Raising Red Flags on Extreme Risk Protective Orders

Red Flag Gun Grab Laws
Raising Red Flags on Extreme Risk Protective Orders

Fayetteville, AR – -(AmmoLand.com)- Red flag laws, laws that allow the removal of guns from persons who have been declared by a court to be a danger to self or others, are the latest in the efforts of gun control advocates to reduce the number of firearms in private hands. The NRA has expressed some approval, depending on the exact nature of the laws, drawing the ire of gun rights supporters.

But hold on a minute you say. The calls for these laws have been a response to the fact that the Parkland shooter gave multiple signs that he was building up to a big crime, and he was not the only mass shooter to do that. The problem, of course, is that we do not have a Department of Pre-crimes—this bit of science fiction is unlikely to become a reality any time soon, and the idea of punishing people before they commit crimes is difficult to square with a free society in any case.

Difficult, but not impossible, however. After all, we have a court system that exists to address the more intractable conflicts, and in principle, they provide a fair resolution. But the caveat here is that the process itself must be balanced.

The concern here is that the system could be [or will be] abused. A false accusation can be the civil tort of defamation, or it can be a crime, depending on the context. In some divorce cases, they’re standard procedure. If, by contrast, anyone making a bogus charge of terroristic acts—called swatting, since the SWAT team may be sent to the scene—has committed a felony. Incidents of this are on the rise in New Jersey, for example, and a call to the Wichita, Kansas police claiming that a hostage situation was in progress resulted in an innocent person being killed. Cases like this illustrate the fact that gun owners are not paranoid to ask for details about proposed red flag laws.

What is going on here is typical of the proposals of gun control advocates, a scheme that sounds good to the uninitiated and that asks us to sign a blank check. I agree with them that if someone is making threats of violence or is abusing a domestic partner or similar, that person should not have guns, but I don’t go along with efforts to make the denial of gun rights a simple matter of filing a report with the police. Due process is as valuable a right as gun ownership or carry.

An acceptable red flag law would emphasize the presumption of innocence. The history of civil forfeiture cases reminds us that the government has taken property away from people who were doing nothing wrong and who are never convicted of any crime, and they often spend years trying to get that property back with the burden of proof being on them, not on the government. And false accusations should be treated as an attempt to deny a person’s civil rights and prosecuted.

But the goal of many gun control advocates is not to promote safety. It is instead an effort to remove as many guns from private hands as possible. This leaves reasonable people having to work things out for ourselves.


About Greg CampGreg Camp

Greg Camp has taught English composition and literature since 1998 and is the author of six books, including a western, The Willing Spirit, and Each One, Teach One, with Ranjit Singh on gun politics in America. His books can be found on Amazon. He tweets @gregcampnc.

  • 76 thoughts on “Raising Red Flags on Extreme Risk Protective Orders

      1. You do understand that these White House petitions are absolute nonsense, right?

        Instead, contact YOUR representative by e-mail, postal mail or phone! Be clear, precise and polite in your communication! Make sure you can deliver a reasonable argument!

    1. Since I like wolves, I must remark that this sinister Red Flag travesty is a prime example of “beware of jackals in sheeps’ clothing”. The maniacal, wild-eyed Leftists behind this are determined to “divide and conquer” by taking down gun owners a few at a time using unethical, unscrupulous police and Sheriff resources along with politicized courts. BEWARE!

    2. The problem is that they make this all Political( the Democrat party anti gun position) the courts and DA offices full of anti gunners. Under the Democrats idea of due process is done via SWAT teams breaking your door down at 5 AM. We have a new Gov and AG in Wisconsin and one of the first things they want to do is enact Red Flag Laws. Democrats are now the party of Anti gun laws no matter what how bad they are or unconstitutional they are.

      1. “we have to exert our brain-dead, commie, unconstitutional authority over you peons because we are superior beings & we don’t want any halt to our taxpayer-funded gold, platinum, & silver lifestyles”

        1. @ Willie D and Wild Bill Yea he has to have time to think of a reply or get permission before he can post anything to further his spout. Wild Bill, do you think the guy he was a newlywed with was bigger than him?
          LOL.

