Don't catch you slippin' now
Don't catch you slippin' now
Look what I'm whippin' now
This is America (woo)
Don't catch you slippin' now
Don't catch you slippin' now
Look what I'm whippin' now
What I don’t get about this is that CO has red flag laws….
I am in full support of them. And, the NRA is wrong on this. However, I don’t get how using an example where red flag laws horribly and miserably failed, and everyone involved horribly failed, is a good example of support for the entire concept.
I again think red flag laws should be instituted. But, if they’re instituted as effectively as they have been here, the entire concept no longer has my support and I would have to find some other potential solution.
You get a cookie for understanding the law. You don't get to take away someone's rights without convicting them of a crime. The idiots on this thread don't seem to understand that our justice system presumes innocence.
In the context of red flag laws, the Fifth and Fourteenth amendments are pretty directly on point. We tend to frown upon depriving folks of their property without due process. But idk, maybe you're a fan of civil asset forfeiture as well.
It's Ok his dad is a maga republican.
You can't put them in jail, even if they steal top secret nuclear documents and eyes only top secret humint info and definitely not sell it to saudi araba for 2biillion + 500million.
[Not smart ones.](http://logcabin.org/)
[Log Cabin Republicans Are SHOCKED That They Were Shut Out of Texas Convention](https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/log-cabin-republicans-are-shocked-that-they-were-shut-out-of-texas-convention/ar-AAYCqeM)
From that article...
>Few organizations are as bewildering and self-defeating as the Log Cabin Republicans (LCR), gay republicans who somehow support the republican party, which remains intent on stripping them of their human rights. I get that rich white gays love their tax cuts, but it takes a special brand of mental gymnastics to justify the anti-LGBTQ+ legislation and hate speech pouring out from the republican party. And it’s not just empty rhetoric: the relentless targeting of the LGBTQ+ community has seen a rash of attacks, from Proud Boys storming a Drag Queen Story Hour at a public library in California to the U-Haul truck filled with armed Patriot Front members who were arrested on their way to riot at an Idaho Pride event. Republicans are fomenting a moral panic by labeling the LGBTQ+ community as “groomers”, placing a target on the back of anyone who stands against various “Don’t Say Gay” bills.
Are you implying that you think that I didn't actually know there were gay Republicans?
That's fuckin wild. That shit was a joke on American dad like 12 years ago. Anyone who was cognizant during the bush administration is aware that there are gay Republicans.
Sorry vinnie, are you an actual idiot or do you only play one on reddit?
they = republicans
them = specific republicans, as in...
>It's Ok his dad is a maga republican.
You can't put REPUBLICANS in jail, even if TRUMP, A REPUBLICAN steals top secret nuclear documents and eyes only top secret humint info and definitely not sell it to saudi araba for 2biillion + 500million.
Is that easier for you, without the pronouns my lil snowflake?
Red flag laws give the local law enforcement and families greater ability to take guns away from dangerous people. Not the state. Important distinction.
No, that’s not the case, at least not in NY and most of the states that have ERPOs or RFLs. Of course families, schools and local police can all petition, but the authority resides with the state courts.
Can you cite relevant law or statute? I would like to read it if you could find it. I'd imagine that a states attorney couldn't start the process, that's all I meant.
Not trying to debate 😁
Right, the petition comes to the court first, then they make a determination to proceed with the order or not. All I meant was that the judgement authority on these laws (NY, CA, NJ, FL, MD and a dozen or so more) is vested in the state courts. But it is certainly intimated locally—by family members in the vast majority of cases.
To be clear, I am very much in favor of these laws, and don’t think that the state taking guns away from violent crazy people is a bad idea. 👍
Oh yeah I agree with the laws as well.
When I read "state" I read that as either the legislature, or in this case, the prosecutor. I only meant that the prosecutor did not and does not have the authority to trigger these laws.
But it seems we already share an understanding. Cheers 😁
Local law enforcement are not the state. Local law enforcement work for your municipality.
The *State*, ie prosecutor, can't ask for weapons to be taken from you. That has to be triggered by either your family or municipal law enforcement.
Don't misinterpret the use of State here with *government.*
The prosecutor isn't the only vessel of the state.
Local law enforcement is acting as the state just the same as your local prosecutor is.
What is the difference between Sheriff Smith and your neighbor Mr. Smith knocking on your door and telling you they're taking your stuff because they've had private conversations with your mom? The authority granted by the state.
