[a / b / c / d / e / f / g / gif / h / hr / k / m / o / p / r / s / t / u / v / vg / vm / vmg / vr / vrpg / vst / w / wg] [i / ic] [r9k / s4s / vip / qa] [cm / hm / lgbt / y] [3 / aco / adv / an / bant / biz / cgl / ck / co / diy / fa / fit / gd / hc / his / int / jp / lit / mlp / mu / n / news / out / po / pol / pw / qst / sci / soc / sp / tg / toy / trv / tv / vp / vt / wsg / wsr / x / xs] [Settings] [Search] [Mobile] [Home]
Board
Settings Mobile Home
/news/ - Current News

[Advertise on 4chan]

Name
Options
Comment
Verification
4chan Pass users can bypass this verification. [Learn More] [Login]
  • Please read the Rules and FAQ before posting.
  • There are 21 posters in this thread.

08/21/20New boards added: /vrpg/, /vmg/, /vst/ and /vm/
05/04/17New trial board added: /bant/ - International/Random
10/04/16New board for 4chan Pass users: /vip/ - Very Important Posts
[Hide] [Show All]


Happy 18th Birthday, 4chan!

Janitor acceptance emails will be sent out over the coming weeks. Make sure to check your spam box!


[Advertise on 4chan]


>https://badgerherald.com/news/2021/10/12/social-workers-endorse-bills-to-reduce-gun-violence-suicides/
In Wisconson, 1,500 social workers endorsed 2 bills, one to create a registry and sin tax on buying guns, the second to ban all gun owners from ever seeking mental healthcare under threat their rights are stripped from them and they are murdered at 2 am in a no knock raid.
Remember friends, red flag laws have a chilling effect and prevent people from seeing mental health professionals and violate the takings clause of the 5th amendment. Someone needs to get one up to the SCOTUS because in Caniglia v. Strom Alito flat out said as much that red flag laws CAN and SHOULD be challenged.
In NJ, which Biden's federal red flag model legislation is based off, you get tried in absentia for for a TERPO where the standard is "good cause" which is only slightly above suspicion. Then you get railroaded into having to do a FERPO 10 days later where the standard is a "preponderance of the evidence" which is a civil standard, not one for depriving someone of property and "recently purchasing a gun or ammo" is considered just cause for that preponderance of the evidence, aka, owning a gun is justification for your guns to be taken from you under a red flag order in NJ and this is the one Biden and Bloomberg is trying to push out nation wide.
>>
>>944179
>About 81% of Wisconsinites support red flag laws
Oh I doubt this very much. Just a quick recap: a one-time $30 dollar purchase for an ID to vote is an unacceptable, racist poll-tax but a sin tax on guns is okay. I wonder if they'll be using these red flag laws to take guns away from people like Gaige Grosskreutz, or if it's just going to be directed at non-criminal old boomers like Gary Willis.

You can't take a day off with anti-gunners.
>>
>>944179
Well too bad, they are sending social workers to go talk down crazies running around with guns threatening themselves now.
>>
>>944179
>https://badgerherald.com/news/2021/10/12/social-workers-endorse-bills-to-reduce-gun-violence-suicides/

Social workers endorse bills to reduce gun violence, suicides
Gun suicide attempts are fatal, severely depressed, suicidal people should not be allowed to carry guns, national social work group leader says

A group representing over 1,500 social workers has publicly endorsed two bills aimed at keeping guns out of the hands of people who are a danger to themselves or others, stating the bills would reduce suicides and gun violence.

Despite overwhelming support from over 80% of Wisconsinites, it will be difficult for the bills to make it through the Republican-controlled legislature, the bill’s sponsor Sen. Melissa Agard, D-Madison, said in an email statement to The Badger Herald.

Bill LRB 2751, would require all guns to be purchased through a federally licensed gun dealer, Agard said. Federally-licensed gun dealers are required by law to conduct background checks on their buyers, according to the Federal Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives. People who cannot pass the background check — which includes convicted felons and people with a history of domestic assault — cannot purchase a firearm, according to the ATF.