    3. Didn’t Ben Franklin once say something like: Those who would give up their freedom for a little security with have neither? On this parkland thing, there was ample opportunity to prevent and or stop it. So who is actually at fault? The shooter, the cops, the F.B.I., the school board and finally the “security guards”. Murder, accomplice to murder, incompetence, negligent manslaughter all come to mind as applicable charges for the above people. Instead, government comes up with overly vague new laws that effectively strip innocent people of their GOD given and constitutionally guaranteed rights without the slightest due process. No matter if good intentioned or not, these laws are not constitutional and they are not needed. Don’t get me wrong, if there is a mental situation or threats against someone then something has to be done and in this case in Fla. the shooter defiantly fit both bills. People who don’t fit these criteria are not guilty by definition and should not have their gear taken. The cops were called PRIOR, the F.B.I. was called PRIOR, the security guards were made aware of the kid PRIOR. They had their chance. They could have stopped the kid but they were derelict in their duty. They are ALL JUST AS GUILTY AS THE SHOOTER. Instead of being held accountable, their excuse is we need MORE LAWS? Appears to me these laws are just another way to disarm the public. Death by a thousand cuts, that is how they are taking our freedoms away. This is tyranny, this is treason. We used to hear about these kind of human rights abuses and violations in Russia, China, Rhodesia, Saudi Arabia etc. but now they are commonplace here in the U.S.A. I say punish the true criminals-not the innocent. The shooter, the feds, the cops, the school board and the security guards are the criminals not the poor guy who’s neighbor or in laws say they are scared of him because he is armed and he MIGHT do violence. Give up my rights, guns, ammo, high capacity magazines etc.? NUTS. You are out of your mind. America began to loose it’s morals many years ago. It started when an unrighteous judge made it so prayer was taken out of school. You might not remember this far back but what got kids in trouble back before that was chewing gum or talking out of turn in class! A bit different now isn’t it ! There are just ten basic rules for society and these also have been stripped out of schools and even government buildings ! Just think what a world it could be if everyone just lived by these ten, simple rules. You should not punish the innocent, you should punish the guilty–those that are guilty of righteous laws. There are laws that enslave men and there are laws that set men free. Either what we KNOW to be right, good and true IS right, good and true for all mankind-under GOD or there can be no hope and no freedom. As for government, there can be no justice when you hold no law higher than your own. I want peace, you want peace, I pray for peace but, there is a peace that can only be found on the other side of war. It has been that way through the ages. When government or insane, unreasonable people threaten liberty or peace we have the GOD given right to abolish that government and to fight against treasonous traitors and their enforcers. If the battle must come, I will fight it.
      Register your guns? A small history lesson here. Stalin registered guns in 1929–and then confiscated them. The result? TWENTY MILLION PEOPLE DIED. Hitler registered guns in 1938 and then confiscated them. The result? THIRTEEN MILLION PEOPLE DIED. Throughout world history, when weapons were banned, millions upon millions of people died. Only when a nation, a society, a people, a person is disarmed are they truly vulnerable. Those who are corrupt or just plain evil in authority or power will always take advantage of anyone they can and if they can disarm their targets, the easier it is to put those people into slavery. I have no intention of going out and harming anyone, likely you don’t either but surrender my means of self defense because some self-righteous idiot is scared of themselves, it just is not going to happen. Sooner or later those treasonous politicians and enforcement people are going to run across someone who is not going to surrender their gear-and win the fight. Some way, some how, it will make the news. The second battle of concord. Pray for peace. Stand your ground. Arm up, carry on.

    4. I wonder what would happen if a Red Flag was called on someone who did not have firearms. Further curious of what would happen if someone Red Flagged a non gun owner falsely claiming the person has hidden guns.

      1. Jack Mac, I had made a similar comment several weeks or more ago when the Maryland police killed one of their citizens during a “red flag” confiscation order. I believe in any state that these laws are passed, the politicians that passed these laws need to be targeted by their own laws. Maybe, but I doubt it, they would begin to understand.

    5. There are NO acceptable red flag laws! There are already laws on the books to do what the red flag laws say they will do, except the red flag laws are easier to abuse. Time to wake up and smell the bull manure.

    6. What am I missing? Initially, the problem was that proposed “red-flag” laws circumvented due process entirely, allowing police to wantonly confiscate firearms on-location. The onus/responsibility to reclaim the weapons would then require expensive legal efforts in a court, at a later time, by the victimized citizen. THAT is what made the proposals so horrible.

