Sen. Lindsey Graham is drafting 'red flag' gun confiscation bill. Every right has its limit say Grah

[338 dude]

"I understand what you are saying but if you are threatening some one the police could already take action before red flag laws. That is intent to action and enhances the probable cause, Red Flag laws unconstitutionally goes beyond that. And now shovels are weapons? WOW! " No.....that's not correct and not what I am saying. LE cannot take action to disarm anyone unless there is (at minimum) a reasonable suspicion or probable cause to believe that a person is hurting someone or planning to hurt someone. The only time that law enforcement can go outside the scope/guarantees/perimeters of the U.S. Constitution are in cases where "exigent circumstances" are present. And.....even then exigent circumstances fall within the purvue/guarantees of the U.S. Constitution. By this what I am writing here is that if special circumstances, such as issues of public safety, Miranda and the 4th Amendment guarantees are abrogated; yet, these circumstances still fall within the purvues and protections of the U.S. Constitution. Thus meaning LE cannot go overboard while exercising exigent circumstances and going on a fishing expedition; PERIOD!! I understand the U.S. Constitution, I understand its protections (pro/con) and do not either want or need an lecture on the 1st, 2nd, 4th, 5th, 6th, 8th, 9th or 10th amendments. Nor do I intend to get in to a debate about the U.S. Constitution on this forum.

I knew that I was going to catch some flack with this posting when I wrote it! The point about the axes, shovels and machetes from crazy/angry people was making a point that not always are these laws used just for firearms, nothing more.; to read more than that into it, in my opinion, is extreme. Next I took an oath to to "Protect and to Serve" the citizens of the town that I worked in. And yes we do take firearms (and other weapons like axes, shovels and car keys) from people who are crazy and angry or angry acting crazy; that's what LE does to protect its citizens. This posting has nothing to do with 1st, 2nd, 4th, 8th, 9th and 10th amendments, it only has to do with red flag laws and nothing else! What I have written is that red flag laws do serve a purpose (other than to circumvent the 2nd amendment), they can help protect people in certain circumstances; and, something that you forgot before this attack is that I also see the propensity for the red flag laws to be abused by the anti's. I am a total supporter of the 2nd amendment, and I feel that every legal citizen who is entitled to AND...trained to carry/own a firearm ought to have and utilize that right.

An element of some of the guns laws and gun legislation is the fact that there are extremists (as well as political whores) on both sides of this fence. As a result neither side can sanely accomplish passing laws to protect the innocents' rights as guaranteed by 2nd amendment; and, at the same time pass laws to prohibit/punish people who should not have firearms and prevent them from owning them or having them in their possession. If I accepted our argument/position, for me that would be like condoning the crazy/angry high school student, or the crazy/angry postal service employee owning a firearm; that's not going to happen. Radicalism is radicalism (left or right) it's still radicalism and it is both destructive and obstructive in its nature. Being "non-judgemental" and "objective" goes a long ways both here in this forum, and within our society today.

"I understand what you are saying but if you are threatening some one the police could already take action before red flag laws. That is intent to action and enhances the probable cause, Red Flag laws unconstitutionally goes beyond that. And now shovels are weapons? WOW! " No.....that's not correct and not what I am saying. LE cannot take action to disarm anyone unless there is (at minimum) a reasonable suspicion or probable cause to believe that a person is hurting someone or planning to hurt someone. The only time that law enforcement can go outside the scope/guarantees/perimeters of the U.S. Constitution are in cases where "exigent circumstances" are present. And.....even then exigent circumstances fall within the purvue/guarantees of the U.S. Constitution. By this what I am writing here is that if special circumstances, such as issues of public safety, Miranda and the 4th Amendment guarantees are abrogated; yet, these circumstances still fall within the purvues and protections of the U.S. Constitution. Thus meaning LE cannot go overboard while exercising exigent circumstances and going on a fishing expedition; PERIOD!! I understand the U.S. Constitution, I understand its protections (pro/con) and do not either want or need an lecture on the 1st, 2nd, 4th, 5th, 6th, 8th, 9th or 10th amendments. Nor do I intend to get in to a debate about the U.S. Constitution on this forum.

I knew that I was going to catch some flack with this posting when I wrote it! The point about the axes, shovels and machetes from crazy/angry people was making a point that not always are these laws used just for firearms, nothing more.; to read more than that into it, in my opinion, is extreme. Next I took an oath to to "Protect and to Serve" the citizens of the town that I worked in. And yes we do take firearms (and other weapons like axes, shovels and car keys) from people who are crazy and angry or angry acting crazy; that's what LE does to protect its citizens. This posting has nothing to do with 1st, 2nd, 4th, 8th, 9th and 10th amendments, it only has to do with red flag laws and nothing else! What I have written is that red flag laws do serve a purpose (other than to circumvent the 2nd amendment), they can help protect people in certain circumstances; and, something that you forgot before this attack is that I also see the propensity for the red flag laws to be abused by the anti's. I am a total supporter of the 2nd amendment, and I feel that every legal citizen who is entitled to AND...trained to carry/own a firearm ought to have and utilize that right.

