Are Red Flag Laws Constitutional?

[airplanemechanic]

Mixed up question. Don't use a firearm to threaten anyone.

No, it's not. It's going off of your assumption that someone who owns a firearm used it to threaten someone when someone says they were threatened by this person.

If anything, it just shows you how convoluted and fucked up YOUR logic is.

I've threatened to kick people's asses before, but never used a firearm to do it.

 

[John Edgar Slow Horses]

No, if you have a firearm and you are accused of threating, you have to answer the blue. No way out.

You would threaten me once and out No, better you just cry and run away,

 

[d0gbreath]

I know that on my gun request forms the last couple of times, there's the question: "Have you ever been convicted of domestic violence?" A truthful 'yes' answer is not recommended to complete the sale. The drug question ditto.

I'm talking about a decade ago, or so. Why is this an issue now? Are they trying to reduce it to having been arrested for domestic violence? I'm not sure what a red flag law is. I could look it up, naw.

 

[Desperado]

They get due process, and you know it.

No they do not get due process and you know it but lied about it

 

[John Edgar Slow Horses]

Desperado is desperate. Don't be a punk and threaten with a gun.

 

[John Edgar Slow Horses]

No they do not get due process and you know it but lied about it

Do they go before a judge?

 

[martybegan]

We are talking about the federal restrictions. State and local restrictions are up to you dude. Fix it if you have the balls.

You didn't answer my question.

 

[martybegan]

While the 5th & 14th amendments to the U.S constitution state that a person cannot be deprived of their life, liberty or property without due process of the law, I thought that the due process to which they're referring involves the 6th Amendment right ...

"to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence."​

https://constitution.congress.gov/constitution/amendment-6/​

That would be the best argument to make against red flag laws that rely on just a judge's warrant.

 

[martybegan]

A judge issuing an order without the subject of said order getting his day in court FIRST is not really due process though is it?

Considering we can detain people before their trial, it might just be enough to go with Red flag laws.

 

[John Edgar Slow Horses]

None of you show any ability as constitutional scholars.

Washington would say take away their firearms on principle. They are dangerous to children and wildlife and other criminals.

 

[NewsVine_Mariyam]

Considering we can detain people before their trial, it might just be enough to go with Red flag laws.

But in order to detain them for more than the required number of hours/days don't they have to be charged with a crime? And if they are and they don't have an attorney or can't afford one then they get a public defender, that's required. But does a person get a public defender under the Red Flag laws?

 

[martybegan]

But in order to detain them for more than the required number of hours/days don't they have to be charged with a crime? And if they are and they don't have an attorney or can't afford one then they get a public defender, that's required. But does a person get a public defender under the Red Flag laws?

If red flag laws are to be done properly, they sure as hell should get a PD and a speedy hearing.

If we can detain someone before they reach trial constitutionally, what's to stop other rights from being removed before trial?

 

[John Edgar Slow Horses]

Can a defendant be held without bail before trial?

In the United States, a defendant cannot be held indefinitely without bail being set or a hearing conducted. Typically, defendants are given a bond hearing within 24 hours, during which a judge determines whether to allow bail and, if so, sets the bail amount1. However, there are limited circumstances when a court may insist on holding a defendant without bail, such as for capital offenses or felony charges that could result in a life sentence without conditional release2. In the case of the January 6th Capitol riot, some defendants have been held in jail while awaiting trial, but most have been released from custody3.

 

[martybegan]

Can a defendant be held without bail before trial?

In the United States, a defendant cannot be held indefinitely without bail being set or a hearing conducted. Typically, defendants are given a bond hearing within 24 hours, during which a judge determines whether to allow bail and, if so, sets the bail amount1. However, there are limited circumstances when a court may insist on holding a defendant without bail, such as for capital offenses or felony charges that could result in a life sentence without conditional release2. In the case of the January 6th Capitol riot, some defendants have been held in jail while awaiting trial, but most have been released from custody3.

The thing is the dems are trying to get rid of cash bail, and yet they want to increase red flag laws.

 

[John Edgar Slow Horses]

Is that a good or bad thing? Republicans have pushed for reforms that make it more difficult for defendants to get out of jail while awaiting trial, arguing that such changes would enhance public safety12. The NAACP also calls for the elimination of cash bail and monitoring fees, suggesting more appropriate means like home incarceration to satisfy bail requirements3.

 

[AZrailwhale]

Honestly I'm shocked that this far right SCOTUS ruled to limit violent abuser's ability to commit violent abuse. Republicans must be outraged. Good for SCOTUS.

Following the constitution isn’t “far right”. Your problem is that people like you see anyone to the right of Josef Stalin to be far right.

 

[the watcher]

Do they go before a judge?

State laws vary, most states only require an application of a complaint before a judge or magistrate, no presence of the accused and the accused may not even be notified until the warren ts served.The first time they are before a judge will be if they request a return of anything seized. There is no facing an accuser or representation.

 

[John Edgar Slow Horses]

State laws vary, most states only require an application of a complaint before a judge or magistrate, no presence of the accused and the accused may not even be notified until the warren ts served.The first time they are before a judge will be if they request a return of anything seized. There is no facing an accuser or representation.

OK. But they can rebut after the initial service?

 

[the watcher]

At a minimum, due process means that a citizen who will be affected by a government decision must be given advance notice of what the government plans to do and how the government's action may deprive them of life, liberty, or property. The key here is before or after you are deprived of property or rights. Would you like it if the state impounded your property or life without even giving you the chance to respond? Does a maybe sometime next year if you have the money to challenge do it for you? Also know that if this red flag results in a 2 am no knock raid when you're asleep things could well go western really fast. Too much unquestioned power here in the hands of a system that is prone to abuse already.

OK. But they can rebut after the initial service?

 

[John Edgar Slow Horses]

the watcher's definition is only his definition, not that of the jurisdiction.