      Suddenly (and I cannot ascertain where this came from, exactly), the proposed “red-flag” laws are now being described – in articles like this one – as gun confiscation in instances where a citizen has already been “declared by a court to be dangerous.” Does this mean that “red-flag” law proposals are being re-written to 1) INCLUDE (rather than evade) due process, and 2) require police to obtain a court order before confiscation can occur? But if such proposals are NOT being re-written to include due process, why are they described as such (here and elsewhere)? Is this a typical liberal misinformation campaign (and if so, why are conservatives repeating it)? Overall… I’m confused.

      1. We already have confiscation laws that require due process. It’s called mental adjudication.

        Any red flag law proposal can still be done by people that might have a grudge against someone. People who defend these laws keep saying things like “but if the accusation is false the accuser can be gone after” however no one has answered (despite me asking every time it is brought up) how you can prove what someone else did or did not feel.

        In the end you’re still guilty until you prove your innocence, and hopefully you get at least a non gun hating judge, and hopefully you have enough money and time to fight the legal battle, which will assuredly be drug out as long as it can be.

      2. JoeUSooner, the red flag laws do not abide by due process. The only person in court are the police and maybe the accuser to state that the “firearm owner” is a “danger to self or others”. We know how well the process works by the recent murder by police of an accused.

        JMR explained the current proper process that gives due process. However, another point is that leaving a supposedly dangerous person on the street after seizing all his/her known firearms does not make that person nor anyone else safer. Half the suicides in the USA are by other than firearm, and after the first WTC bombing, OKC bombing, 9-11, etc., we know that firearms are wholly unnecessary to commit mass murder.

        1. Indeed, Remember the sudden uptick in “Mass Car rammings” a few years ago?

          One in particular came during the debate on “Refugees” when a refugee at Ohio State university back in 2016 by Abdul Razak Ali Artan, who used his car and a knife.

          A Red Flag would have left him on the street to perpetrate that crime.

    7. To build on what other posters have said, “Red Flag Laws” are a violation of the 6th Amendment wherein “… the accused shall enjoy the right to … to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the assistance of counsel for his defense.” Also the 2nd Amendment, “… the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed”, the 5th Amendment, “… nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use without just compensation”, and the 7th Amendment, “… where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved”. In other words, TOTALLY UNCONSTITUTIONAL and in violation of almost half the Bill O Rights!

      1. @1776Patriot

        And you forgot the other Commandment.. Thou Shalt not forget the 9th Amendment.

        There is also the issue of Preemption visa vis the Supremecy Clause, since the arguments made for them are that it is being done on a state by state level. The States do not have the authority to pass Red Flag Laws, plain and simple. 🙂 There is only one way they can do that, and to do it they would have to pass multiple amendments to the Constitution and then kill off anyone that resisted.

    8. Balance. There are mentally ill people out there that need help. Then there are those that appear mentally ill and are not. The citizen or cop cannot make that determination, but the public must be protected. The partial solution would be to have to every police department maintain an on-call panel of three psychiatrists, and let them make the determination if further care is required. Illegally seizing someone’s property is not the answer, especially if they are suspected of being mentally ill, as I would think that would only exacerbate their illness.

      1. You may want to take a look at the existing laws before creating new ones! What you describe is not needed! Look up “psychiatric hold”!

    9. This was written in 1990 , and is making more sense all the time … ” This is intended to foster a feeling of insecurity, which would lead the American people to voluntarily disarm themselves by passing laws against firearms. Using drugs and hypnosis on mental patients in a process called Orion, the CIA inculcated the desire in these people to open fire on schoolyards and thus inflame the antigun lobby. This plan is well under way, and so far is working perfectly. The middle class is begging the government to do away with the 2nd amendment.Author’s Note: I have found that these events have indeed happened all over the country. In every instance that I have investigated — the incident at the women’s school in Canada, the shopping center incident in Canada, the Stock- ton, California, massacre, and the murder of Rabbi Meir Kahane — the shooters were all ex-mental patients or were current mental patients who were ALL ON THE DRUG PROZAC! This drug, when taken in certain doses, increases the serotonin level in the patient, causing extreme violence. — ( Author William Cooper , Behold A Pale Horse )

    10. Heard on the news this morning. Stats show that more pedestrians are killed by larger vehicles , because they are larger.
      Suppose the control freaks will be wanting Red Flag Laws on people who own large vehicles .