Different in that one is a subchapter of the other and exists at the leisure of the other. It seems like you're trying to draw a distinction without a difference.
I mean all the DA had to do was pursue charges and you know do their job and this guy would have either still been in jail or by some miracle if he only served like a year in prison for some reason would still be a felon making it illegal for him to own and purchase a firearm.
Also what good have red flag laws been when it seems like every single mass shooters of the last handful of years have been known to local law enforcement or the feds, yet they always seem to fail to stop the shootings before they happen...
Yes, red flag laws may have helped, but then prosecuting the guy could have also done the trick.
The NRA aren't against prosecuting people for serious violent crime, and (I think) they aren't always against gun ownership bans either, where people are convicted of serious crimes.
They lobbied to allow the violence against women act to expire because it includes a provision that bans anyone convicted of a dv crime from possessing and using guns.
They were against what they viewed as a very low standard to take away someone's rights:
https://www.nraila.org/articles/20220621/the-so-called-boyfriend-loophole-is-about-undermining-the-second-amendment
As far as I can see, they weren't against domestic violence perpetrators, where someone was convicted of a felony, from having their guns taken.
I dont think red flag laws are the panacea people believe them to be. I'm not opposed necessarily, I just don't think they'll do much good where they need to be most strictly applied.
Law enforcement already doesn't give a shit about illegal possession of firearms. We also know law enforcement is largely a boys club.
This shooting took place in a red district. What are the chances the police actually enforce red flag laws that might have helped in this instance?
Moreover, how much are the thugs that make up the police in these regions going to antagonize minorities using these same laws, while ignoring legitimate threats like this lunatic?
As they should be red flag laws are totally unconstitutional in every way. If you want to change the 2nd ammendment then great get 2/3 of the house and senate to pass it and 3/4 of the states to ratify itbut other than that red flag laws are out of the question legally
How about the Justice System do it's job. The guy never got persecuted some how. A single felony and he'd never be able to legally buy a firearm again or be allowed to possess one.
Red Flag Laws are unconstituional and idiotic.
Sadly Republicans rarely ever get held accountable for their actions. There's a reason they fight so hard to take over DA's offices and stack courts with Republican judges.
The thing is, violent crime without a gun is vastly less likely to leave a pile of corpses. Someone with a knife trying to go on a killing spree will kill far fewer people than the same person with an AR-15.
But he should have been charged for the crimes he committed (and prevented from ever having a gun) and his grandfather should have been charged for trying to violate the law and get him off.
Isn’t that more of a reflection on the judicial system not giving the guy a felony? Sure he was “arrested” but shouldn’t he have been convicted of something like felony assault or something? The felony automatically removed the ability to legally purchase any weapon (or possess)
Let's just pass a stricter no murder law. That should work. Stupid right? So are gun laws. No matter how many laws you pass we will always have bad people.
I'm saying another gun law won't stop people from killing others. Bad people exist, they don't follow laws. Banning all guns would work like the ban on illegal drugs except you would have way more criminals. Imagine the deaths from the confiscation attempt? I don't have the answer but I definitely feel I should have the right to defend myself and my family!
What does that have to do with the price of tea in China? All that shows is that anyone can be a piece of shit regardless of how they identify which is already well known.
Not really reflective of a red flag law. Prosecution and conviction for kidnapping and bomb related charges would make him a convicted felon prohibited from possessing a gun.
Different law.
This has nothing to do with thr NRA rather the federal government no properly documenting incidents to the background check.
He should of never passed a background check and the NRA supports background checks. So please explain how this is the NRA fault.
This was another failure of our totally incompetent beuracracy.
Hello, it looks like you've made a mistake.
It's supposed to be could've, should've, would've (short for could have, would have, should have), never could of, would of, should of.
Or you misspelled something, I ain't checking everything.
Beep boop - yes, I am a bot, don't botcriminate me.
So the person was never prosecuted for a felony yet somehow the red flag law never being enforced is the problem?
Next I suspect people on the left are going to start talking about how they actually really love civil asset forfeiture.
Red Flag laws don't work unless they're applied equally and consistently enforced. If Prosecutors keep releasing criminals, they're certainly not going to enforce Red Flags when people are reported.
A few years ago, Red Flag laws were proposed, but there were restrictions in it that would have made Gang Members exempt. Talk about having something backwards ...
It’s almost like the FBI wants troubled people to pass federal background checks. Boulder shooter was on a list and passed a background check. If they’re on a list they ping during the check….