The other bill, LRB 3007, would establish an Extreme Risk Protection Order procedure — also known as a red flag law — in Wisconsin. Under it, families would be able to petition the court to temporarily confiscate the firearms of a family member that a judge determines to be a danger to themselves or others, Agard said.

Executive Director National Association of Social Workers Wisconsin Chapter Marc Herstand said many social workers help people struggling with suicide.
>>
>>944304
“As social workers we understand issues of mental health and what happens when people are suicidal,” Herstand said. “We need to keep them safe, and help them through that transition. We know that suicide attempts using a gun are fatal, so it’s absolutely critical that if somebody is feeling suicidal or extremely depressed that they not have a gun in the home at that time.”

Many people who attempt suicide do so impulsively, and if they are stopped, will generally not attempt again, Herstand said. But 90% of suicide attempts using a gun are fatal, compared to five percent of attempts using the most common alternative methods, Herstand added, citing a 2004 study from the Harvard School of Public Health.

Research from other states with red flag laws shows the legislation is effective in reducing firearm suicides, Herstand said, citing a 2018 study showing that the passage of red flag laws in Indiana and Connecticut resulted in decrease in firearm suicides.

Red flag laws can also provide a point of intervention for people who are suicidal, allowing them to get the treatment they need, Herstand said.

Suicide is a problem affecting many Wisconsin communities —in both urban and rural settings, Agard said.

“We know in Wisconsin that this is something affecting many people in our communities, not just in urban area, but also rural areas, including farmers,” Agard said. “We’ve been seeing a lot more suicide attempts because of the stress associated with farming. I see [these bills] as a way to support Wisconsin as a core, to make sure they’re around to enjoy their families, friends, and live their lives to the fullest.”
>>
>>944306
About 81% of Wisconsinites support red flag laws, according to a 2019 Marquette poll. But Wisconsin Republicans are unlikely to pass either bill because Wisconsin’s gerrymandered districts favor extreme Republican positions, Agard said.

None of the Republican legislators contacted responded at the time of this article’s publication.

Gerrymandering is the manipulation of political boundaries to favor one party over another, according to the Washington Post. Wisconsin is a purple state — it voted for Trump in 2016 and Biden in 2020 — but its districts are gerrymandered so they benefit Republicans, Agard said.

Because many Republicans come from districts that gerrymandered so that a Republican is always likely to win, they don’t have worry about being voted out in favor of a Democrats, Agard said. Instead, they compete against other Republicans in the primaries — something which favors extreme positions among Republicans, Agard said.

One reason that some people may be against red flag laws and expanding background checks is because they fear that it may take away some people’s second amendment rights, Brett Fankhauser, who is a Deerfield Pistol Center manager and Civilian NRA instructor, said.

“I imagine [red flag laws] could do some good,” Fankhauser said. “I don’t doubt the intention here is to save people, but there’s going to be a lot of people that it’s a big hindrance to, and there’s going to be few people who are going to lose their guns and their constitutional rights for nothing.”

While the bills may not see much progress in the Wisconsin legislature, Agard says she’s hopeful similar pieces of legislation will pass on a national level, pointing to the Center for Disease Control Director Dr. Rochelle Walensky’s recent announcement that the institution will study gun violence.
>>
>>944308
The CDC had been prevented from studying gun violence for more than two decades after Republicans and the gun lobby effectively blocked federal funding for firearm research with the Dickey Amendment, according to NPR.

But in the 2018 omnibus spending bill, Congress changed the wording in the Dickey Amendment to allow the CDC to study gun violence, according to the Washington Post. In a 2019 federal spending package, congress allocated $25 million to the National Institute of Health and the CDC to study gun violence, according to NPR.