    11. that’s what the rich want, a peoples revolution so they can swoop in and reap the whirlwind! people rights be damned and the poor who are thrown a bone fight over it; so to get more bones they serve their masters,

    12. Can we leverage this concept into over-reaching stupidity in the hopes of getting this stopped? Why stop with firearms? Why are knives, drugs, clubs/bats/hammers, bed sheets, autos, and more, not confiscated as well? Those are used to end lives.

      Better to address the accessories and not the core issue of the person needing help? Uncommon sense at it’s finest.

    13. I’m in this situation right now as we speak, I’m from Ct and my case is a disorderly conduct and assault 3rd been married for 21years and divorced for 2and a half year, happily divorced best thing in my life had my weapons over 15years, I’m now an unarmed citizen until my case is over..

    14. If we are to be like all the other Communist Country’s on this planet , then we are headed the right direction ? We might as well dye our flags all “RED” ? Like our Government likes the color anyways, Red Flag laws ?

    15. The Parkland shootings was the “set-up”. With the risk of being labeled a “nut-job”, I do not believe many of these shootings resulted in actual deaths. That being said, it is the Saul Alynski/communist/socialist set up of “Create Crisis – Offer solution – strip away Freedoms” – It has been happening on a regular basis for decades. It is the play book to destroy this country from within and if anyone believes politicians will stand-up to this, I have some ocean-front property in Montana I’d like to sell you.
      All “Red Flag Laws” are a violation of the 6th Amendment wherein “… the accused shall enjoy the right to … to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the assistance of counsel for his defense.”
      Red flag laws are secret as the accuser is anonymous and does have to face the accused. It is also a violation of bearing false witness against thy neighbor according to the Bible of which all common law is based, hence all laws stem from biblical law. They are a violation of all known laws preceding our set of laws derived historically.

      1. Mark R, one is not a nut -job by stating thinking of what can be thought. The Parkland murders were forewarned so a crisis did not need to be created, just allowed to happen.

    16. You are all preachin’ to the choir!
      The Red Flag Laws are just a way to circumvent the Second Amendment to The Constitution and disarm the American population. Once the guns are gone from civilian hands, the Globalists can complete the dismantling of our Rights and make us subservient to the Central Government, wherever “They” decide to place the capital city.
      The majority of citizens are just too busy trying to make ends meet and keep a roof over the family’s heads to be concerned about most of the laws being foisted upon us by politicians (all levels) and un-elected bureaucrats.
      The Revolution was fought over less oppression than we have today from our Federal Government.

    17. The creation of Extreme Risk Protection Orders (Red Flag Laws) began life after the Parkland incident, an incident that had nothing to do with lack of Red Flag Laws, but did have everything to do with lazy, irresponsible actions of the FBI and Broward County Sheriffs Department… and a little known written agreement between the School District and the Sheriffs Department, that the Sheriffs Department would not arrest or put pressure on the students of the district because it made the actual problems of the district and its students out in the public for all to see. I call it a Contract for Coverup. This is what caused Parkland.

      Tell me exactly when the police in any jurisdiction around the country worried about what they couldn’t/shouldn’t do, in the face of any situation where they could use their power to accomplish anything? Sorry, well-meaning lawmakers, the Parkland tragedy wasn’t caused by lack of laws, so let’s face the real issue of the proposed laws: Gun Control and Confiscations. We have a US Constitution in place that was drafted because of the forethought of our forefathers, who had the keen vision to into the future, to see exactly what’s happening now. The 2nd Amendment is there to protect us from any new laws that violate the “shall not infringe” part of that amendment.

      There needs to be ONE case sent to the Supreme Court, the definitive case that says NO MORE LAWS that infringe. This isn’t about hunting or sports shooting, this is about the government seizing power over its citizens after it has completely disarmed them. THIS IS WHY we have the 2nd Amendment and THIS IS WHY we need it.

      1. I am not a lawyer, as if I trust them. This is what I have learned through various publications.
        In the case of the FBI, Sheriff’s Dept. and the School Administrators INACTIONS ALLOWING a DISRUPTIVE individual to carry an IDENTIFIED RIFLE CASE into the school before the actual SLAUGHTER occurred is in part due to OBAMA’S “Promise” Fiasco.
        The FBI was warned PREVIOUSLY of the NAME of the SHOOTER and his intent to kill others.
        The Sheriff’s Department had visited the home of the shooter MULTIPLE times. Even the Parent warned the Sheriff. Even the brother warned the Sheriff.
        The School Administrators REFUSED, by inaction of suspensions of the shooter, to act upon the actions of the shooter by the dictates of the PROMISE PROGRAM.
        IF there were ever a LAW SUIT – – – THIS IS ONE.
        This PROVES what the SUPREME COURT JUDGES STATED; ” The Police ARE NOT responsible to defend or protect an individual. The DEFENSE is the RESPONSIBILITY of each individual American”.