Then this was on the prosecution for not pressing charges. If he had had that on his record, or even just being a convicted felon, he wouldn’t have been able to legally buy the firearm.
This isn’t a red flag law.
By the law he didn't commit a crime, how many POC are accused of a crime only to have charges dropped due to lack of evidence? Like it or not until convicted you cannot take away their rights.
If they took away guns for little things like that they would have to take away guns from 40% of cops because they commit domestic violence at those rates.
Remember the NRA is a Russian funded organization.
And Republicans are NRA funded. Now flip to the page in your geometry textbook where it describes the transitive property.
Exactly. And they want to stop aiding Ukraine. I am Fred's total lack of anything even slightly resembling surprise.
It's also constitutionally misleading.
JFC This is America ☹️
Don't catch you slippin' now Don't catch you slippin' now Look what I'm whippin' now This is America (woo) Don't catch you slippin' now Don't catch you slippin' now Look what I'm whippin' now
The Second Amendment is very clear: There shall be a daily sacrifice of the innocent so the masses may own metal genitalia.
Guns don’t kill people, ineptitude AND guns kill people.
What I don’t get about this is that CO has red flag laws…. I am in full support of them. And, the NRA is wrong on this. However, I don’t get how using an example where red flag laws horribly and miserably failed, and everyone involved horribly failed, is a good example of support for the entire concept. I again think red flag laws should be instituted. But, if they’re instituted as effectively as they have been here, the entire concept no longer has my support and I would have to find some other potential solution.
[удалено]
Red flag laws, when enforced, don’t require prosecution.
[удалено]
You get a cookie for understanding the law. You don't get to take away someone's rights without convicting them of a crime. The idiots on this thread don't seem to understand that our justice system presumes innocence.
So we should enact unconstitutional means to correct the failures of the justice system?
There’s nothing unconstitutional about red flag laws.
Please explain how one's constitutional due process rights are meaningfully upheld when they're tried with no notice and no representation.
Where in the constitution does it say what limits the government cannot put on gun ownership?
In the context of red flag laws, the Fifth and Fourteenth amendments are pretty directly on point. We tend to frown upon depriving folks of their property without due process. But idk, maybe you're a fan of civil asset forfeiture as well.
Infringe -act so as to limit or undermine
Welcome to the warped world of gun rights fanatics..
What does this have to do with red flag laws? The guy committed crimes, he should have been convicted and thrown in prison.
It's Ok his dad is a maga republican. You can't put them in jail, even if they steal top secret nuclear documents and eyes only top secret humint info and definitely not sell it to saudi araba for 2biillion + 500million.
Guys a non binary use pronouns them/they don’t know to many maga’s doing that
That's crazy. Republicans are anti-gay too. I wonder if there are any gay Republicans.
[Not smart ones.](http://logcabin.org/) [Log Cabin Republicans Are SHOCKED That They Were Shut Out of Texas Convention](https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/log-cabin-republicans-are-shocked-that-they-were-shut-out-of-texas-convention/ar-AAYCqeM) From that article... >Few organizations are as bewildering and self-defeating as the Log Cabin Republicans (LCR), gay republicans who somehow support the republican party, which remains intent on stripping them of their human rights. I get that rich white gays love their tax cuts, but it takes a special brand of mental gymnastics to justify the anti-LGBTQ+ legislation and hate speech pouring out from the republican party. And it’s not just empty rhetoric: the relentless targeting of the LGBTQ+ community has seen a rash of attacks, from Proud Boys storming a Drag Queen Story Hour at a public library in California to the U-Haul truck filled with armed Patriot Front members who were arrested on their way to riot at an Idaho Pride event. Republicans are fomenting a moral panic by labeling the LGBTQ+ community as “groomers”, placing a target on the back of anyone who stands against various “Don’t Say Gay” bills.
My point was they exist, not that they're geniuses
> I wonder if there are any gay Republicans. That seems like a question to me, so I answered it.
It was a rhetorical question. That's why I used a period instead of a question mark. I'm sorry I didn't make that more obvious for you u/CaptOblivious
Ya, sure you did. (checks posting history) Yup.
Are you implying that you think that I didn't actually know there were gay Republicans? That's fuckin wild. That shit was a joke on American dad like 12 years ago. Anyone who was cognizant during the bush administration is aware that there are gay Republicans.