An element of some of the guns laws and gun legislation is the fact that there are extremists (as well as political whores) on both sides of this fence. As a result neither side can sanely accomplish passing laws to protect the innocents' rights as guaranteed by 2nd amendment; and, at the same time pass laws to prohibit/punish people who should not have firearms and prevent them from owning them or having them in their possession. If I accepted our argument/position, for me that would be like condoning the crazy/angry high school student, or the crazy/angry postal service employee owning a firearm; that's not going to happen. Radicalism is radicalism (left or right) it's still radicalism and it is both destructive and obstructive in its nature. Being "non-judgemental" and "objective" goes a long ways both here in this forum, and within our society today.

I have had firearms in one form or another for over 45 years but yet I have never received any kind of formal training I am not angry or dangerous does that mean you do not want me to have firearms because I have received no training?

 

[338 dude]

"No crime, no probable cause, no charge and no right to take firearms away from a law abiding citizen just because some one FEELS UNCOMFORTABLE that some one in their family or neighborhood have guns. Not to mention, in many states you have no right to counsel." What do you call a situation where you have a 15 year old boy, who has some personal/social issues with this fellow school mates, has told a friend that he has a gun and is planning on coming to school to get even? Essentially it is hearsay, from a student, there's been no crime committed and where is your probable cause? Everyone has the right to counsel in every state in this nation, everyone.

As for, "We already have Laws in place to adjudicate Mentally ill people from owning guns. But that's too hard. We need where Joe Blow can disarm you because you got angry." In the original post I wrote, "Rhode Island just introduced the red-flag laws, that "already" were on the books; but, we know how that goes." What I have written here essentially is what you have also written. I feel that no matter what I write you are going to try to over trump me. I too am frightened to witness what is going on within this country, and fear that it is being taken over by radical, left wing liberals whose only goals are to diminish and destroy the U.S. Constitution by using the Constitution and it guarantees against itself. We don't only have 2nd amendment issues in our country. You're worried about gun control, I'm really worried about where our social security system and our MediCare system are going when we have 4000 people a day coming in to this country looking to get a piece of those pies without contributing to it. And.....currently have politicians (political whores) supporting that point of view for votes. This country is in trouble, by the time people wake up the ship will have left the dock and it will be too late! I'm done here, you are entitled your opinions and I am entitled to mine; and, we can agree to disagree. I'm going back to the "Reloading Forum

"No crime, no probable cause, no charge and no right to take firearms away from a law abiding citizen just because some one FEELS UNCOMFORTABLE that some one in their family or neighborhood have guns. Not to mention, in many states you have no right to counsel." What do you call a situation where you have a 15 year old boy, who has some personal/social issues with this fellow school mates, has told a friend that he has a gun and is planning on coming to school to get even? Essentially it is hearsay, from a student, there's been no crime committed and where is your probable cause? Everyone has the right to counsel in every state in this nation, everyone.

As for, "We already have Laws in place to adjudicate Mentally ill people from owning guns. But that's too hard. We need where Joe Blow can disarm you because you got angry." In the original post I wrote, "Rhode Island just introduced the red-flag laws, that "already" were on the books; but, we know how that goes." What I have written here essentially is what you have also written. I feel that no matter what I write you are going to try to over trump me. I too am frightened to witness what is going on within this country, and fear that it is being taken over by radical, left wing liberals whose only goals are to diminish and destroy the U.S. Constitution by using the Constitution and it guarantees against itself. We don't only have 2nd amendment issues in our country. You're worried about gun control, I'm really worried about where our social security system and our MediCare system are going when we have 4000 people a day coming in to this country looking to get a piece of those pies without contributing to it. And.....currently have politicians (political whores) supporting that point of view for votes. This country is in trouble, by the time people wake up the ship will have left the dock and it will be too late! I'm done here, you are entitled your opinions and I am entitled to mine; and, we can agree to disagree. I'm going back to the "Reloading Forum

While I disagree with your post about red flag laws I respect your opinion and you're right to say so and I totally agree with your worries about our borders socialism and Medicare just to gain votes by politicians I do see both sides of the fence and I agree with whatever seems logical to me

 

[Greyfox]

Sen. Lindsey Graham is...

....a "sheep" in "wolfs" clothing!