg]

And I am not sure what federal law you are referring to when you say you have to be found mentally insane. The ATF forms refer to prohibiting sales to those adjudicated mentally defective OR those committed to a mental institution.

Follow the laws in place instead of creating an over-broad power that gives the government the ability to target virtually anyone.

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.

And I am not sure what federal law you are referring to when you say you have to be found mentally insane. The ATF forms refer to prohibiting sales to those adjudicated mentally defective OR those committed to a mental institution. Current laws address both criteria.

Follow the laws in place instead of creating an over-broad power that gives the government the ability to target virtually anyone. I am shocked that you are an attorney (unless you simply have an agenda) if this is what you are advocating. I am also an attorney and would never even suggest such unfettered power which would almost certainly lead to horrible abuses by those in “power”.

Whether someone is a leftist antra person, a right wing wacko, or just a keyboard warrior on a gun forum, no one should be subject to what you are proposing.

 

[Fatal_Bert]

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.

So the avatars are screaming at you, I see. Does anyone else's avatars talk to you? Do you hear any other voices when nobody is physically around?

 

[Sharpsburg]

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.

Oh ok. Clearly mentally unstable has no overlap with “violent and threatening or suicidal”? Really? This is your logic? People get baker acted, committed, or whatever the term is from state to state every single day. Try again.

 

[Tactical Beaver]

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.

Again, my problem is the subjective language. Your scenario is way too broad and up to complete interpretation, which varies extremely ... not to mention, an example from a different country. Maybe he was weird. Maybe there were other signs. My point is, some people would call me weird (not many cause I’m a super duper cool guy ) But what if they did ... you going to take my guns away?? My answer to the OP is still NO, absolutely not. Change my mind.

 

[Tactical Beaver]

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.

Or they’re just talking **** to get a rise ... who draws the line? Joe X can say all that and mean it. What if I said it to piss someone off because of my 1A and have no intention of harming anyone. Who decides? How? Where do you draw the line?

 

[Tactical Beaver]

So the avatars are screaming at you, I see. Does anyone else's avatars talk to you? Do you hear any other voices when nobody is physically around?

My avatar screams I want to chew some ****ing wood and build a damn. Red Flag meh

 

[Lionheart]

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.

It's very ironic, laughable actually, that you cite this incident as an example of why the US needs to abandon the rule of law. If I was your law school professor and you used this I would flunk you out of the class.

1) Canadian law doesn't apply to US citizens.
2) Even if you look over this obvious logical/legal flaw in your argument - it gets worse. Canadian law does not even recognize the citizens right to own a firearm. In fact, a Canadian gun permit is only issued after extensive background checks and a 28 day waiting period. So using the example of an avowed Canadian goth Satanist getting a gun legally actually argues against your call for more background checks in the US...since in your example Canada already had them and they didn't work after all.
3)What your example really proves is that no matter how many background checks, waiting periods or other Gestapo-like powers that you give to the government...crazies can still slip through the cracks. In fact, your example proves that all more government regulations will do is make it harder for innocent, law-abiding citizens to exercise their inalienable right to bear arms. In other words you will punish the innocent instead of the guilty.

What Canadian authorities could have done is put that obviously insane and evil sob in a dark cell where he belonged long before he ever acquired a gun. Go to the website he frequented...it's still there. https://vampirefreaks.com
Websites like this that glorify death, rape and are just plain evil...that's who spawns these sadistic killers.

 

[Lionheart]

Anybody who supports red flags laws that deny due process is crazy. Many of them are probably on Wellbutrin for depression...or maybe they were on Ridalin as a child. That makes them dangerous. And by their own definition deserving of a midnight knock on the door. Put that in your pipe and smoke on it.

 

[Bypass]

Yeah, but say there's "due process" and they still don't find a crime has been committed, but decide this guy is weird. Should they take the guns?

Yep. We are all weird in the eyes of the left.

 

[Bypass]

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.

Probably a liberal POS as well.