[NEWS] "Red Flag" Gun Law Backfires, Gets A Man Killed

[Deus Ex]

because gun owners will resist arrest and put themselves and officers lives in danger rather than hand over their firearm? thats like saying drug arrests wont work because crackheads might stab the person trying to arrest them lol

next time dont resist arrest because you'll probably be shot lol. thats like textbook

This wasn't an arrest warrant

Try listening to the video or looking up an article if you're gonna offer a dipstuff opinion on the subject

They came to his house and said they were gonna take his guns on the grounds that some judge has deemed him unworthy of his 2A right. This was an unconstitutional attempt to seize the legally owned property of an American citizen. This is not comparable to a crackhead arrest. forget off with your nonsense.

[Ad Bot]

[MoltenKitten]

Yes, ownership of metal ,that's what people are upset about.

These weapons are the only means of fighting back if the government starts to become a dictatorship. If the German people had guns durring the national socialist regime national socialist Germany would have fallen long before the war started.

While I do believe that this red flag rule is loving stupid I have to go ahead and stop you with that national socialist thing because it's factually wrong. Interwar Germany did have many gun restrictions in place however, once the national socialist party took power they actually loosened these laws and actively encouraged the ownership of firearms for everyone that wasn't considered against the regime.

[Mr.Noßody]

It's actually much easier than you would think.

It's really not. Unless you think waving a gun around in public is totally acceptable, sure. I guess its easy. You'd have to publicly do something stupid or dangerous to be considered a threat by police like that.
I want to know what this guy did.

Also it's not bring flagged as a "public nuisance" just a """threat""".

Okay?

[Master Matthew²]

its amazing how libertarians will be like 'oh its ok for cars to run down protesters if they block the road lol its their own fault' but then the moment some dipstuff resists arrest and gets shot they're like 'uhhhh look what gun laws did!!! its the gun law fault!!!'

its okay guys freedom is rlllllly important!!! laws are the problem with society!!!

Here's the major difference, legal gray areas can move, roads can't.

[Master Matthew²]

It's really not. Unless you think waving a gun around in public is totally acceptable, sure. I guess its easy. You'd have to publicly do something stupid or dangerous to be considered a threat by police like that.
I want to know what this guy did.

Okay?

A restraining order can do it, and in current t year if you hab bagina and the right politics you will get it, lest the judge be called a loveist bigot and lose their job.

[Mr.Noßody]

So this man was shot dead because he had a restraining order?

[thegoodperry]

This wasn't an arrest warrant

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reasonable_suspicion

Here's the major difference, legal gray areas can move, roads can't.

so its ok for people to be legally allowed to unnecessarily kill human beings with their automobile under any condition because roads are legal safe zones for hit and run drivers now. but taking away a dangerous object from someone who is potentially a threat to themselves or others is crossing many lines and manipulation of legal gray areas?

[Drydess]

I would love to know what the gun owner did to be flagged as a public nuisance.

this. also the guns are only seized temporarily until you're processed and evaluated as a proper gun owner and then given back if it turns out the red flag was bullstuff
haven't read up too much on this law but hopefully there's some sort of false claim charges for someone who reports a red flag out of like spite but nothing out of this is unconstitutional. if it was, it wouldn't have passed as a law

[Mr.Noßody]

Im pretty sure this man wasn't considered a threat because of a restraining order.
It most likely involved the guns they wanted to confiscate.

[Master Matthew²]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reasonable_suspicion
so its ok for people to be legally allowed to unnecessarily kill human beings with their automobile under any condition because roads are legal safe zones for hit and run drivers now. but taking away a dangerous object from someone who is potentially a threat to themselves or others is crossing many lines and manipulation of legal gray areas?

Why the hell is it so important the protestors walk in the road? It's doesn't hold the same necessity as owning a gun. It doesn't protect you and it doesn't change anything, it's as easy to stay out of the road as it is to walk into it. Most importantly, if your protesting on a road that has a speed limit of 65mph or higher, congrats future pancake you can hold your victim card all the way to the hospital.

Ffs it's the embodiment of the bike meme with the rod in the wheel.

Certainly it shouldlnt be legal to purposefully run over people, but sometimes these "protestors" start attacking people in these cars. Honestly that's a tough call, but really there is no valid reason to hold up in the middle of the road for hours on end.

[IkeTheGeneric]

Officials said Willis answered the door while holding a handgun.
Willis then placed the gun next to the door.


When officers began to serve him the order, Willis became irate and grabbed his gun.


One of the officers tried to take the gun from Willis, but instead Willis fired the gun.


The second officer fired a gun, striking Willis. He died at the scene.

https://baltimore.cbslocal.com/2018/11/05/fatal-officer-involved-shooting-in-anne-arundel-county/


Maybe you shouldn't try going for a gun while the police are talking for you, js

[Drydess]

yall cant seriously defend this lmao^

[thegoodperry]

Also if your reaching into your pocket, it's very possible you could be reaching for a weapon, have some common sense.

Its very possible someone who is a threat could be threatening with a firearm. sure its arbitrary but its even more arbitrary to assume someone who is reaching for their pocket is reaching for a weapon when 90% of the worlds pockets hold identification and phones.

This is always a contradiction of the second amendment right, and this sets a bad precedent:

"If arbitrary conditions are met, loss of amendment rights can be validated."

in theory this doesn't sound correct but its pretty strange how many other amendment rights are damaged by arbitration but only second amendment rights are the most serious. what about the fact that your right to life can be taken away if you are handed an arbitrary amount of life sentences?

[Master Matthew²]

nothing out of this is unconstitutional. if it was, it wouldn't have passed as a law

< Implying that because it's a law the people who passed it weren't biased enough to overlook constitutional validation.

[IkeTheGeneric]

Certainly it shouldlnt be legal to purposefully run over people, but sometimes these "protestors" start attacking people in these cars.

And sometimes these "lawful gun owners" are a danger to society.

Crazy how your stupid leaps in logic contradict your stupid points