Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Gun seizures spike nationally, as states pass laws aimed at curbing mass shootings

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • M_F
    replied
    Originally posted by LiDad View Post
    Why do you think Andy and pals want to look at your social media?
    Andy boy says he owns a shotgun, I don't feel safe with such dangerous man owning dangerous weapons, especially at the governor's mansion.

    Leave a comment:


  • LiDad
    replied
    Why do you think Andy and pals want to look at your social media?

    Leave a comment:


  • viper720
    replied
    Originally posted by SLYTAPEX View Post
    Well all I can say is be polite to your neighbors and even though we all know it’s a shitty law and you just need to put your best foot forward if you care about your Second Amendment rights. I think it’s absolutely insane that basically anybody can call the police and say that they have a funny feeling about you and that’s all it takes. At least here in New York you know damn well you’re not getting a knock on the door in a conversation. You’re getting a knock on the door and a confiscation. I understand there are definitely some fuck ups out there but I think we all know that this law will be abused like crazy and I think it’s going to probably ramp up in the future
    I filled up my gas next to a lady with a "moms demand action" sign tacked up in her window and managed to keep my mouth shut....does that count?

    Leave a comment:


  • kempoguy
    replied
    Even as conservatives sound the alarm about potential Second Amendment violations, supporters -- sometimes across party lines -- say these "red flag" laws are among the most promising tools to reduce the nearly 40,000 suicides and homicides by firearm each year in the country.

    You know what else is a really promising tool for reducing suicide and homicide? Keep a cop or a soldier at the corner of every single city street, anyone who has ever had anxiety, depression, bi-polar, or just too much stress has to wear a special marker on their jacket that says "mentally ill" so people know to watch out for them. Do away with the 4th amendment entirely, stop and frisk everyone you see walking down the street to make sure they aren't packing. Might as well quarter troops inside people's homes so they can keep tabs on what people are talking about, and hell start making anyone who speaks out against government or anyone who works for the state disappear so there won't be any talk to incite people.

    But we are supposed to be a "free country". Yet what exactly are we free to do? And the more freedoms we keep taking, what makes us any better than any other developed nation? Either people are free and they have civil rights, or they don't.

    Leave a comment:


  • SLYTAPEX
    replied
    Well all I can say is be polite to your neighbors and even though we all know it’s a shitty law and you just need to put your best foot forward if you care about your Second Amendment rights. I think it’s absolutely insane that basically anybody can call the police and say that they have a funny feeling about you and that’s all it takes. At least here in New York you know damn well you’re not getting a knock on the door in a conversation. You’re getting a knock on the door and a confiscation. I understand there are definitely some fuck ups out there but I think we all know that this law will be abused like crazy and I think it’s going to probably ramp up in the future

    Leave a comment:


  • viper720
    replied
    I honestly don't think confiscating guns from the mentally ill with court orders is an appropriate course of action. If a person is homicidal/suicidal, it's not just guns you need to worry about them having access to. Those people should be committed. If you take their guns there's nothing stopping them from killing people/themselves with cars, knives, fire, etc... more band-aid policy.

    Leave a comment:


  • M_F
    replied
    Originally posted by Sparks25 View Post

    I agree 100% however, we have already lost about 18 states and to most people it sounds like “common sense”. We are not likely to win that battle any time soon. There is no more compromise in NYS. That is why we need some checks and balances written into the laws. It would be better if there were strict guidelines and burdens of proof for “dangerous” but I don’t see that coming either with all dems in the state govt.
    There are no longer any adults in the room.
    Sadly even if no red flag law occurs at the federal level the number of states (even pro 2A states) with this law will increase. As long as people keep parroting "common sense" and "safety" the masses will keep accepting this infringement, I'm afraid this and "universal background checks" will become the law of every state in the near future.

