Get Ready For More Red Flag Abuse

[VinnieBoomBah]

Wow.
It has nothing to do with the "group " you believe that you're advocating for.

It's the new situation that was created, and has subsequently been exploited by anyone who sees the fresh opportunity for abuse. The same core issue that presents itself every time we attempt to better ourselves through legislation. Which is why I am sick of new laws attempting to right all the wrongs that people perceive with their overdeveloped feels.

Just to be clear, I'm not advocating for any particular group, I'm asking American123 to substantiate his claims, which in truth seem totally irrelevant to the the discussion of Red Flag laws

 

[Cavedweller]

I was able to find one instance of that from a prisoner in Wakefield, West Yorkshire, but am unable to find any other documented cases that would support that claim.

Not exactly the same, but:

NJ women’s prison inmates pregnant after sex with transgender prisoner

Two inmates serving time in New Jersey’s only state prison for women became pregnant after they had sex with a transgender inmate.

nypost.com

This kind of social insanity leads to questions like this:

I am a transgender woman (M2F) who likes girls. Are there lesbians who are into dating transgender women like me?

Answer (1 of 73): Oh, there are MANY of them! I can assure that, in time, you will have no difficulties in finding interested women. A couple bits of advice… Location, location, location! The best, and safest way to put yourself in social situation where you might encounter an interested partner ...

www.quora.com

 

[American123]

Just to be clear, I'm not advocating for any particular group, I'm asking American123 to substantiate his claims, which in truth seem totally irrelevant to the the discussion of Red Flag laws

Claim very much substantiated.

Relevance to red flag laws?

Laws with obvious abilities to be perverted will be perverted and until those laws are able to effectively safeguard against their perversion, they shouldn't be laws.

Example: tranny men in women's facilities and predators using that created opportunity to assault women.

It was/is a contested issue. Proponents argued similar to your argument for red flag laws, "hasn't been an issue so far."

Those against claimed it would become a problem given time - it did.

Examples given of women being assaulted as predicted.

I hope that lays it out clearly enough for you.

 

[Koda]

Just to be clear, I'm not advocating for any particular group, I'm asking American123 to substantiate his claims, which in truth seem totally irrelevant to the the discussion of Red Flag laws

I thought we went down this tangent to validate that the "slippery slope" is not really a fallacy? The idea being that red flag laws are open to abuse but hasn't happened yet doesn't mean it wont become a problem. Im pretty convinced in Portland area ANY claim of a threat valid or not gets the persons guns removed

heres another bathroom incident. Id say it happens enough to be a legit problem.

Transgender woman arrested accused of sexually assaulting teen in Walmart bathroom

31-year-old Sean Ojeda, who is currently transitioning to a woman, was arrested last week for allegedly assaulting a teen inside a Walmart bathroom.

www.kxii.com

 

[American123]

I thought we went down this tangent to validate that the "slippery slope" is not really a fallacy? The idea being that red flag laws are open to abuse but hasn't happened yet doesn't mean it wont become a problem. Im pretty convinced in Portland area ANY claim of a threat valid or not gets the persons guns removed

heres another bathroom incident. Id say it happens enough to be a legit problem.

Transgender woman arrested accused of sexually assaulting teen in Walmart bathroom

31-year-old Sean Ojeda, who is currently transitioning to a woman, was arrested last week for allegedly assaulting a teen inside a Walmart bathroom.

www.kxii.com

That was the purpose of the tangent, yes.

 

[VinnieBoomBah]

Claim very much substantiated.

Relevance to red flag laws?

Laws with obvious abilities to be perverted will be perverted and until those laws are able to effectively safeguard against their perversion, they shouldn't be laws.

Example: tranny men in women's facilities and predators using that created opportunity to assault women.

It was/is a contested issue. Proponents argued similar to your argument for red flag laws, "hasn't been an issue so far."

Those against claimed it would become a problem given time - it did.

Examples given of women being assaulted as predicted.

I hope that lays it out clearly enough for you.

