Number of guns owned now being used as a Red Flag Trigger.

[Gator 45/70]

Tell that to all the Branch Davidians. Living or dead. Wasn’t a fan of Koresche, but I distinctly remember the news conference where the ATF announced they were watching and raiding because of stockpiling and ordering parts to possibly convert AK and other rifles to automatic. Wonder how they tracked those transactions...
Oh, and don’t buy anything straight from China (Wish.com or equivalent) right now. Bad juju...

Yeah that's true enough,Hell they killed Randy Weaver's wife,son and dog over a shot-gun that the ATF supplied....

 

[Bangswitch]

Tell that to all the Branch Davidians. Living or dead. Wasn’t a fan of Koresche, but I distinctly remember the news conference where the ATF announced they were watching and raiding because of stockpiling and ordering parts to possibly convert AK and other rifles to automatic. Wonder how they tracked those transactions...
Oh, and don’t buy anything straight from China (Wish.com or equivalent) right now. Bad juju...

You know you can’t post words like Branch Davidian, Wacko, or ‘Janet Reno killed them’ without sending the ATF spies into overtime.

 

[El Pozzinator]

I have some friends from past lives working for alphabet agencies. They pay a lot more attention to the dingbats on video sites and mainstream social media than to these types of enthusiast sites. Why? Because of exactly what was mentioned above: the majority of us are law abiding people, a good number of whom are CCW holders. Sure, correlation doesn’t equal causation, but the fact is if one distills the uniform crime report compared against 4473s and CCW applications one would be able to draw a reasonable conclusion that it appears CCW holders, (legal) hunters, and (legal) firearms owners in general are the least likely segment of the population to have a law enforcement encounter due to violation of a local, state, or federal statute.

Sure, we can only effectively use one at a time. Likewise we can only drive one car at a time or sleep in one bedroom at a time, but nobody’s talking about limiting the number of cars we’re allowed to own or how big our house is allowed to be. And those aren’t even constitutionally-guaranteed fundamental rights.

My stepdad and I spoke about a lot of this stuff today at length. I’d really like to know at what point we can start talking about seizing cars from people convicted of DUI or who’ve been found to be drunk in public. Or chemically castrating men convicted of rape. The left wants to talk about “common sense restrictions”, I’m good with that. Let’s start with restricting privileges which people have clearly abused to the detriment of civil society. Not rights which the vast majority of people have never and will never misuse.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Gator 45/70]

I have some friends from past lives working for alphabet agencies. They pay a lot more attention to the dingbats on video sites and mainstream social media than to these types of enthusiast sites. Why? Because of exactly what was mentioned above: the majority of us are law abiding people, a good number of whom are CCW holders. Sure, correlation doesn’t equal causation, but the fact is if one distills the uniform crime report compared against 4473s and CCW applications one would be able to draw a reasonable conclusion that it appears CCW holders, (legal) hunters, and (legal) firearms owners in general are the least likely segment of the population to have a law enforcement encounter due to violation of a local, state, or federal statute.

Sure, we can only effectively use one at a time. Likewise we can only drive one car at a time or sleep in one bedroom at a time, but nobody’s talking about limiting the number of cars we’re allowed to own or how big our house is allowed to be. And those aren’t even constitutionally-guaranteed fundamental rights.

My stepdad and I spoke about a lot of this stuff today at length. I’d really like to know at what point we can start talking about seizing cars from people convicted of DUI or who’ve been found to be drunk in public. Or chemically castrating men convicted of rape. The left wants to talk about *common sense restrictions*, I’m good with that. Let’s start with restricting privileges which people have clearly abused to the detriment of civil society. Not rights which the vast majority of people have never and will never misuse.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Well I don't know about all that using chemicals to chemically castrating men convicted of rape and pedophiles,It seems to me that clamping their nuts in a vice,Hand them a dull rust butter knife and then sent the building on fire would be more of a solution depending on just how much they want to live or die.

You know, Being kind enough to give them a few minutes to think about their sins

But that's just me.....

 

[El Pozzinator]

Well I don't know about all that using chemicals to chemically castrating men convicted of rape and pedophiles,It seems to me that clamping their nuts in a vice,Hand them a dull rust butter knife and then sent the building on fire would be more of a solution depending on just how much they want to live or die.

You know, Being kind enough to give them a few minutes to think about their sins

But that's just me.....