    Leave a comment:


  • Sparks25
    replied
    Originally posted by M_F View Post

    Citizens do not deserve to lose their second amendment rights because of an "accusation" and hearsay. They were NOT arrested/charged with a crime. If someone is deemed too dangerous to have guns they shouldn't bee free roaming in our society. You give the antis an inch they will take a mile, it will never be enough for the anti gunners, if you try to compromise they will always want more.
    I agree 100% however, we have already lost about 18 states and to most people it sounds like “common sense”. We are not likely to win that battle any time soon. There is no more compromise in NYS. That is why we need some checks and balances written into the laws. It would be better if there were strict guidelines and burdens of proof for “dangerous” but I don’t see that coming either with all dems in the state govt.
    There are no longer any adults in the room.

    Leave a comment:


  • M_F
    replied
    Originally posted by Sparks25 View Post

    I do not have a problem with the concept of the red flag laws but there must be amendments made by the feds or SCOTUS that override state laws.
    1. After 30 days, with no actual corroborated proof, the guns go back to the owner, no hearings, no lawyers, just a voucher turned in, guns returned and “sorry for the inconvenience”.

    2. If there is proof that it was a malicious prosecution, falsified evidence or false accusation just to punish, extort, political gain, divorce gaming, etc. the crime must be federal civil rights violation on top of any local crimes, punishable by 10 years in federal prison with no judicial discretion. Lawyers or doctors involved also have their licenses revoked. Permanently

    Any other additions welcome.
    Citizens do not deserve to lose their second amendment rights because of an "accusation" and hearsay. They were NOT arrested/charged with a crime. If someone is deemed too dangerous to have guns they shouldn't bee free roaming in our society. You give the antis an inch they will take a mile, it will never be enough for the anti gunners, if you try to compromise they will always want more.

    Leave a comment:


  • Sparks25
    replied
    Originally posted by Dan 0351 View Post
    "Only when the entity that illegally deprives someone of their rights are hit with SERIOUS repercussions, will people's rights be restored.

    Winning a lawsuit and having taxpayers pay for it without taxpayers even knowing about it - is NOT a serious repercussion. And no matter how many lawsuits there are, it won't change anything unless the actual people calling the shots are held responsible."
    I do not have a problem with the concept of the red flag laws but there must be amendments made by the feds or SCOTUS that override state laws.
    1. After 30 days, with no actual corroborated proof, the guns go back to the owner, no hearings, no lawyers, just a voucher turned in, guns returned and “sorry for the inconvenience”.

    2. If there is proof that it was a malicious prosecution, falsified evidence or false accusation just to punish, extort, political gain, divorce gaming, etc. the crime must be federal civil rights violation on top of any local crimes, punishable by 10 years in federal prison with no judicial discretion. Lawyers or doctors involved also have their licenses revoked. Permanently

    Any other additions welcome.

    Leave a comment:


  • SemiAutoFetish
    replied
    Originally posted by spider View Post

    What if someone unplugs the respirator?
    you mean the puppet strings?

    Leave a comment:


  • warmnfuzzy
    replied
    Originally posted by Dan 0351 View Post
    "Only when the entity that illegally deprives someone of their rights are hit with SERIOUS repercussions, will people's rights be restored.

    Winning a lawsuit and having taxpayers pay for it without taxpayers even knowing about it - is NOT a serious repercussion. And no matter how many lawsuits there are, it won't change anything unless the actual people calling the shots are held responsible."
    and then I woke up

    Leave a comment:


  • Dan 0351
    replied
    "Only when the entity that illegally deprives someone of their rights are hit with SERIOUS repercussions, will people's rights be restored.

    Winning a lawsuit and having taxpayers pay for it without taxpayers even knowing about it - is NOT a serious repercussion. And no matter how many lawsuits there are, it won't change anything unless the actual people calling the shots are held responsible."

    Leave a comment:


  • FastPhil
    replied
    The buzzards follow her wherever she goes

    Leave a comment:


  • Banzai
    replied
    Originally posted by spider View Post

    Ginsberg's replacement will give us a solidly pro 2A court.
    Even if she dropped dead tomorrow, the libtards would Weekend At Bernie's her until at least 2020. You'll know she's dead when you see her staff discreetly buying Fabreze in bulk and Ruth starts wearing sunglasses all the time.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X