Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
What it tells you is that NO ONE is coming for your guns.
No one is coming for your guns, dumbass.
No one is coming for your guns, dumbass.
He isn't going to take your guns.
No one is coming for your guns.
No one is coming for your guns, needle dick.
But, take comfort, no one is coming for your guns. They're not coming for mine either.
No one is coming for your guns, Rambo.
NO ONE, pay attention, NO ONE is coming for your guns.
And no one is coming for your guns.
www.usmessageboard.com
www.usmessageboard.com
If it's reasonable, have the cops go to court with lawyers on BOTH sides for a commitment order. A secret trial in front of a judge when the defendant doesn't even know it's happening can't be constitutional. If they can get a hearing with a judge immediately to seize a person's weapons, they can get a hearing to commit that person in the same timeframe unless it's nothing but a kangaroo court.Extreme risk seems to be a reasonable reason to prevent a dangerous person from obtaining a firearm. What's the problem?
1: It violates the constitutionExtreme risk seems to be a reasonable reason to prevent a dangerous person from obtaining a firearm. What's the problem?
offspring of the new extreme risk protection order resource center. Anyone can initiate an ERPO on anyone and you may never face them and you are guilty until proven (by yourself) innocent at your expense. No knocks are in play here on the word of a "concerned citizen".
Due process is ignored, for one. Protection from illegal search and seizure, for another. That and it flips the entire system of justice upside down for a third.Extreme risk seems to be a reasonable reason to prevent a dangerous person from obtaining a firearm. What's the problem?
Commitment? Secret trial? Confiscation is a different process. All we are talking about is a red flag on an application to purchase a firearm.If it's reasonable, have the cops go to court with lawyers on BOTH sides for a commitment order. A secret trial in front of a judge when the defendant doesn't even know it's happening can't be constitutional. If they can get a hearing with a judge immediately to seize a person's weapons, they can get a hearing to commit that person in the same timeframe unless it's nothing but a kangaroo court.
No, Red Flag laws allow the immediate confiscation of the subject person's firearms. I would assume that it would block purchase as well.Commitment? Secret trial? Confiscation is a different process. All we are talking about is a red flag on an application to purchase a firearm.
New York have Fascist in office
This is what they want for the whole country.
Maybe a small meteor could hit it an do the world a favor.
History. 1930s Germany.
Just so I can read up on that
Great get outHistory. 1930s Germany.
Enjoy
Which does nothing to protect the person, or the people he may want to harm.No, Red Flag laws allow the immediate confiscation of the subject person's firearms.
The law are designed to confiscate firearms from current owners who others allege are a danger.Extreme risk seems to be a reasonable reason to prevent a dangerous person from obtaining a firearm. What's the problem?
It would be a favor. Most Regular Americans are moving to Florida anyway.New York have Fascist in office
This is what they want for the whole country.
Maybe a small meteor could hit it an do the world a favor.
Which, of course, means the person in question is still a danger to himself or others.The law are designed to confiscate firearms from current owners who others allege are a danger.
