TexasCHLforum.com

And away we go...

https://dailycaller.com/2019/08/05/grah ... -red-flag/

First order create red flad laws so that weapons can be taken on the word of anonymous complaint

Second order institute universal background checks. This creates defacto registration.

Third order turn off or delay background checks so that no weapons can be sold.

Final solution start picking them up.

Dan Crenshaw has already promoted this... pretty disappointing, I had considered him to be such a fine example until today.

From dog catcher to the presidency, it's going to be hard to vote for any Republican candidate in the future.

Gird your loins, my 2A brothers and sisters, it is coming. Only Congressional and federal judgeship term Limits have a chance of stemming this anti-gun storm tide.

The people pushing these laws only touch the surface of what they really want. "Of course, we want to keep the guns out of the hands of crazy people, so we need "red flag" laws. Of course we want universal background checks to buy guns" What they don't cover is how many people will be denied due process when an ex girlfriend/boyfriend accuses them of being crazy or the fact that the government can't control people selling guns unless they know where all the guns are(registration). The law the House has passed allows the government access to all the background checks to purchase a gun.

howdy wrote: ↑Mon Aug 05, 2019 10:02 pm The people pushing these laws only touch the surface of what they really want. "Of course, we want to keep the guns out of the hands of crazy people, so we need "red flag" laws. Of course we want universal background checks to buy guns" What they don't cover is how many people will be denied due process when an ex girlfriend/boyfriend accuses them of being crazy or the fact that the government can't control people selling guns unless they know where all the guns are(registration). The law the House has passed allows the government access to all the background checks to purchase a gun.

Exactly. Just make it a law that crazy people shouldn't have guns! Seems sane to me. Just expand what meets the definition of crazy. "Oh you want another gun? Well thats crazy!" Turn them in!

Its like Catch 22 by Heller. You can get out of the army if you are crazy. But by asking to get out of the army that means your sane, so you stay!

Yep the law against killing others worked real well to prevent these two shootings this weekend.

The leftists politicians are headed towards take ALL guns. Other country’s do not have as many murders with guns like the United States. It makes sense right? Just overlook the use truck, knives, hatchets, machetes, bombs, etc... before long we want have a butter knife. Why did they not band Ryder trucks after the Oklahoma City bombing?

They are Chopin away at the Constitution a little at a time. They want to make the “undocumented workers” legal so they can keep voting democrat. Say what you will, but I do not see this stopping. We are headed down hill like a snowball headed to hades.

Well, let them know why this is a bad idea. Otherwise let's just give up and cry.

Just say no.

“The laws that forbid the carrying of arms are laws of such a nature. They disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes. … Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man.”
— Thomas Jefferson, “Commonplace Book,” quoting 18th-century criminologist Cesare Beccaria, 1774-1776
“To disarm the people … is the most effectual way to enslave them.”
— George Mason, referencing advice given to the British Parliament by Pennsylvania Gov. Sir William Keith, “The Debates in the Several State Conventions on the Adoption of the Federal Constitution,” June 14, 1788
“Before a standing army can rule, the people must be disarmed, as they are in almost every country in Europe. The supreme power in America cannot enforce unjust laws by the sword; because the whole body of the people are armed, and constitute a force superior to any band of regular troops.”
— Noah Webster, “An Examination of the Leading Principles of the Federal Constitution,” Oct. 10, 1787
“Guard with jealous attention the public liberty. Suspect everyone who approaches that jewel. Unfortunately, nothing will preserve it but downright force. Whenever you give up that force, you are ruined. … The great object is that every man be armed. Everyone who is able might have a gun.”
— Patrick Henry, speech to the Virginia Ratifying Convention, June 5, 1778
“The right of the citizens to keep and bear arms has justly been considered, as the palladium of the liberties of a republic; since it offers a strong moral check against the usurpation and arbitrary power of rulers; and will generally, even if these are successful in the first instance, enable the people to resist and triumph over them.”
— Joseph Story, “Commentaries on the Constitution of the United States,” 1833
“On every occasion (of constitutional interpretation) let us carry ourselves back to the time when the Constitution was adopted, recollect the spirit manifested in the debates, and instead of trying (to force) what meaning may be squeezed out of the text, or invented against it, (instead let us) conform to the probable one in which it was passed.”
— Thomas Jefferson, letter to William Johnson, June 12, 1823

jb2012 wrote: ↑Mon Aug 05, 2019 9:44 pm Dan Crenshaw has already promoted this... pretty disappointing, I had considered him to be such a fine example until today.

I’m worried about Lindsey Graham and Dan Crenshaw, let’s take their guns. We can’t be to safe.

The link says it is a "federal grant program" to encourage states to adopt red flag laws--not a "federal red flag statute" like some states already have.
A federal red flag statute would of course be a nightmare to enforce even setting aside its questionable constitutionality. They would need many more U.S. marshals, FBI, ATF agents, etc. to enforce such a program at the federal level.

What happened to the proposed red-flag law from this past Texas legislative session? In that proposed legislation could law enforcement take your guns even before the hearing, based on a sworn affidavit of a complainant and an order from a judge or would they have to serve you with process, hold, a hearing, then take your guns? The devil is in the details--a big devil indeed.

Taking somebodies property and denial of due process of law will go to the Supreme Court quick!

If you had a relative that was truly crazy and a potential threat and had firearms how would you deal with them?
Hypothetically of course.

Richbirdhunter wrote: ↑Tue Aug 06, 2019 8:00 am I’m worried about Lindsey Graham and Dan Crenshaw, let’s take their guns. We can’t be to safe.

No let's take their pens. That's what they're creating future mayhem with........(vote them out)