“I believe that we will get there,” Agard said. “I do believe that if we can’t get this done in Wisconsin, it will happen at the national level.”
>>
>>944304
>Social workers endorse bills to reduce gun violence, suicides
>by banning access to mental health care
What
>>
>>944310
It is a rather moronic move, yes.
>>
>>944310
They got spooked at people talking about them doing their job instead of sending cops to shoot crazies.
>>
>>944310
Don't treat the problem, just ban things. Classic democrat move.
>>
>>944309
>Guns cause disease and mental disorders!
Thanks faggot
>>
>>944355
What do you expect? It's much easier to send a SWAT team to shoot someone for breaking the law than going through a decade of policy to try to fix the healthcare system. Looks cooler on CNN too, especially if the guy is white or whatever.
>>
social workers are some of the most retarded people. it's mostly women, that's why, nurses social workers and psychologists are all stupid lazy insane women.
>>
>>944310
Mass killers are good for pushing gun control, why fix the source of the problem before grabbing the guns
>>
>>944414
>Mass killers are good for pushing gun control
not if they're black
>>
>>944421
They are great for that too, why do you think Chicago, NY, and Detroit all have strict gun control?
>>
>>944426
>They are great for that too, why do you think Chicago, NY, and Detroit all have strict gun control?
white lawmakers?
>>
>>944310
From what I can tell, it doesn't ban mental health outright, but rather could result in mentally unstable people having their guns confiscated or blocking them from buying guns at all. These two things could deter people from seeking needed mental healthcare, though the point of these bills is to reduce firearm suicide, which accounts for a majority of gun deaths.
>>
>>944437
Nothing wrong with suicide. A person has the right to do as they please with their own life.
>>
>>944439
If you knew that a family member had mental health issues and suicidal ideation, would you consider petitioning a court to confiscate firearms owned by them? If I was in that sort of situation, I'd probably regret it if I did nothing and that family member eventually did commit suicide.
>>
>>944452
Now imagine the police show up and steal your guns when haven't been convicted of or even charged with a crime. Doesn't that sound kind of bullshit? You can justify all kinds of tyranny by claiming it's for their own good, but I don't believe it's the government's place to be doing this. If you have a suicidal family member why don't you do something yourself instead of asking daddy government to bring force to bear on someone who's already unstable?
>>
>>944452
>Tell cops ex-bf is suicidal
>They confiscate guns
>End of story
Great system.
>>
>>944309
>The CDC had been prevented from studying gun violence for more than two decades after Republicans and the gun lobby effectively blocked federal funding for firearm research with the Dickey Amendment, according to NPR.
this statement is false. The dickey amendment does not block research, it blocks using taxpayer funding for gun control propaganda
>>944310
>go to shrink for therapy
>shrink has you swatted
>best case scenario you lose your basic human right
>possibility of cops murdering you and your family in your home
it absolutely will have a chilling effect and the only reason people push for red flag laws is because they want extra judicial gun confiscation
>>944452
If my parents redflagged me I would never contact them ever again in my life and they would never meet their grand kids. Also my cousin committed suicide using a rope. Want to ban those too?
>>
>>944452
Yeah I'd call in a SWAT raid on them, because what could go wrong?
>>
>>944452
Speaking from personal experience, someone that wants to take their own life WANTS to take their own life for a reason, and it's usually a very deep rooted reasoning that cannot be changed or altered by anyone else. In my case it's a great hatred for myself, my personality, my family, and everything around me, and if someone tried to tell me I wasn't allowed to end myself I would be quite pissed. I'm inching towards it slowly and I don't intend to involve anyone else in it. Believe me, the last thing I want is to be around my family anymore, and they won't miss me, these lawmakers trying to use the guise that these peoples families want them around and they need to be happy is sickening. Simplified, I see this as them using a persons depression to further their own agenda of gun control.
>>
>>944516
Stream it and post the link here
>>
>>944179
>second to ban all gun owners from ever seeking mental healthcare under threat their rights are stripped from them and they are murdered at 2 am in a no knock raid.
>Non gun fetish translation: How dare they take means of harming themselves or others from the mentally unwell.

Would you like the local schizo who thinks the walls have eyes and the local McDonalds have been stealing his dreams to have a fucking shotgun?
>>
>>944504
You do realize it would basically be a wellness check and not a fucking raid, right?
>>
>>944519
>depressed people are all schizos
You have to be at least 18 to post here.
>>
>>944487
>I would gladly cut all ties with my family if they ever tried to get me help for my mental illness and gun fetishizing.