Meh. You said "plenty " which I took to mean a substantial number but it could also mean "good enough for me" as in "That's plenty good enough of me"

Anyway, too far off topic, no one's mind is going be changed and dancing precariously close to a couple of Rule violations

 

[American123]

Meh. You said "plenty " which I took to mean a substantial number but it could also mean "good enough for me" as in "That's plenty good enough of me"

Anyway, too far off topic, no one's mind is going be changed and dancing precariously close to a couple of Rule violations

In my field of work I find that some people learn much faster than others. Some people are just dense, it takes them far more examples, explanations, practice problems, or analogies for them to get what other people clearly understood far earlier with far less assistance. Those same dense people often struggle with later concepts as well. They're just 'slow' by comparison.

Obviously those people make their way out into society and do something with their lives.

Thanks for the discourse.

 

[VinnieBoomBah]

 

[VanceInWA]

So-called "red flag" laws take away your constitutional rights. If they succeed in taking away your Second Amendment rights, none of your constitutional rights will be protected. Consider this scenario: Someone suspects you are selling drugs from your car. Drugs are deemed to be a danger to yourself or others. If there was a "red flag" law for drugs, the person suspecting you of dealing drugs from your car could anonymously complain to the police, a hearing could be held before a judge without your knowledge or participation, and based on that one-sided presentation the judge could order ALL of your cars impounded for two weeks, at which time you finally get a chance to present your side of the story. If you fail to convince the judge, your cars would remain impounded for the next year before you could have another hearing. Have you been convicted of an actual crime? No. Have you even been charged with a crime? No. Normally, the Fourth Amendment would constitutionally protect you from these kinds of improper seizures, but not with a "red flag" law. In this bizarre legal scenario, state "red flag" laws are able to trump your constitutional rights. How do you like that? And all arising from someone anonymously lodging a mere suspicion against you.

 

[Old Dog]

I wasn't gonna post in this thread as the topic is so insidiously contentious, but some of y'all seriously need to do some research into just how the "Extreme Risk Protection Order" law in Washington state has gone since its passage and institution.

DISCLAIMER: I do NOT support the concept of "red flag laws" in principle because (1) I do believe this type of law violates the standard of due process; (2) I do believe these laws are unconstitutional (4th and 5th Amendment grounds) and (3) the potential for "weaponizing" these laws to be used against another person -- the potential for abuse -- is great.

This said -- Washington hasn't done badly -- thus far -- in this regard. Existing laws for restraining/protection orders and DV response pretty much cover what's been happening, and as another poster noted, the use of the ERPO -- at least in WA thus far -- has been limited, legit, and reasonable. We haven't seen the predicted abuse by vengeful ex-girlfriends, spouses, neighbors, rivals, enemies, et al... Nor have any child custody, spousal support, alimony cases, neighborhood disputes, etc., hinged on ERPOs.

And all arising from someone anonymously lodging a mere suspicion against you.

Have you actually read the RCW? That is not how it works.

So, none of what I've just typed should be construed as me being a supporter of red flag (ERPO) laws. Most of you -- rightfully -- have trust issues when it comes to government regulation of what we consider natural rights, but -- please just read the laws and try to understand the reality of how they CURRENTLY impact law-abiding gun-owners (at least in WA state).

 

[HungN24]

I don't understand why they call this a compromise.

We don't get anything in return for more infringements.

How about suppressors and/or SBRs off the NFA?
How about interstate handgun sales?
If they want private sales to go through BG checks, how about opening up the NICS for private citizens to access?
Give US something.

 

[ma96782]

The constitutionality of laws is determined by the courts. It says as much in the constitution. The courts have ruled that firearm centric laws can be constitutional. You dont determine constitutionality. Neither do I . The courts do.

When the President declares that the next Supreme Court Justice MUST be a ______________ and a ______________ .

AND

When the nominee is asked...........to define a woman?

AND

The Nominee gives some B.S. answer and is still appointed to the Court.

IMHO..........well, we as a Nation are probably/likely DOOMED.

Aloha, Mark

PS........in case you might have missed it.

 

[VanceInWA]

I wasn't gonna post in this thread as the topic is so insidiously contentious, but some of y'all seriously need to do some research into just how the "Extreme Risk Protection Order" law in Washington state has gone since its passage and institution.

DISCLAIMER: I do NOT support the concept of "red flag laws" in principle because (1) I do believe this type of law violates the standard of due process; (2) I do believe these laws are unconstitutional (4th and 5th Amendment grounds) and (3) the potential for "weaponizing" these laws to be used against another person -- the potential for abuse -- is great.

This said -- Washington hasn't done badly -- thus far -- in this regard. Existing laws for restraining/protection orders and DV response pretty much cover what's been happening, and as another poster noted, the use of the ERPO -- at least in WA thus far -- has been limited, legit, and reasonable. We haven't seen the predicted abuse by vengeful ex-girlfriends, spouses, neighbors, rivals, enemies, et al... Nor have any child custody, spousal support, alimony cases, neighborhood disputes, etc., hinged on ERPOs.


Have you actually read the RCW? That is not how it works.

So, none of what I've just typed should be construed as me being a supporter of red flag (ERPO) laws. Most of you -- rightfully -- have trust issues when it comes to government regulation of what we consider natural rights, but -- please just read the laws and try to understand the reality of how they CURRENTLY impact law-abiding gun-owners (at least in WA state).

You need to read 7.94.030(7) as follows: "If the petition states that disclosure of the petitioner's address would risk harm to the petitioner or any member of the petitioner's family or household, the petitioner's address may be omitted from all documents filed with the court.". The petitioner (complainer) has no burden of proof, or even so much as a need to state why, all they need to do is state their "belief" in order to gain this filing anonymity.

 

[VinnieBoomBah]

When the President declares that the next Supreme Court Justice MUST be a ______________ and a ______________ .

Serious question, do you think that is any different than how any Prez has selected nominees other than saying it out loud? They all have criteria they use, in the past I recall the geographic location being an issue, and don't forget

Column: The architect of Reagan's pledge to put a woman on the Supreme Court says it was all political

The 1980 promise was about closing the gender gap, says top campaign strategist.

www.latimes.com

 

[ma96782]

RE : Post #141
and this response.......

I was able to find one instance of that from a prisoner in Wakefield, West Yorkshire, but am unable to find any other documented cases that would support that claim.

On the other hand I can find several instances of conservative politicians that are guilty of that

Transgender Rikers inmate sentenced to 7 years for raping female prisoner

Ramel Blount received a seven-year prison sentence with an additional eight years of post-release supervision. An order of protection was issued, and Blount will be registered as a sex offender.

nypost.com

NJ women’s prison inmates pregnant after sex with transgender prisoner

Two inmates serving time in New Jersey’s only state prison for women became pregnant after they had sex with a transgender inmate.

nypost.com

Which brings up......
Consent?
Yeah, Imagine if/when.......
The inmate said and the guard said.....that they were in love.
Was it/should it be "allowed" in the name of LOVE?
OR
Because of the situation of incarceration.....is it, automatically considered RAPE?

Hummmm........
Certainly, the taxpayers would like an answer. Before this becomes an even BIGGER PROBLEM (Pregnancy - Bigger).

Aloha, Mark

 

[VinnieBoomBah]

You need to read 7.94.030(7) as follows: "If the petition states that disclosure of the petitioner's address would risk harm to the petitioner or any member of the petitioner's family or household, the petitioner's address may be omitted from all documents filed with the court.". The petitioner (complainer) has no burden of proof, or even so much as a need to state why, all they need to do is state their "belief" in order to gain this filing anonymity.

Is there a part that says they can omit their name. or just the address?

 

[VinnieBoomBah]

BIGGER PROBLEM

JMHO here, but the actual bigger problem here is that this issue should never have been introduced into a discussion on Red Flag Laws and how they pertain to 2A on a forum that states "We are a single-issue organization, focused solely on bringing people together in support of the 2nd Amendment."

Everyone else is of course entitled to their own opinion on that, but that is mine

 

[ma96782]

JMHO here, but the actual bigger problem here is that this issue should never have been introduced into a discussion on Red Flag Laws and how they pertain to 2A on a forum that states "We are a single-issue organization, focused solely on bringing people together in support of the 2nd Amendment."

Everyone else is of course entitled to their own opinion on that, but that is mine

When someone states something........as a GIVEN or FACT and no one challenges.......does THAT/should THAT.........

Automatically get a PASS?

Aloha, Mark

 

[VinnieBoomBah]

When someone states something........as a GIVEN or FACT and no one challenges.......does THAT/should THAT.........

Automatically get a PASS?

Aloha, Mark

 

[ma96782]

Post #179
Response.




Aloha, Mark