Hey personally my preferred method would be Charlie Daniels’ advice:

Ya just take them rascals out in the swamp//put ‘em on their knees and tie ‘em to a stump// let the bugs and rattlers and the alligators do the rest...

But I was trying to be civil about it.

:-)


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Nathan Hale]

x

 

[Magdump]

So, evidence of the unsuitability of firearm possession by an individual is the ownership of firearms by that individual. Unbelievable.

Sort of like.. resisting being an arrestable offense in and of itself?

 

[Magdump]

Bad juju...

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[thperez1972]

Sort of like.. resisting being an arrestable offense in and of itself?

No...not really.

 

[KDerekT83]

So im guessing 24 mags loaded at all times would be considered red flag? Or am I slacking and need to buy more? Lol

 

[Bangswitch]

So im guessing 24 mags loaded at all times would be considered red flag? Or am I slacking and need to buy more? Lol

Dang son you keep 24 high-capacity fully-semi-automatic multi-clips loaded at all times? You must be crazy. We can’t just take your guns we’re gonna have to lock you up too.

 

[machinedrummer]

I hope that’s 24 per gun. If not that’s rookie numbers.

 

[Emperor]

I have some friends from past lives working for alphabet agencies. They pay a lot more attention to the dingbats on video sites and mainstream social media than to these types of enthusiast sites. Why? Because of exactly what was mentioned above: the majority of us are law abiding people, a good number of whom are CCW holders. Sure, correlation doesn’t equal causation, but the fact is if one distills the uniform crime report compared against 4473s and CCW applications one would be able to draw a reasonable conclusion that it appears CCW holders, (legal) hunters, and (legal) firearms owners in general are the least likely segment of the population to have a law enforcement encounter due to violation of a local, state, or federal statute.

This^ is all fine and dandy. What point everyone is missing is the ability by tech companies and yes, even the US intel agencies, to use bots, algorithms, spy-ware, malware, etc., to essentially let the internet do the work for them. Real humans are not needed to monitor this site or sites like it.

If any of you don't believe that keywords are all that is needed to sweep entire ISP's for data you are really naive. I don't use Google products, but just for fun, pull up their search engine and type any obscure word you can think of and let her rip.

Gee! How'd they do that?

 

[KDerekT83]

I hope that’s 24 per gun. If not that’s rookie numbers.

guess you've answered my question pretty clearly, and I need to go shopping. Sir, I thank you for justifying some shopping time online tonight...

 

[Kraut]

It’s a catch 22. It’s illegal to file a false order for protective custody (OPC) against someone (because it’s a legal affidavit sworn before law enforcement) but how does one PROVE it was false? Because the person didn’t eventually do something unstable? If they’re released by the first physician? What about a false physician’s emergency certificate (PEC) where an ER doc thinks a patient needs remanded for evaluation? They’re medical doctors, so they should know about behavior and mental health and the law, in addition to how the human body works, and they should never be wrong. Right? But how would one prove false allegations if one’s neighbor filed an OPC because they saw guns, or if a lefty doc decides someone must be unstable because they’re wearing a Glock shirt (or some other indication of firearms ownership, since hospitals are gun-free zones)?

That’s how these red flag laws are going to work. Like bogus restraining orders and PFAs filed by soon-to-be ex’s as vindictive precursors to a custody battle. This mocks our system of “innocent until proven guilty” because once filed (especially if they seize one’s property) the onus is now on the accused to prove their innocence. My stepdad’s PAC (foac.org) has been involved in numerous suits for exactly these types of cases. They haven’t had any red flag issues -yet- but they’ve had a few “swatting” by unfriendly neighbors, and numerous false PFA and 302 (PA version of an OPC) cases.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I'd better watch out then, I purposely wear a t-shirt from this site most of the time when I go to my son's school, just because of stories about kids being made to change shirts or sent home because of military or patriotic shirts. My kid goes to a school that has uniforms, so not really an issue specifically at his school, but I just like poking the bear, I guess. If I smoked, I'd alternate it with a Marlboro shirt. I sometimes make sure to wear a Budwieser shirt because once in high school, I got a Saturday suspension because the t-shirt I wore from the Crescent City Classic had a beer label logo from a sponsorship, and the disciplinarian saw the half-inch letters and decided it was just time to be a d!ckhead. I wear my Gadsden t-shirt when I go vote, too, and I always eat twice as much meat as necessary just to negate the efforts of that one vegan who really thinks he's making a difference!