    18. There should be NO compromise with such laws and victim disarming gun controllers who want them as these laws are an egregious violation especially when crime is already illegal. There’s nothing “red flag” about them when they actually eliminate due process. Illegal on its face.

      1. Agreed! For being the SECOND of the ENUMERATED RIGHTS listed in the first ten amendments, as to We the People had these RIGHTS BEFORE the Constitution was put onto “paper”, IT SURE IS INFRINGED!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
        When the Second Amendment is “whittled” down to nothing but a memory, that is when the First Amendment will DISAPPEAR.
        The DemocRATic communist/muslem/nwo party is trying their “best” to conquer America with their “limited blood letting” COUP.

        1. All the Rights are being hammered away! They all interlock to protect each other…This is why you see these 2nd Amendment Infringements that affect other Rights. and visa versa.

    19. Can’t you feel the walls closing in on gun ownership?? it’s like seeing a train at The end of the tunnel and you can’t get out of the wayIt’s all against the workingman -is too busy supporting the Tax systems, family and things that matter ,,to stand up and fight against these political slimeballs both the left and right ,that moves like deadly fog through the night/1776

    20. There will be red flag laws, partly because, as many 2A advocates rightly argue, most high profile shootings are by “crazy” people, who telegraphed their impending explosion. The gun community should get involved in how these laws are written or live with the consequences. Make false claims federal felonies under ATF, require confiscation reviews every 60 days, but do something.

      1. @DS …False claims are a federal offence . Witness the Wichita swatting case resulting in a death .. Barris plead guilty to 51 federal counts . Will be sentenced in march. You can google Wichita Ks. Swatting case for a full description.

      2. @DS…False claims are a federal offence . Witness the Wichita Ks. Swatting incident , barris pled guilty to 51 federal counts . You can Google Wichita Ks. swatting case for full details. He will be sentenced in march.

      3. @DS…Do something? Read Laddyboys response again he is exactly right. I read the report on Oboys promise also.
        The news shut it down , just like the first tape on the Vegas shooting , where the sound of the rate of fire sounded like a belt fed arm rather than a bumpstock . It to was covered up by the media. With a dishonest media you are only going to hear what the big money and socialist communists want’s you to hear , no matter what laws are on the books.

      4. We already have psychiatric hold laws! There are no new laws needed!

        As for making false claims federal felonies, you first would need to prove that a false claim was made. Good luck with that! How do you prove that someone’s feelings about another person were false?

        “Do something”: Right, because confiscating the Las Vegas shooter’s guns would have certainly stopped him from flying a private plane into the crowd. Makes totally sense, really! (The Las Vegas shooter had a pilot’s license and owned two planes.)

        “Do something”: Right, because confiscating the Parkland shooters guns would have been done with a red flag law, because using the existing Baker Act was not sufficient. Makes totally sense, really! (Several people, including the officer that did not respond during the shooting, recommended Baker Acting the shooter. The Coward County Sheriff’s Office refused. Instead, the shooter was made to sign a piece of paper, declaring that he is not mentally ill.)

        1. @CF: I stated all what you have said here last year when a certain pres. open his big mouth with the ‘”take them first” statement. Now let’s put it to music.

    21. We’ve seen what these activist did to Judge Kavanaugh, guilty first prove yourself innocent. Ford testified under oath she heard the two alleged assauters leaving down the stairs like ping pong balls, bouncing off the walls, so drunk, while she locked herself in bathroom sfter the “alleged” attack, (with no supporting testimony or evidence to the truth of her allegation). Why was she upstairs anyway? Did she know Kavanaugh before or any contact after? Did she hear them go up the stairs like ping pong balls too? How did these boys sneak up on her when bouncing off the walls, purportedly then shoving her into the bedroom? Did she scream where others downstairs could of come to see what was going on? She also testified she thought she was gonna be raped and murdered, yet she ran out of the house, leaving her best friend with these alleged rapists and murderers? How did she get home? Who picked her up? RFL already has and will continue to violate due process – on someone’s whim, you are guilty and must then prove your innocence at tremendous cost, mentally and financially! Just more evidence Due Process matters not to these activists, for as the speaker of the house recently stated, there will be collateral damamge perfecting their political agenda!

      1. @SK; Correct! Tell that to the man in Montgomery County in Maryland who was KILLED by the “police” while ENFORCING a RED FLAG CONFISCATION!

    22. The “red flag” is yet another attack on the 2nd Amendment. You LOSE your guns for at least a year. And you cannot defend yourself and ANYONE can say you are ” a threat to yourself or others”
      THAT is NOT America, that is Bolshevism with a new Mask.
      Why do you think democrats will NOT allow a wall to be built? For the same reason our immigration law was changed in 1965.
      To have a NEW PEOPLE, a people that DO NOT SUPPORT GUNS in the citizens hands. Just look at the polling data. Immigrants DO NOT support people owning guns, AT ALL.

      These are dark days and I don’t think 2nd Amendment folks realize what the rich and powerful plan. The fact of the matter is that the TRUTH does not matter. THEY want US disarmed. Why? Well let this Russian tell you it is one of those bits of writing that sets it all straight:
      http://english.pravda.ru/opinion/columnists/28-12-2012/123335-americans_guns-0/

      And it was written TO us by one who knows. If you don’t realize that the literal descendants of the TEAM he is talking about are in HIGH PLACES in our nation, well…

      1. @ JA I read the article you referenced here and all I can say is that history is our best teacher and this proves it. The Russian population went through what we are on the threshold of including the lying to and killing of those that could be a problem to them.Progressives need the power to rethink what they are trying to do because many of them will find their efforts will end up in their demise because they will no longer be useful idiots.

    23. When a perp is in the act of a crime, I don’t go to the dictionary and advise law enforcement a RFL is in progress. As for guns being in the equation, I have called 911 three different times. All where before the term RFL was born. The GWD.

      1. GWD, and did the police come and take his firearms or arrest the person and for what? There are already laws that make planning a crime illegal and subject to incarceration. If the person is dangerous, taking his/her firearms doesn’t make the person not dangerous. And in incidents from 9-11 forward, show us that dangerous people are dangerous even without firearms.

        Taking all the “known” firearms from someone won’t stop someone intent on harming themselves or others. Half the suicides in the USA are by other than a firearm. In Japan all, but a very few suicides are by other than a firearm – and at a higher rate than in the USA. Using your logic having firearms prevents suicide, since we have a lower ratio.

        1. @Heed, How all knowing and wise of the green rat fink to know all the circumstances and facts before an act is even done. The argument only works in a boxed in hypothetical, like a hollywood movie or the libtard world.
          I am so sure that law enforcement would want his “advice”.

          1. If you cower down in a similar situation and not report to authorities of a crime in progress, then I suggest you join the dark side. That way you will feel safer and not be so afraid.

            1. @ Green Weenie Dog I would say, having read your irritating posts that you, most likely, pissed people off to the point they thought about putting you out of your misery. In turn you turned them in because you were scared you might get hurt. The police dispatcher probably thought oh no not this nutcase again. Your explanation of the circumstances points out that you are scared of guns and will call the police when you see one.

            2. @Tcat, it amazes me that the sniveling little socialist does not even realize the errors in his logic. He thinks that it is proper that his will be imposed on others, and that using government to impose his will is acceptable.
              What he does not realize is that if the socialists take over, he won’t be part of the ruling class. When he is no longer useful or asks for his fair share, they are going to end him.

            3. TGWD, your initial post did not state a crime was in progress. You stated “before” it occurred. Also, you never stated what happened when you called, as I requested. As WB stated, you are full of bs. Oddly, you keep being called on your bs, but continue to post it anyway, as if anyone here believes an iota of your posts. You are just a shill for the antis and a poor foil for anyone here.

            1. Heed the Call,
              Did not have to witness that a crime was in progress. Read again what I typed out. Never heard back why my friend’s brother was arrested after only a few hours after getting out of jail. Never followed up.

            2. @GWD

              Previously, you stated that an entirely different crime was being committed, and that you had suspicion of intent. However, the circumstances there already involved an act, not the one you felt was going to happen, but one already covered by law.

              The problem here is you are intentionally twisting it to state a need or support for Red Flag violations of the Constitution, when existing and constitutional law covered it just fine. You are twisting a narrative to advance your own personal agenda and lying in the process. On top of that, you couldn’t even seem to find the correct spot to reply to the person in question you intended.

              We know who and what you are, and your bs is never going to sway anybody here. We smelt you coming hundreds of miles away.

      2. You appear to hang out with a lot of criminals or people that are acquainted with the criminal element and are in a position to snitch on their activities, why is that?

        1. Revelater, You must have gotten me confused with someone else, or dreamt it. Or, you are intentionally trying to skewer the issue. I have not wavered from what I stated long ago. May have typed it with different words, but the same incident. Never mentioned the other two.

          1. @GWD

            Love that you cant reply directly and you are putting it under the wrong individuals’ comments in the hopes it will slip by unnoticed and unchallenged. What a cowardly tactic.

            No, I stated the correct incident, and your position that you were trying to advance. No confusion at all. The original question to you when you stated that story was that if the law worked as intended, then there is no need for Red Flag laws which had no business in your story to begin with.

            You avoided answering that and instead went on a rant that you knew better and that Red Flag Laws were coming in spite of the multiple violations to the Constitution they present. In further arguments you stated the Constitution meant nothing to you, before getting called out for what you claimed at which point you ran away again and moved onto a different article. You Lost your argument there as well, tucked tail after wetting yourself and took off to hide again.

            No confusion at all. You are still the same liar, the same hypocrite, the same Coward who can’t answer one simple little question that I have been asking from the start when I laid out a point by point analysis of why there is no such thing as a “Common Sense” gun control law. We know you for what you are, and you’re attempt at lying about that isn’t going to help you either. The ol’ “My twitter account got hacked, it wasn’t me!” defense is not going to work.

            1. Revelater,
              To say once more, you are seriously confused. You questioned me about a specific threat I mentioned some time ago. I stand by my commitment for safer more peaceful place to live. I have always been viewed as one who truthful and direct. Have a restful night.

            2. No, You have not always been viewed as truthful and direct.

              We have multiple pages of comments and arguments made against you here on ammoland which disprove that.

              As stated before, you are not talking about peace or freedom. You still have not answered the question of what you will do to people who refuse to comply with your totalitarian agenda. What you are talking about is not safety, its an illusion of safety.

              I can fortunately cite the places where you made and lost those arguments previously. No confusion, they are still there

              You are still the same hypocrite, the same liar, and the same coward. Crying “Confusion” is never going to wipe your history here clean.

      3. To the ‘Fink’! I think it’s time for Ammoland to let you go. They should LOG your IP and consider you a REAL serious inherent threat to everyone and the 2A community here.
        They have the right and I believe it to be the right thing to do.

        Call it.Ammoland’s Anti-Socio/Communist Policy.

        1. The ultra right holy radicals will never silence me and others that strive for peace with law abiding citizens, regardless of their political position. Additionally, we will not shut our doors, or turn away in fear to criminal activity, or criminal intent. Say something, do something.

          1. We’re hearing that sucking noise again Fluid in the void. Slurp, slurp!!!!… Gurgle, gurgle, gurgle!!!… GULP!!!

          2. @GWD

            You don’t strive for “Peace.” You strive for peace like Nazi Peace, or Pax Romana.

            The idea is that as long as all comply with your agenda there is “Peace”. If any resist, if any cry foul then you label it as something to be fought, justifying your use of force to steal, murder, and oppress any who disagree with you.

            You are a hypocrite and a liar. We are never going to comply with your Violations of the Constitution.

        2. Nonsense! The green rat fink is great entertainment! Like the part about not getting silenced. If they are successful in their takeover, his own democrat national socialists will silence him. His coveted position of county commissar is already reserved for someone else.

          1. Yep. I think they already have his efficiency apartment chosen, at least until the gulag is ready and he has outlived his usefulness ratting on Second Amendment supporters to his secret police handlers.

            There will be no Dacha waiting for him.

    24. And again, I ask, how would one prove in a court of law, that someone’s else’s feeling that someone was a threat to himself or others false?

      1. Are not the Cities/State/Federal/Military LE Arsenals in direct contradiction of the ‘Red Flag Laws’ that they wish to enforce?
        When they go in they shoot up everything and everybody (or run and hide)… its almost like they were trained to show ‘WHTFTU’.

    Leave a Comment 76 Comments

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