Please, get help. Go to an anonymous online therapist or some shit if you're that paranoid but please fucking get help.
>>
>>944522
You do know "Mental illness" isn't just depression right? It might also be paranoid delusions, violent mood swings, hell even a mix of those three.
>>
>>944521
You may trust the police to play nice where you live, but things are different here in the hypermilitarized, paranoid US.
>>
>>944527
Hence why there's a push for social workers to handle this shit and not cops. "Wellness check" doesn't have involve officers.
>>
>>944524
You do know "Mental illness" isn't just schizophrenia right? It might also be anxiety, depression, or even external factors. Scared you'll hurt yourself? You're not required to buy a gun.
>>
>>944528
>"Wellness check" doesn't have involve officers.
So the social workers are gonna be the ones to confiscate firearms? Lol.
>>
>>944529
...yes? That's why I just said that? I literally just admitted it isn't one singular thing and has multiple factors and different ailments.

> Scared you'll hurt yourself? You're not required to buy a gun.
What does that even mean in this conversation? The issue is people who buy a gun and then begin behaving in ways that suggest they might start using it to hurt themselves or others.
>>
>>944530
>No, social workers or therapists could never convince someone that maybe they need help and shouldn't have access to those things if they get overwhelmed.

Cops should only get involved if the guy is actively threatening to shoot up the nearest walmart.
>>
>>944534
Agree perfectly with your post. Let's leave the gun ownership up to personal choice, and only get involved in cases like the one you mentioned.
>>
>>944535
It shouldn't be just if they're an active threat to others. If you know a loved one is going through a very tough time and that they have a gun while saying shit, maybe get a mental health professional to weigh if he's well enough to keep it without a risk of them hurting themselves with it. It's the small things like that which tend to foil suicides.
>>
>>944532
>...yes? That's why I just said that? I literally just admitted it isn't one singular thing and has multiple factors and different ailments.
What a relief, I thought you were this guy with the strawman >>944519
>What does that even mean in this conversation? The issue is people who buy a gun and then begin behaving in ways that suggest they might start using it to hurt themselves or others.
Not really, but you're close. The point of this thread is more about whether someone should have their rights taken away based on someone's interpretation that they might hurt themselves or others. You can have a bad day, doesn't mean you're gonna shoot yourself tomorrow.
>>
>>944538
>going through a very tough time and that they have a gun while saying shit
Like what? I can understand reaching out to a mental health professional if they say "i'm going to shoot myself", but I'm not going to ruin someone's hobby or leave them feeling helpless in a suicide ward based on my interpretation of their mental state.
>>
>>944539
To be honest, that was also me. My point is some people aren't mentally well or stable enough that they should have access to guns, both for their own safety and others.
>>
>>944540
Hence why they should send people to actually check on them and make sure they're alright. There's nothing saying "If someone says someone else isn't well, just auto-send a squad car to their house and take their guns by default".
>>
>>944541
>My point is some people aren't mentally well or stable enough that they should have access to guns, both for their own safety and others.
I perfectly agree with that. Where I draw the line is when those with a mental illness yet still living normal lives find their right to own guns determined by their diagnosis, rather than by what they've done to overcome it.
What's even worse is when the act of taking guns from people is done in such a hamfisted way (as is often with the police) that it poses a real possibility of sending someone over the edge.
>>
>>944543
>There's nothing saying "If someone says someone else isn't well, just auto-send a squad car to their house and take their guns by default".
Well, that's the thing. To quote the article in the OP:
>The other bill, LRB 3007, would establish an Extreme Risk Protection Order procedure — also known as a red flag law — in Wisconsin. Under it, families would be able to petition the court to temporarily confiscate the firearms of a family member that a judge determines to be a danger to themselves or others, Agard said.
No social workers or welfare checks necessary. Checking in on someone and making sure they're alright is a hell of a lot better an idea than what's being proposed in Wisconsin.
>>
>>944546
The thing is a wellness check isn't just "You have schizophrenia/depression/whatever". It's "How mentally stable is this person in regards to that."

Tons of people have mental illness, no one's suggesting taking guns from them just for that. But if someone's exhibiting concerning behaviors, send a mental health expert to check up on them, and if they really ARE on the edge of doing something bad, then take action to make sure they don't do something they'll regret and get them the health they need.
>>
>>944547
You're acting like a judge wouldn't consult an expert for it. And if multiple family members are putting up the concern, it's more likely then not that intervention IS necessary.
>>
>>944519
>>Non gun fetish translation: How dare they take means of harming themselves or others from the mentally unwell.
are we banning ropes too? Does this take away their car? Nope. The point is to deny them their constitutionally protected basic human rights via extra judicial means
>Would you like the local schizo who thinks the walls have eyes and the local McDonalds have been stealing his dreams to have a fucking shotgun?
We have had medication for schizophrenia for years and people with mental illnesses commit violent crimes at a lower rate than the general pop
https://psychiatryonline.org/doi/pdf/10.5555/appi.books.9781615371099
all this law does is prevent the schizo from going to a doctor.
>>
>>944521
>You do realize it would basically be a wellness check and not a fucking raid, right?
in practice, cops have done these orders via no knock raid at 2 am and it isn't like a mental check. Multiple cops show up to your home, strong arm you, confiscate your property, and are given a general search warrant to try to rack you up on other charges and pretty much spit in the face of the 4th amendment.
>>
>>944523
I don't have a mentally illness. My family wouldn't redflag me. You aren't qualified to give medical advice. I will never see a mental health professional so long as red flag laws exist in my state and if a doctor or nurse asks me if I own a gun I tell them to go choke on a cock.
>>
>>944528
social workers aren't the ones doing the red flag orders and confiscating guns.
>>
>>944534
>Cops should only get involved if the guy is actively threatening to shoot up the nearest walmart.
so you agree there should be zero red flag laws. Because if a social worker ever showed up to my house she is just getting told to go fuck herself and zero chance I open the door
>>
>>944543
>There's nothing saying "If someone says someone else isn't well, just auto-send a squad car to their house and take their guns by default".
that is literally what red flags are and do
>>944541
this is demonstrably false. Also it is straight up denying these people their human rights due to their disabilities. Do you think wheelchair fags should be banned from freedom of expression? Should we be able to search the houses of all fags who have AIDS without a warrant?
https://psychiatryonline.org/doi/pdf/10.5555/appi.books.9781615371099
>>
>>944551
>no one's suggesting taking guns from them just for that.
that is literally what the 1,500 social workers in OP, Biden, and multiple members of the DNC are literally suggesting
>>944553
judges just rubber stamp the shit. The standard for a TERPO is literally just a hair over that of suspicion and they don't want people saying they let someone do a shooting or a suicide. Especially democrat judges who just want mass confiscation of guns via any means
>>
>>944551
>Tons of people have mental illness, no one's suggesting taking guns from them just for that. But if someone's exhibiting concerning behaviors, send a mental health expert to check up on them, and if they really ARE on the edge of doing something bad, then take action to make sure they don't do something they'll regret and get them the health they need.
And you are solving this problem by banning said person from mental health facilities and sending cops to swat them at 2 am
>>
>>944541
>My point is some people aren't mentally well or stable enough that they should have access to guns, both for their own safety and others
If you have been involuntarily committed for psych/mental health issues, then you are already prohibited from owning a firearm. Red Flag laws allow firearms to be confiscated based on hearsay and without giving the person the ability to defend themselves in court. Gun control laws get pushed when existing laws are not enforced.
>>
>>944564
>banning said person from mental health facilities
What the fuck are you talking about?
>>
>>944543
>There's nothing saying "If someone says someone else isn't well, just auto-send a squad car to their house and take their guns by default".
Google "Gary Willis".
>>
>>944452
>If you knew that a family member had mental health issues
Translation: if I get into an argument with my pro-gun, NRA-member uncle at Thanksgiving and want to fuck him over for blowing me the fuck out at the dinner table...
>>
>>944521
>You do realize it would basically be a wellness check and not a fucking raid, right?
Gary Willis.
>>
>>944612
Nice strawman.
>>
>>944523
>I would gladly cut all ties with my family if they ever tried to get me help for my mental illness and gun fetishizing.
>Please, get help.
>But it's okay and not hypocritical at all for me to cut ties with my family who voted for Trump.
Please, get help.
>>
>>944616
That "strawman" was exactly what happened with Gary Willis, although it wasn't Thanksgiving. Maybe you should look him up before spouting your "red flags are good" horseshit.
>>
>>944610
You mean the guy who dove for a revolver, struggled with a police officer for it until it went off, and then promptly got shot by the first officers partner because of that? The one who had the red flag order on him in the first place because he was literally threatening to shoot his sister-in-law the day before? That Gary Willis?

First, that's just more evidence that they should send mental health professional, but secondly, Willis literally tried to pull a gun on a police officer, AND was threatening to shoot his family members the day before. The officers lives were in danger, and so was his family since, again, he was literally threatening to kill his sister-in-law the previous day.
>>
>>944619
See >>944622

Gary Willis was threatening to kill his sister-in-law the day before, AND struggled with a cop for his gun when he dove for it. Hell, that wasn't even a mental health call, that was a protective order.
>>
>>944626
>Gary Willis was threatening to kill his sister-in-law the day before
Bullshit. Source. From his niece's own mouth, her aunt - his cunt of a sister - got into an argument and she went to a judge who approved the confiscation the next day.

>>944622
>You mean the guy who dove for a revolver, struggled with a police officer for it until it went off, and then promptly got shot by the first officers partner because of that?
AFTER cops showed up and told him they were there to take his guns. Had they not been there for that this never would of happened - which is the whole point. Had police never been there he never would have hurt anyone. He committed no crime and was not medically evaluated before the judge said take his shit.
>>
>>944603
>go to mental health facility
>cops come to your home, take your property, strip you of your rights, and have a general search warrant to find something else to van you for
>possibility of cops straight up murdering you
yea totally not a ban or anything
>>944616
literally not even a strawman, that is how anti's are.
>>944622
the one who cops raided at 2 am without IDing themselves
>>
>>944630
>Had police never been there he never would have hurt anyone.
You don't put a apply for a fucking protective order out for someone who "Wouldn't hurt anyone".

I've checked: The very first reports of the incident all cite witnesses saying Willis was threatening to shoot his sister-in-law the day before. The others, mostly from pro-2a and conservative news sources, conveniently cut out that part of the original article and refuse to elaborate behind the circumstances behind the call.
>>
>>944631
>NO, I CAN'T GET HELP FOR MY MENTAL ISSUES! THEY MIGHT TAKE MY GUUUUUUUNNNNSSSS!

Anonymous online therapy anon, please.
>>
>>944640
Source, by the way: https://www.baltimoresun.com/news/crime/bs-md-aa-shooting-20181105-story.html
>>
>>944348
>>944487

This is the dumbest fucking thing. It's like saying black people don't like voting because they're afraid that the people they elect will take away their right to vote.
>>
>>944658
it isn't. voting is anonymous. Where as in NJ at least the shrink could lose their license if they don't red flag you and there is precedent that they could be liable in civil court too. Not to mention that most shrinks are anti gun karens who would take your guns without reason just because they think no one should own a gun
>>
>>944646
I read this source twice and I don't see where Willis threatened to shoot his sister-in-law. Could you please highlight that for me?
>>
>>944643
Is this the new "take your meds schizo" posting?
>>
>>944674
Shit, wrong article on the same topic on the same site.
>https://www.baltimoresun.com/maryland/anne-arundel/ac-cn-red-flag-20191001-zjzsbra735eatkkm2qmobz5z4a-story.html
>>
>>944688
This is literally the first time I'm hearing of witnesses claiming he said anything threatening so I guess I'll give you that. With all that said, the man was drunk, yelling, and didn't even have time to sober up before he got shot. Police showed up at 6pm, the order was signed at 2am, he got shot at 5am. Had they brought him for being under the influence, let him sober up, and then argue his case before a judge before being ordered to turn in his guns this could have been handled peacefully. There shouldn't be a process where your guns can be confiscated from your home in less than 24 hours without being able to defend yourself in court or be evaluated by a medical professional.

Also what sick fuck of a parent names their child Bruce Willis?
>>
>>944716
What were they supposed to do? Not serve the protective order until he sobered up? They were living in the same house.
>>
>>944719
Take him in, put him in the drunk tank, a few hours later talk to judge/commissioner/psychiatrist, bing bang boom.
>>
>>944721
>take him in
Oh, yeah, just take the armed, drunk guy in. Reminder one of the things that agitated him the most in the incident was being told to leave his house.

Not to mention he already had a gun when they arrived. They can't take him to the police station ARMED.
>>
>>944553
Judges rubber-stamp this shit
A friend of mine was driving around the roads near his property and some asshole kids were ripping and tearing up the road, driving like they wanted to kill someone (more than double the speed limit and on a bumpy dirt back road). He confronts them, they tell him to fuck off. He goes to talk to their grandfather, trying to be non confrontational, and soon enough the grandfather and father are screaming at him, while he's remaining level-headed but warning them if it keeps up he intends to call the cops. This friend is always legally carrying, but on this circumstance he didn't want to intimidate anyone and left his pistol in his truck. Unfortunately, he didn't hide it - he didn't think he needed to, since he's legally entitled to open carry. Father of the asshole kids happens to notice the gun in his car, and hits this guy over the head with new red flag laws. The court rubber-stamped it (this friend has ZERO history of mental illness and has never threatened anyone or exhibited any violent tendencies, no criminal record, etc), they take EVERYTHING, including historical pieces that were passed down from his grandfather, some of which were not even functional and purely decorative/heirloom pieces. He now has to pay thousands to fight this and get everything back.

Fact of the matter is: the only way to keep yourself safe from this as a responsible gun owner is noncompliance. For what it's worth, knocking down someone's door at 2am and confiscating their possessions is a great way to push an otherwise sane, well-adjusted person over the edge. Thankfully my friend had the sense to just let it happen and fortunately he has the funds that he will get everything back in time - but this isn't possible for people who can't afford the legal fees, so actually this is an extremely classist system designed to take guns away from poor people while making sure our managerial and supermanagerial classes can continue to defend themselves
>>
>>944847
What a fantastic fairy tale.
>>
It really doesn't sound like the guy was wrong in thinking government thugs would roll up and kill him based on nothing because they got someone to say so with no evidence when that is exactly what happened.
>>
>>944487
>this statement is false. The dickey amendment does not block research, it blocks using taxpayer funding for gun control propaganda
This is gun lobby propaganda.
>>
>>944956
>reality is gun lobby propaganda
>>
>>944956
>gun lobby
What gun lobby?
>>
>>944963
the big spoopy NRA which spent a whole 7 million dollars on lobbying!
>>
>>944723
If the plan was to take him in until he sobered up the best case scenario is he would have been detained peacefully and would have argued his case with a clear head, worst case scenario he gets shot resisting police while armed and this never would have made it on anyone's radar.

Instead the plan was to go to this pissed off guy's home and just take his guns, WITHOUT detaining him, for allegedly threatening someone when he has no prior criminal record that I can see and there's no evidence that he poses a threat other than he's a gun owner because that was going to make him less pissed off and less likely to do something stupid. As a result of this fuck up, gun owners can now use this as an example of why red flag laws are bad.

And this is only one example of shitty red flag laws, you also have the /pol/-larper in California who got his guns taken for saying nigger on Facebook and you have the retired New Jersey cop who got his guns taken for reporting corrupt cops and judges.
>>
>>944856
great argument, chang. Judges 100% rubber stamp this shit. The standard is less than a civil case to sue someone and if they are a blue state judge odds are they don't believe in the constitution and want all guns banned.
>>944956
Cite the text of the fucking amendment. The text of the fucking amendment literally says the CDC can't use taxpayer money to fund gun control. It says nothing about research.
>>
>>944956
https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/PLAW-104publ208/pdf/PLAW-104publ208.pdf

>Provided further,
That none of the funds made available for injury prevention and
control at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention may
be used to advocate or promote gun control

Why do you lie?
>>
>>945445
because the truth is not on the side of gun control





Delete Post: [File Only] Style:
[Disable Mobile View / Use Desktop Site]

[Enable Mobile View / Use Mobile Site]

All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.