STOP Red Flag Gun Grabs

#1

Are you aware of this
have you responded?

YOUR Senators urging them to strike down these gun grabs that would destroy our Second Amendment and Due Process rights.

Talking about a RED FLAG! wow!

#2

I don’t like it, sounds like a revenge tool to me. I may give it slight, slight support if they would prosecute anyone using it for revenge. It happened to a local in this area. I think his wife should have been charged with, at least, a class c felony.

1 Like
#3

Unless an law enforcement officer has just cause, they should NOT have the authority to confiscate a law-abiding citizen of their firearm(s). If a person produces a vaild “Concealed Firearms Permit” (Nevada) and/or documentation showing legal purchase of said firearm(s), then nobody should be allowed to confiscate them.

Now, I always like to premise this that as a law-abiding citizen I have the right to own and bear arms as provided in the “Second Amendment”. How, if a person has been lawfully convicted of a felony then it is no longer a right, but a privilege that can be taken away. This I truly agree with.

3 Likes
#4

Zero support from me without significant, detailed, controls to limit corruption and threat to constitutional rights. Reminds me of one of the videos I watched from my USCCA membership. Michael Martin explains that we MUST remember that the laws are open to some interpretation when it comes to the reader… I.E. the prosecutor, judge, jury, etc. Thus far, my understanding is that these ERPO/Red Flag laws are full of holes and open the door for continued erosion of our constitutional rights.

1 Like
#5

I contacted my Senators. Since I live in Illinois, my current senators are “Dirty” Dick Durbin, and Tammy “Duckworthless” Duckworth. They are all for all the anti-gun garbage that Schumer and Feinstein can come up with. Due process is a constitutional right. The reps, Senators, and the Trump are wrong on this subject.

2 Likes
#6

I oppose these red flag laws, I’m all for DAs and Judges getting off their rears and doing their jobs. I’ve been through many divorce court appearances since 2007.

Here’s my meaning by they need to do their job to bear the burden of proof a law has been violated and seek a conviction or have someone adjudicated as mentally ill. The LEO departments have plenty of powers with probable cause and powers to arrest with the laws that are already on the books.

LA courts just pass out TROs like the candyman, no proof needed, other party doesn’t need to be in court or face their accusers.

I have a huge problem with it being possible that someone says they felt they were in fear or threatened allegedly, then providing some of the worst attempt to win an academy award monologues. No witnesses or less than credible non 3rd party witnesses, no calls to LEOs, no injuries or history thereof, no mandated reporting occurred of yet the courts issue an order.

Civil is just as easy just need to pay $300.

We don’t need to make red flag laws easier we need to enforce the part about under risk of perjury and get people both fined and put behind bars that lie or maliciously make a false allegation for revenge or in an attempt to sway custody in a family law case.

But maybe that makes too much sense as no stats to keep budget funding available in the “fight against crime”

Woo where’s the Tylenol, that’s my 2 cents.

2 Likes
#7

In LA, do TROs affect the person negatively at all? Permanent record or affect job offers?

You should be able to face your accuser but that doesn’t apply to civil courts :frowning:

However, in true domestic violence cases, I would consider it torturous for the person who was abused to have to face their accuser and relive the details again… It’s a slippery slope.

People who claim abuse who have not been abused are lower than abusers in my mind. Their actions call into question every true claim of abuse. It’s pitiful.

1 Like
#8

In CA this is a lawsuit be it criminal, family, or civil do yes that portion is permanent and public record. As far as background checks no TRO’s don’t, as they’re not entered in CLETS (CA Law Enforcement Telecom System. Once the “hearing” occurs as proof of service is based on “sworn” testimony the defendant was served potentially someone can find themselves in a situation where they’re found guilty by default as a no show being they were “properly” served and given “notice”. You can motion to quash for improper service, but it take months to get it straightened out and again no consequences or accountability for falsifying statements and perjury.

As far as being further negativety affected yes, in CA you have 24hrs to surrender your firearms and ammunition to LEOs or sell them through an FFL and provide proof to the court to file. Prior to the law that took effect you used to be able to store them with an attorney, FFL/gun club until the matter was resolved. No longer the case. As you cannot loan or keep a firearm in your name away from your immediate possession. Funny thing is I had to point that out to 2 attorneys last year, they were shocked as they had been violating the law in holding firearms for their clients until the cases were dropped/worked out.

So if you go to an FFL they’ll buy them out right. If you go to transfer them to a family member, sell them to a family member or someone else it will show as being on a 10 day wait while the CADOJ is doing the background check and they could deny it and or consider it a straw purchase as both seller and buyer go through the check.

Now guess what, if you have any other members/persons in your home with firearms you can’t have “access” or be in “possession” of firearms or ammunition until things clear up. Remember as a firearm owner these must be in your immediate possession or locked and secured. CA is all about definition. So it can be said who might still have access, you had the intent to gain access, etc.

If falsely accused you’re looking at thousands lost in court costs and property, time away to be in court.

Once the permanent CLET RO is issued the defendant now convicted, will come up as a restrained person when pulled over and ran by LEOs, background checks, and of course permanent record.

For those truly abused, there is usually an arrest and a whole set of resources are made available. There are also workshops in every courthouses and social services offered.

So I get it about the slippery slope, but after representing myself as the petitioner from 2007 to 2012 in my divorce case which I didn’t settle and pushed to trial. I went up against 2 separate attorneys won, getting full custody with no visitation and a CLETS RO on my abusive ex wife.

I’ve seen and heard some pitiful people as you’ve put it @Dawn.

1 Like
#9

In NV during the last midterm election, a total left-wing jerk got in office. I just can’t believe he won. Anyway, he is supporting every anti-gun legislation that is being written. Next year the sale/transfer of a firearm will be just like CA.

I also sent e-mails to my representative(s) and hope that these bills don’t pass.

3 Likes
#10

I am sorry, when I said that a left-wing jerk got in office, I meant the governor. He is a total waste on a number of accounts.

3 Likes
#11

In any discussion of this type, it’s vitally important to give everyone who reads it a clickable link that will instantly help them respond directly to their legislator’s on the issue: https://oneclickpolitics.global.ssl.fastly.net/widget/oneclick/5842 ONLY by sounding off to our Reps and Senator’s every single time we need to will there be any hope of reversing our course on the slippery slope we’ve already started down. I posted that particular link because it’s a FEDERAL bill (meaning it would impact every State if passed). I strongly urge everyone to USE that link and make your voice heard - while we still have one.

1 Like
#12

@M3gaW0lf I used your link… providing a link like that is a good idea. That being said, I had to rewrite the letter because it’s pretty angry and hyperbolic. My experience is that a strong letter without rage works better.

2 Likes
#13

Nothing wrong with that at all, Zee - glad you took the time an made the effort to put your own thoughts into words. Way to go!

1 Like
#14

Red flag laws are well intended by many but in practice are nothing but a backdoor route to confiscation, and as others have mentioned a “revenge tool”. There are no consequences for the accuser if the accusations cannot be sustained in court either.

In order to get one of these Emergency Orders issued there is no burden of proof on the accusers, no chance for the accused to confront or cross examine the accuser and a total denial of our 2nd, 4th, and 5th Amendment rights.

The burden of proof is put on the accused as is the cost of defending themselves while the accuser has the full force of the state behind them.

If someone is too dangerous or incompetent to possess firearms that needs to first be a determination made by the courts and if found so then an order to remove the firearms issued.

2 Likes
#15

TPO’s are public record and will follow you for the rest of your life and can have serious repercussions for career choices and future employment.

2 Likes