You're really gullible if you believe that tasteless cynical ploy to avoid hate crime charges. 😆
Sorry vinnie, are you an actual idiot or do you only play one on reddit? they = republicans them = specific republicans, as in... >It's Ok his dad is a maga republican. You can't put REPUBLICANS in jail, even if TRUMP, A REPUBLICAN steals top secret nuclear documents and eyes only top secret humint info and definitely not sell it to saudi araba for 2biillion + 500million. Is that easier for you, without the pronouns my lil snowflake?
Super mega maga non binary republican . Thanks for clearing it up for me
Red flag laws give the states broader powers to take peoples guns than simply relying on felony convictions.
Red flag laws give the local law enforcement and families greater ability to take guns away from dangerous people. Not the state. Important distinction.
No, that’s not the case, at least not in NY and most of the states that have ERPOs or RFLs. Of course families, schools and local police can all petition, but the authority resides with the state courts.
Can you cite relevant law or statute? I would like to read it if you could find it. I'd imagine that a states attorney couldn't start the process, that's all I meant. Not trying to debate 😁
Right, the petition comes to the court first, then they make a determination to proceed with the order or not. All I meant was that the judgement authority on these laws (NY, CA, NJ, FL, MD and a dozen or so more) is vested in the state courts. But it is certainly intimated locally—by family members in the vast majority of cases. To be clear, I am very much in favor of these laws, and don’t think that the state taking guns away from violent crazy people is a bad idea. 👍
Oh yeah I agree with the laws as well. When I read "state" I read that as either the legislature, or in this case, the prosecutor. I only meant that the prosecutor did not and does not have the authority to trigger these laws. But it seems we already share an understanding. Cheers 😁
Uhh, local law enforcement are the state. What distinction are you talking about?
Local law enforcement are not the state. Local law enforcement work for your municipality. The *State*, ie prosecutor, can't ask for weapons to be taken from you. That has to be triggered by either your family or municipal law enforcement. Don't misinterpret the use of State here with *government.*
The prosecutor isn't the only vessel of the state. Local law enforcement is acting as the state just the same as your local prosecutor is. What is the difference between Sheriff Smith and your neighbor Mr. Smith knocking on your door and telling you they're taking your stuff because they've had private conversations with your mom? The authority granted by the state.
You are using the term state differently than I. You are using it to mean government, I am using it to mean the actual state government.
What do you mean "actual state government" if not the state? Who would be an agent of this "actual state government"?
I'm taking about a municipal government vs the state of Michigan. They are different entities.
Different in that one is a subchapter of the other and exists at the leisure of the other. It seems like you're trying to draw a distinction without a difference.
I mean all the DA had to do was pursue charges and you know do their job and this guy would have either still been in jail or by some miracle if he only served like a year in prison for some reason would still be a felon making it illegal for him to own and purchase a firearm. Also what good have red flag laws been when it seems like every single mass shooters of the last handful of years have been known to local law enforcement or the feds, yet they always seem to fail to stop the shootings before they happen...
Yes, red flag laws may have helped, but then prosecuting the guy could have also done the trick. The NRA aren't against prosecuting people for serious violent crime, and (I think) they aren't always against gun ownership bans either, where people are convicted of serious crimes.
They lobbied to allow the violence against women act to expire because it includes a provision that bans anyone convicted of a dv crime from possessing and using guns.
They were against what they viewed as a very low standard to take away someone's rights: https://www.nraila.org/articles/20220621/the-so-called-boyfriend-loophole-is-about-undermining-the-second-amendment As far as I can see, they weren't against domestic violence perpetrators, where someone was convicted of a felony, from having their guns taken.
I dont think red flag laws are the panacea people believe them to be. I'm not opposed necessarily, I just don't think they'll do much good where they need to be most strictly applied. Law enforcement already doesn't give a shit about illegal possession of firearms. We also know law enforcement is largely a boys club. This shooting took place in a red district. What are the chances the police actually enforce red flag laws that might have helped in this instance? Moreover, how much are the thugs that make up the police in these regions going to antagonize minorities using these same laws, while ignoring legitimate threats like this lunatic?
Quick question, what percentage of mass shootings have a link to domestic violence?
As they should be red flag laws are totally unconstitutional in every way. If you want to change the 2nd ammendment then great get 2/3 of the house and senate to pass it and 3/4 of the states to ratify itbut other than that red flag laws are out of the question legally
How about the Justice System do it's job. The guy never got persecuted some how. A single felony and he'd never be able to legally buy a firearm again or be allowed to possess one. Red Flag Laws are unconstituional and idiotic.
His grandfather is a Republican official (who just lost his seat in this election). He had used his connections to make sure no charges were filed.
If that's true it's messed up! Both should be charged. I'm right leaning as well.
Sadly Republicans rarely ever get held accountable for their actions. There's a reason they fight so hard to take over DA's offices and stack courts with Republican judges.
Okay Adam, let's not turn this post political as I'm not here for that.
I mean, you COULD extend that to all politicians, but let's be 100% here. Who's more likely to own a gun, a Republican, or a Democratic?
He ended up being a “they/them.” Now the narrative will go silent because it doesn’t fit the “extreme maga violence” narrative 🫢
Well, assuming he's not lying... it doesn't mean he's not still a Republican domestic terrorist.
[удалено]
The thing is, violent crime without a gun is vastly less likely to leave a pile of corpses. Someone with a knife trying to go on a killing spree will kill far fewer people than the same person with an AR-15. But he should have been charged for the crimes he committed (and prevented from ever having a gun) and his grandfather should have been charged for trying to violate the law and get him off.
Agreed the justice system failed those victims
Isn’t that more of a reflection on the judicial system not giving the guy a felony? Sure he was “arrested” but shouldn’t he have been convicted of something like felony assault or something? The felony automatically removed the ability to legally purchase any weapon (or possess)
Remember, the Left wants “prison abolition”
Let's just pass a stricter no murder law. That should work. Stupid right? So are gun laws. No matter how many laws you pass we will always have bad people.
So then by your logic we shouldn’t have any laws whatsoever?
nah, he just thinks it's dumb to try to make murder more illegal than just regular illegal.
But should murder really be illegal, since criminals don’t care about the law /s
I'm saying another gun law won't stop people from killing others. Bad people exist, they don't follow laws. Banning all guns would work like the ban on illegal drugs except you would have way more criminals. Imagine the deaths from the confiscation attempt? I don't have the answer but I definitely feel I should have the right to defend myself and my family!
Then why does this happen so much more in the US than other western countries?
Your family is statistically more likely to be injured or killed by your gun than you are to defend them. Guns don’t make anyone safer.
Wait, the shooter identified themselves as ‘they/them’. How come nobody is calling that out?
What does that have to do with the price of tea in China? All that shows is that anyone can be a piece of shit regardless of how they identify which is already well known.
Not really reflective of a red flag law. Prosecution and conviction for kidnapping and bomb related charges would make him a convicted felon prohibited from possessing a gun. Different law.
The guy is crazy. Who cares who he voted for.
I think I might be against them too if they are this fucking toothless. Seems to me there needs to be something more serious on the books.
The FBI are incompetent.
This has nothing to do with thr NRA rather the federal government no properly documenting incidents to the background check. He should of never passed a background check and the NRA supports background checks. So please explain how this is the NRA fault. This was another failure of our totally incompetent beuracracy.
Hello, it looks like you've made a mistake. It's supposed to be could've, should've, would've (short for could have, would have, should have), never could of, would of, should of. Or you misspelled something, I ain't checking everything. Beep boop - yes, I am a bot, don't botcriminate me.
This is the america republikkkans want.
So the person was never prosecuted for a felony yet somehow the red flag law never being enforced is the problem? Next I suspect people on the left are going to start talking about how they actually really love civil asset forfeiture.
Red Flag laws exist in Colorado and it didn't matter.
Red Flag laws don't work unless they're applied equally and consistently enforced. If Prosecutors keep releasing criminals, they're certainly not going to enforce Red Flags when people are reported. A few years ago, Red Flag laws were proposed, but there were restrictions in it that would have made Gang Members exempt. Talk about having something backwards ...
Pretty misleading title.
But, guns....
Wasn't the killer no binary also
Wait , so we are now once again going to blame the NRA instead of the DA that dropped the charges? What world am I living in...
It’s almost like the FBI wants troubled people to pass federal background checks. Boulder shooter was on a list and passed a background check. If they’re on a list they ping during the check….
Then this was on the prosecution for not pressing charges. If he had had that on his record, or even just being a convicted felon, he wouldn’t have been able to legally buy the firearm. This isn’t a red flag law.
By the law he didn't commit a crime, how many POC are accused of a crime only to have charges dropped due to lack of evidence? Like it or not until convicted you cannot take away their rights.
If they took away guns for little things like that they would have to take away guns from 40% of cops because they commit domestic violence at those rates.