Englebert Posted April 10, 2021 Report Share Posted April 10, 2021 Since no Liberals will respond to the background check topic, would any of you anti-gun nuts like to opine on the susceptibility of so-called "Red Flag Laws". If you think background check laws are subjective to abuse...let's delve into this brain-dead idea. I'm guessing the enlargement of Red Flag Laws against those who purposely interact with firearms should also apply to any "pedophiles" that have the audacity to purposely interact with children. I want you to keep in mind that idea as one of many conundrums when you attempt to explain the benefits of Red Flag Laws. Please outline who has the ability to subject a person to gun confiscation. Can anyone call authorities to generate an investigation of a gun owner? Do we have a litmus test for the competency of the accuser? Will the accuser be subjected to an analytical skills test to prove they are capable of analyzing suspicious behavior? Will the accuser's motive be analyzed? If so, by who? Someone qualified? And as with the background check test, what behavioral attributes will dictate a confiscation of one's constitutionally guaranteed right? Will a LEO, who has enormous skill in law enforcement but has zero experience in psychological behavior be the deciding factor of stripping one's guaranteed right? Should a psychologist be called in to evaluate the situation? Who gets to decide? What behaviors are listed as "bad"? Please explain the parameters and standards of Red Flag Laws. Also, identify and explain recourse for those accused, especially for those falsely accused. And just as important, please explain measures that will be implemented that dissuade false accusations and confiscation based on incompetence by the confiscator. Name the checks and balances. If you are in favor of Red Flag laws, please type your full legal name here. Someone might want to experiment on how to abuse these laws. I'm betting it will not be hard. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Englebert Posted April 10, 2021 Author Report Share Posted April 10, 2021 Both background checks and red flag laws are based on the premise that we have the capability of predicting behavior based on a set of arbitrary criteria. The premise is that we can prevent crime by disarming those who we think will commit a future crime. Who posses this capability? (That is rhetorical.) If you know the criteria, please lay it down on print...right here...right now. As with "no fly" lists, how do we stop abuse of these programs? All are ripe for abuse and have zero oversight for fairness. All can be good if applied by Andy Griffith, but would be suspect if applied by Barney Fife. Can you image the abuse that could happen if applied by a raging Liberal (Pelosi, Schumer, AOC)...especially the rare Liberal over-achiever that has a double digit IQ (Can't come up with an example...but I assume they exist)? And as always, when you are finished defining the qualifications of those incapable of determining their own self protection (LOL), please explain: If someone "qualifies" as incapable of practicing his constitutionally guaranteed rights, should that person qualify as incapable of determining our elected officials? LumRaiderFan and Realville 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.