 

[RichJen]

Interesting. Thanks for the post

 

[machinedrummer]

I'd better watch out then, I purposely wear a t-shirt from this site most of the time when I go to my son's school, just because of stories about kids being made to change shirts or sent home because of military or patriotic shirts. My kid goes to a school that has uniforms, so not really an issue specifically at his school, but I just like poking the bear, I guess. If I smoked, I'd alternate it with a Marlboro shirt. I sometimes make sure to wear a Budwieser shirt because once in high school, I got a Saturday suspension because the t-shirt I wore from the Crescent City Classic had a beer label logo from a sponsorship, and the disciplinarian saw the half-inch letters and decided it was just time to be a d!ckhead. I wear my Gadsden t-shirt when I go vote, too, and I always eat twice as much meat as necessary just to negate the efforts of that one vegan who really thinks he's making a difference!

Just remember when poking the bear always have a .22lr pistol and a friend with u.

 

[Magdump]

So im guessing 24 mags loaded at all times would be considered red flag? Or am I slacking and need to buy more? Lol

Slack-ker....

 

[Magdump]

I'd better watch out then, I purposely wear a t-shirt from this site most of the time when I go to my son's school, just because of stories about kids being made to change shirts or sent home because of military or patriotic shirts. My kid goes to a school that has uniforms, so not really an issue specifically at his school, but I just like poking the bear, I guess. If I smoked, I'd alternate it with a Marlboro shirt. I sometimes make sure to wear a Budwieser shirt because once in high school, I got a Saturday suspension because the t-shirt I wore from the Crescent City Classic had a beer label logo from a sponsorship, and the disciplinarian saw the half-inch letters and decided it was just time to be a d!ckhead. I wear my Gadsden t-shirt when I go vote, too, and I always eat twice as much meat as necessary just to negate the efforts of that one vegan who really thinks he's making a difference!

Kraut, we need to go have a beer. Something tells me we would fast become good buds.
As for what Pozzinator says about the commitments and protective orders, it is illegal to knowingly falsify anything of that nature. Problem is, nobody even tries to prove any of that til way after the fact, mostly because there’s no real opportunity and judges will go with the professional. A statement made by a lay person will often have the support or sign off of a professional, whether a doc or LEO or what have you.
As a once deputy coroner for 15 years I wrote a great many CEC’s that immediately put people in some form of custody for at least 72 hours. I rarely worried that I would ever have Law Enforcement give me grief or be sued or have to defend my decision at any point for committing a person, but rather for failure to commit. The person filing a report simply needs to say they believe the committed will harm them self or someone else or that there were threats made, then other people get involved. Proving that joe blows neighbor or ex wife is not in fear for their life is not easy to prove and not often pursued anyway.

 

[MOTOR51]

I have some friends from past lives working for alphabet agencies. They pay a lot more attention to the dingbats on video sites and mainstream social media than to these types of enthusiast sites. Why? Because of exactly what was mentioned above: the majority of us are law abiding people, a good number of whom are CCW holders. Sure, correlation doesn’t equal causation, but the fact is if one distills the uniform crime report compared against 4473s and CCW applications one would be able to draw a reasonable conclusion that it appears CCW holders, (legal) hunters, and (legal) firearms owners in general are the least likely segment of the population to have a law enforcement encounter due to violation of a local, state, or federal statute.

Sure, we can only effectively use one at a time. Likewise we can only drive one car at a time or sleep in one bedroom at a time, but nobody’s talking about limiting the number of cars we’re allowed to own or how big our house is allowed to be. And those aren’t even constitutionally-guaranteed fundamental rights.

My stepdad and I spoke about a lot of this stuff today at length. I’d really like to know at what point we can start talking about seizing cars from people convicted of DUI or who’ve been found to be drunk in public. Or chemically castrating men convicted of rape. The left wants to talk about “common sense restrictions”, I’m good with that. Let’s start with restricting privileges which people have clearly abused to the detriment of civil society. Not rights which the vast majority of people have never and will never misuse.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

From what I’ve read in 2017 there were 40,000+ gun deaths in the US and 10,000+ DWI related deaths. Those figures might be wrong but if right, that would be a hard argument to make. That was just a quick search so might be more or might be less for 2018. I believe there are more firearms owned by people but then again it’s way more common for a guy to have 20 $500 guns vs 20 $30k vehicles.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro