CDZ Should all legal fees involved in a "Red Flag Law" gun confiscation be paid by the state?

[2aguy]

This article looks at the cost of getting your Right back after you have been attacked with a Red Flag Law......

This being the case.....before any Red Flag law is passed there needs to be a law that mandates that all expenses, fees, and pay lost due to time of from your job to fight these cases is paid for by the state, and if the Red Flag law is used criminally, from the accuser...

The cost involved is one reason those who oppose gun ownership love this idea...

Defending Against a Red Flag Confiscation Will Cost You Thousands - The Truth About Guns

Experienced counsel to defend you in a “due process” hearing will run about $15,000 in fees. If you lose and want to appeal, expect to spend another $25,000 to $100,000 in fees and costs. And even with all of that, you might still lose.


To win these hearings, you have to refute an allegation that you pose a danger to yourself or others where a judge already issued a temporary ex parte order that concluded you were already a danger. Many judges will likely err on the side of caution, and against your rights.

As a practical matter, if the government’s interest is in separating a potentially-dangerous person from guns, it makes no sense to leave other guns that belong to family members in the home. So, if you live with someone that gets a red flag order issued against them, then you and others living in the same home risk losing your guns, too.

 

[hjmick]

Absofuckinglutely.


That being said... where does the "state" get its money?

So the "state" ultimately pays nothing either way since we the taxpayers give the "state" all their money...

Quite the conundrum...

 

[OldLady]

This article looks at the cost of getting your Right back after you have been attacked with a Red Flag Law......

This being the case.....before any Red Flag law is passed there needs to be a law that mandates that all expenses, fees, and pay lost due to time of from your job to fight these cases is paid for by the state, and if the Red Flag law is used criminally, from the accuser...

The cost involved is one reason those who oppose gun ownership love this idea...

Defending Against a Red Flag Confiscation Will Cost You Thousands - The Truth About Guns

Experienced counsel to defend you in a “due process” hearing will run about $15,000 in fees. If you lose and want to appeal, expect to spend another $25,000 to $100,000 in fees and costs. And even with all of that, you might still lose.


To win these hearings, you have to refute an allegation that you pose a danger to yourself or others where a judge already issued a temporary ex parte order that concluded you were already a danger. Many judges will likely err on the side of caution, and against your rights.

As a practical matter, if the government’s interest is in separating a potentially-dangerous person from guns, it makes no sense to leave other guns that belong to family members in the home. So, if you live with someone that gets a red flag order issued against them, then you and others living in the same home risk losing your guns, too.

The initial Order taking the guns is not based on a psychological examination, but all you have to do is have one and yes that costs money but then if the report says you are not homicidal/suicidal---you get your guns and you walk away. You can then sue the pants off the original accuser in civil court and get back any costs incurred.

Much like a Restraining Order, most people do this unrepresented by counsel. The courts make the language simple and the judge is patient with goof ups. The accuser, usually a family member, hasn't got a lawyer either. Spend $100,000 if you want, but it would be perfectly possible to represent yourself, if you are indeed okay.

 

[Crepitus]

This article looks at the cost of getting your Right back after you have been attacked with a Red Flag Law......

This being the case.....before any Red Flag law is passed there needs to be a law that mandates that all expenses, fees, and pay lost due to time of from your job to fight these cases is paid for by the state, and if the Red Flag law is used criminally, from the accuser...

The cost involved is one reason those who oppose gun ownership love this idea...

Defending Against a Red Flag Confiscation Will Cost You Thousands - The Truth About Guns

Experienced counsel to defend you in a “due process” hearing will run about $15,000 in fees. If you lose and want to appeal, expect to spend another $25,000 to $100,000 in fees and costs. And even with all of that, you might still lose.


To win these hearings, you have to refute an allegation that you pose a danger to yourself or others where a judge already issued a temporary ex parte order that concluded you were already a danger. Many judges will likely err on the side of caution, and against your rights.

As a practical matter, if the government’s interest is in separating a potentially-dangerous person from guns, it makes no sense to leave other guns that belong to family members in the home. So, if you live with someone that gets a red flag order issued against them, then you and others living in the same home risk losing your guns, too.

Are you gonna pay for the guys psychologist as well?

 

[progressive hunter]

This article looks at the cost of getting your Right back after you have been attacked with a Red Flag Law......

This being the case.....before any Red Flag law is passed there needs to be a law that mandates that all expenses, fees, and pay lost due to time of from your job to fight these cases is paid for by the state, and if the Red Flag law is used criminally, from the accuser...

The cost involved is one reason those who oppose gun ownership love this idea...

Defending Against a Red Flag Confiscation Will Cost You Thousands - The Truth About Guns

Experienced counsel to defend you in a “due process” hearing will run about $15,000 in fees. If you lose and want to appeal, expect to spend another $25,000 to $100,000 in fees and costs. And even with all of that, you might still lose.


To win these hearings, you have to refute an allegation that you pose a danger to yourself or others where a judge already issued a temporary ex parte order that concluded you were already a danger. Many judges will likely err on the side of caution, and against your rights.

As a practical matter, if the government’s interest is in separating a potentially-dangerous person from guns, it makes no sense to leave other guns that belong to family members in the home. So, if you live with someone that gets a red flag order issued against them, then you and others living in the same home risk losing your guns, too.

a better discussion would be to point out how red flag laws are in violation of the 2nd amendment and how to stop them,,,

 

[2aguy]

This article looks at the cost of getting your Right back after you have been attacked with a Red Flag Law......

This being the case.....before any Red Flag law is passed there needs to be a law that mandates that all expenses, fees, and pay lost due to time of from your job to fight these cases is paid for by the state, and if the Red Flag law is used criminally, from the accuser...

The cost involved is one reason those who oppose gun ownership love this idea...

Defending Against a Red Flag Confiscation Will Cost You Thousands - The Truth About Guns

Experienced counsel to defend you in a “due process” hearing will run about $15,000 in fees. If you lose and want to appeal, expect to spend another $25,000 to $100,000 in fees and costs. And even with all of that, you might still lose.


To win these hearings, you have to refute an allegation that you pose a danger to yourself or others where a judge already issued a temporary ex parte order that concluded you were already a danger. Many judges will likely err on the side of caution, and against your rights.

As a practical matter, if the government’s interest is in separating a potentially-dangerous person from guns, it makes no sense to leave other guns that belong to family members in the home. So, if you live with someone that gets a red flag order issued against them, then you and others living in the same home risk losing your guns, too.

The initial Order taking the guns is not based on a psychological examination, but all you have to do is have one and yes that costs money but then if the report says you are not homicidal/suicidal---you get your guns and you walk away. You can then sue the pants off the original accuser in civil court and get back any costs incurred.

Much like a Restraining Order, most people do this unrepresented by counsel. The courts make the language simple and the judge is patient with goof ups. The accuser, usually a family member, hasn't got a lawyer either. Spend $100,000 if you want, but it would be perfectly possible to represent yourself, if you are indeed okay.

You have to go to court....that costs money...as the article points out......

 

[2aguy]

This article looks at the cost of getting your Right back after you have been attacked with a Red Flag Law......

This being the case.....before any Red Flag law is passed there needs to be a law that mandates that all expenses, fees, and pay lost due to time of from your job to fight these cases is paid for by the state, and if the Red Flag law is used criminally, from the accuser...

The cost involved is one reason those who oppose gun ownership love this idea...

Defending Against a Red Flag Confiscation Will Cost You Thousands - The Truth About Guns

Experienced counsel to defend you in a “due process” hearing will run about $15,000 in fees. If you lose and want to appeal, expect to spend another $25,000 to $100,000 in fees and costs. And even with all of that, you might still lose.


To win these hearings, you have to refute an allegation that you pose a danger to yourself or others where a judge already issued a temporary ex parte order that concluded you were already a danger. Many judges will likely err on the side of caution, and against your rights.

As a practical matter, if the government’s interest is in separating a potentially-dangerous person from guns, it makes no sense to leave other guns that belong to family members in the home. So, if you live with someone that gets a red flag order issued against them, then you and others living in the same home risk losing your guns, too.

a better discussion would be to point out how red flag laws are in violation of the 2nd amendment and how to stop them,,,

You have to attack gun grabbing from all directions.....too many people don't understand the consequences of these laws on normal people......and by pointing out the cost, it leads to showing why they violate the 2nd Amendment.

 

[Billy_Bob]

Bearing arms is a right... Thus due process must happen, according to the Constitution, before that right can be infringed. This law is, on its face, unconstitutional.

 

[candycorn]

no

 

[OldLady]

This article looks at the cost of getting your Right back after you have been attacked with a Red Flag Law......

This being the case.....before any Red Flag law is passed there needs to be a law that mandates that all expenses, fees, and pay lost due to time of from your job to fight these cases is paid for by the state, and if the Red Flag law is used criminally, from the accuser...

The cost involved is one reason those who oppose gun ownership love this idea...

Defending Against a Red Flag Confiscation Will Cost You Thousands - The Truth About Guns

Experienced counsel to defend you in a “due process” hearing will run about $15,000 in fees. If you lose and want to appeal, expect to spend another $25,000 to $100,000 in fees and costs. And even with all of that, you might still lose.


To win these hearings, you have to refute an allegation that you pose a danger to yourself or others where a judge already issued a temporary ex parte order that concluded you were already a danger. Many judges will likely err on the side of caution, and against your rights.

As a practical matter, if the government’s interest is in separating a potentially-dangerous person from guns, it makes no sense to leave other guns that belong to family members in the home. So, if you live with someone that gets a red flag order issued against them, then you and others living in the same home risk losing your guns, too.

The initial Order taking the guns is not based on a psychological examination, but all you have to do is have one and yes that costs money but then if the report says you are not homicidal/suicidal---you get your guns and you walk away. You can then sue the pants off the original accuser in civil court and get back any costs incurred.

Much like a Restraining Order, most people do this unrepresented by counsel. The courts make the language simple and the judge is patient with goof ups. The accuser, usually a family member, hasn't got a lawyer either. Spend $100,000 if you want, but it would be perfectly possible to represent yourself, if you are indeed okay.

You have to go to court....that costs money...as the article points out......

There are 17 red flag laws so far in 17 states, and they are all different. But the two I read about do not impose any court fees around an ERPO petition/order.

 

[Blues Man]

This article looks at the cost of getting your Right back after you have been attacked with a Red Flag Law......

This being the case.....before any Red Flag law is passed there needs to be a law that mandates that all expenses, fees, and pay lost due to time of from your job to fight these cases is paid for by the state, and if the Red Flag law is used criminally, from the accuser...

The cost involved is one reason those who oppose gun ownership love this idea...

Defending Against a Red Flag Confiscation Will Cost You Thousands - The Truth About Guns

Experienced counsel to defend you in a “due process” hearing will run about $15,000 in fees. If you lose and want to appeal, expect to spend another $25,000 to $100,000 in fees and costs. And even with all of that, you might still lose.


To win these hearings, you have to refute an allegation that you pose a danger to yourself or others where a judge already issued a temporary ex parte order that concluded you were already a danger. Many judges will likely err on the side of caution, and against your rights.

As a practical matter, if the government’s interest is in separating a potentially-dangerous person from guns, it makes no sense to leave other guns that belong to family members in the home. So, if you live with someone that gets a red flag order issued against them, then you and others living in the same home risk losing your guns, too.

The initial Order taking the guns is not based on a psychological examination, but all you have to do is have one and yes that costs money but then if the report says you are not homicidal/suicidal---you get your guns and you walk away. You can then sue the pants off the original accuser in civil court and get back any costs incurred.

Much like a Restraining Order, most people do this unrepresented by counsel. The courts make the language simple and the judge is patient with goof ups. The accuser, usually a family member, hasn't got a lawyer either. Spend $100,000 if you want, but it would be perfectly possible to represent yourself, if you are indeed okay.

The person who represents himself in court has a fool for a client

Red flag laws are a blatant sidestep of due process.

 

[Blues Man]

This article looks at the cost of getting your Right back after you have been attacked with a Red Flag Law......

This being the case.....before any Red Flag law is passed there needs to be a law that mandates that all expenses, fees, and pay lost due to time of from your job to fight these cases is paid for by the state, and if the Red Flag law is used criminally, from the accuser...

The cost involved is one reason those who oppose gun ownership love this idea...

Defending Against a Red Flag Confiscation Will Cost You Thousands - The Truth About Guns

Experienced counsel to defend you in a “due process” hearing will run about $15,000 in fees. If you lose and want to appeal, expect to spend another $25,000 to $100,000 in fees and costs. And even with all of that, you might still lose.


To win these hearings, you have to refute an allegation that you pose a danger to yourself or others where a judge already issued a temporary ex parte order that concluded you were already a danger. Many judges will likely err on the side of caution, and against your rights.

As a practical matter, if the government’s interest is in separating a potentially-dangerous person from guns, it makes no sense to leave other guns that belong to family members in the home. So, if you live with someone that gets a red flag order issued against them, then you and others living in the same home risk losing your guns, too.

a better discussion would be to point out how red flag laws are in violation of the 2nd amendment and how to stop them,,,

And several other amendments

The 5th comes to mind

 

[OldLady]

This article looks at the cost of getting your Right back after you have been attacked with a Red Flag Law......

This being the case.....before any Red Flag law is passed there needs to be a law that mandates that all expenses, fees, and pay lost due to time of from your job to fight these cases is paid for by the state, and if the Red Flag law is used criminally, from the accuser...

The cost involved is one reason those who oppose gun ownership love this idea...

Defending Against a Red Flag Confiscation Will Cost You Thousands - The Truth About Guns

Experienced counsel to defend you in a “due process” hearing will run about $15,000 in fees. If you lose and want to appeal, expect to spend another $25,000 to $100,000 in fees and costs. And even with all of that, you might still lose.


To win these hearings, you have to refute an allegation that you pose a danger to yourself or others where a judge already issued a temporary ex parte order that concluded you were already a danger. Many judges will likely err on the side of caution, and against your rights.

As a practical matter, if the government’s interest is in separating a potentially-dangerous person from guns, it makes no sense to leave other guns that belong to family members in the home. So, if you live with someone that gets a red flag order issued against them, then you and others living in the same home risk losing your guns, too.

The initial Order taking the guns is not based on a psychological examination, but all you have to do is have one and yes that costs money but then if the report says you are not homicidal/suicidal---you get your guns and you walk away. You can then sue the pants off the original accuser in civil court and get back any costs incurred.

Much like a Restraining Order, most people do this unrepresented by counsel. The courts make the language simple and the judge is patient with goof ups. The accuser, usually a family member, hasn't got a lawyer either. Spend $100,000 if you want, but it would be perfectly possible to represent yourself, if you are indeed okay.

The person who represents himself in court has a fool for a client

Red flag laws are a blatant sidestep of due process.

If it were a sidestep of due process WHY ARE THEY IN COURT?
There are laws for exigent circumstances that allow law enforcement to enter a building or residence without a search warrant. These involve imminent danger to a person or imminent destruction of property. Red flag laws are about imminent risk. Emergency. That is why it is called an Emergency order. There is a full evidentiary hearing scheduled ASAP. When I did Child Protective, almost all of our removals were Imminent Risk of Serious Harm. These also required Preliminary and Full Hearings within a set amount of time. It is how emergencies are handled. Would you rather have someone or many someones dead?

 

[Blues Man]

This article looks at the cost of getting your Right back after you have been attacked with a Red Flag Law......

This being the case.....before any Red Flag law is passed there needs to be a law that mandates that all expenses, fees, and pay lost due to time of from your job to fight these cases is paid for by the state, and if the Red Flag law is used criminally, from the accuser...

The cost involved is one reason those who oppose gun ownership love this idea...

Defending Against a Red Flag Confiscation Will Cost You Thousands - The Truth About Guns

Experienced counsel to defend you in a “due process” hearing will run about $15,000 in fees. If you lose and want to appeal, expect to spend another $25,000 to $100,000 in fees and costs. And even with all of that, you might still lose.


To win these hearings, you have to refute an allegation that you pose a danger to yourself or others where a judge already issued a temporary ex parte order that concluded you were already a danger. Many judges will likely err on the side of caution, and against your rights.

As a practical matter, if the government’s interest is in separating a potentially-dangerous person from guns, it makes no sense to leave other guns that belong to family members in the home. So, if you live with someone that gets a red flag order issued against them, then you and others living in the same home risk losing your guns, too.

The initial Order taking the guns is not based on a psychological examination, but all you have to do is have one and yes that costs money but then if the report says you are not homicidal/suicidal---you get your guns and you walk away. You can then sue the pants off the original accuser in civil court and get back any costs incurred.

Much like a Restraining Order, most people do this unrepresented by counsel. The courts make the language simple and the judge is patient with goof ups. The accuser, usually a family member, hasn't got a lawyer either. Spend $100,000 if you want, but it would be perfectly possible to represent yourself, if you are indeed okay.

The person who represents himself in court has a fool for a client

Red flag laws are a blatant sidestep of due process.

If it were a sidestep of due process WHY ARE THEY IN COURT?
There are laws for exigent circumstances that allow law enforcement to enter a building or residence without a search warrant. These involve imminent danger to a person or imminent destruction of property. Red flag laws are about imminent risk. Emergency. That is why it is called an Emergency order. There is a full evidentiary hearing scheduled ASAP. When I did Child Protective, almost all of our removals were Imminent Risk of Serious Harm. These also required Preliminary and Full Hearings within a set amount of time. It is how emergencies are handled. Would you rather have someone or many someones dead?

The person that the accuser names doesn't have to be in court and in fact can be told over the phone that he is getting his guns confiscated.

He then in usually 2 weeks has to go to court and prove he is innocent of these charges. There is absolutely no burden of proof placed on the state or the accuser.

There is no court ordered court funded psychological evaluation, there is no presentation of evidence.


By allowing a law enforcement officer, family member, or household member to seek the ERPO, SB 719A will allow people who are not mental health professionals, who may be mistaken, and who may only have minimal contact with the respondent to file a petition with the court and testify on the respondent’s state of mind. This ex parte order, which strips the accused of their Second Amendment rights, will be issued by a judge based on the brief statement of the petitioner. The accused will not be afforded the chance to appear in court to defend themselves against the allegations when the ERPO is issued. These orders may be issued without any allegations of criminal behavior.

 

[OldLady]

This article looks at the cost of getting your Right back after you have been attacked with a Red Flag Law......

This being the case.....before any Red Flag law is passed there needs to be a law that mandates that all expenses, fees, and pay lost due to time of from your job to fight these cases is paid for by the state, and if the Red Flag law is used criminally, from the accuser...

The cost involved is one reason those who oppose gun ownership love this idea...

Defending Against a Red Flag Confiscation Will Cost You Thousands - The Truth About Guns

Experienced counsel to defend you in a “due process” hearing will run about $15,000 in fees. If you lose and want to appeal, expect to spend another $25,000 to $100,000 in fees and costs. And even with all of that, you might still lose.


To win these hearings, you have to refute an allegation that you pose a danger to yourself or others where a judge already issued a temporary ex parte order that concluded you were already a danger. Many judges will likely err on the side of caution, and against your rights.

As a practical matter, if the government’s interest is in separating a potentially-dangerous person from guns, it makes no sense to leave other guns that belong to family members in the home. So, if you live with someone that gets a red flag order issued against them, then you and others living in the same home risk losing your guns, too.

The initial Order taking the guns is not based on a psychological examination, but all you have to do is have one and yes that costs money but then if the report says you are not homicidal/suicidal---you get your guns and you walk away. You can then sue the pants off the original accuser in civil court and get back any costs incurred.

Much like a Restraining Order, most people do this unrepresented by counsel. The courts make the language simple and the judge is patient with goof ups. The accuser, usually a family member, hasn't got a lawyer either. Spend $100,000 if you want, but it would be perfectly possible to represent yourself, if you are indeed okay.

The person who represents himself in court has a fool for a client

Red flag laws are a blatant sidestep of due process.

If it were a sidestep of due process WHY ARE THEY IN COURT?
There are laws for exigent circumstances that allow law enforcement to enter a building or residence without a search warrant. These involve imminent danger to a person or imminent destruction of property. Red flag laws are about imminent risk. Emergency. That is why it is called an Emergency order. There is a full evidentiary hearing scheduled ASAP. When I did Child Protective, almost all of our removals were Imminent Risk of Serious Harm. These also required Preliminary and Full Hearings within a set amount of time. It is how emergencies are handled. Would you rather have someone or many someones dead?

The person that the accuser names doesn't have to be in court and in fact can be told over the phone that he is getting his guns confiscated.

He then in usually 2 weeks has to go to court and prove he is innocent of these charges. There is absolutely no burden of proof placed on the state or the accuser.

There is no court ordered court funded psychological evaluation, there is no presentation of evidence.


By allowing a law enforcement officer, family member, or household member to seek the ERPO, SB 719A will allow people who are not mental health professionals, who may be mistaken, and who may only have minimal contact with the respondent to file a petition with the court and testify on the respondent’s state of mind. This ex parte order, which strips the accused of their Second Amendment rights, will be issued by a judge based on the brief statement of the petitioner. The accused will not be afforded the chance to appear in court to defend themselves against the allegations when the ERPO is issued. These orders may be issued without any allegations of criminal behavior.

In most states, family members are the primary "reporters," so they certainly have more than "minimal contact" with the respondent. The judge will take into consideration EVERY warning above, because judges are there to uphold the laws, not subvert them. Taking away a person's guns is serious business. I think those of you who are fighting taking guns from suicidal/homicidal people in crisis are doing a great disservice to our judiciary. At least the judges I've known are smart enough to know a "con job" when they see one. That's what you're afraid of, isn't it?
Connecticut has had red flag laws for ten years. Do you hear a lot about people complaining their guns were taken away? I haven't, and you'd think around this board, anyway, those kind of complaints would be front and center of attention.

 

[rightwinger]

Payable with a small tax on gun owners

 

[Blues Man]

This article looks at the cost of getting your Right back after you have been attacked with a Red Flag Law......

This being the case.....before any Red Flag law is passed there needs to be a law that mandates that all expenses, fees, and pay lost due to time of from your job to fight these cases is paid for by the state, and if the Red Flag law is used criminally, from the accuser...

The cost involved is one reason those who oppose gun ownership love this idea...

Defending Against a Red Flag Confiscation Will Cost You Thousands - The Truth About Guns

Experienced counsel to defend you in a “due process” hearing will run about $15,000 in fees. If you lose and want to appeal, expect to spend another $25,000 to $100,000 in fees and costs. And even with all of that, you might still lose.


To win these hearings, you have to refute an allegation that you pose a danger to yourself or others where a judge already issued a temporary ex parte order that concluded you were already a danger. Many judges will likely err on the side of caution, and against your rights.

As a practical matter, if the government’s interest is in separating a potentially-dangerous person from guns, it makes no sense to leave other guns that belong to family members in the home. So, if you live with someone that gets a red flag order issued against them, then you and others living in the same home risk losing your guns, too.

The initial Order taking the guns is not based on a psychological examination, but all you have to do is have one and yes that costs money but then if the report says you are not homicidal/suicidal---you get your guns and you walk away. You can then sue the pants off the original accuser in civil court and get back any costs incurred.

Much like a Restraining Order, most people do this unrepresented by counsel. The courts make the language simple and the judge is patient with goof ups. The accuser, usually a family member, hasn't got a lawyer either. Spend $100,000 if you want, but it would be perfectly possible to represent yourself, if you are indeed okay.

The person who represents himself in court has a fool for a client

Red flag laws are a blatant sidestep of due process.

If it were a sidestep of due process WHY ARE THEY IN COURT?
There are laws for exigent circumstances that allow law enforcement to enter a building or residence without a search warrant. These involve imminent danger to a person or imminent destruction of property. Red flag laws are about imminent risk. Emergency. That is why it is called an Emergency order. There is a full evidentiary hearing scheduled ASAP. When I did Child Protective, almost all of our removals were Imminent Risk of Serious Harm. These also required Preliminary and Full Hearings within a set amount of time. It is how emergencies are handled. Would you rather have someone or many someones dead?

The person that the accuser names doesn't have to be in court and in fact can be told over the phone that he is getting his guns confiscated.

He then in usually 2 weeks has to go to court and prove he is innocent of these charges. There is absolutely no burden of proof placed on the state or the accuser.

There is no court ordered court funded psychological evaluation, there is no presentation of evidence.


By allowing a law enforcement officer, family member, or household member to seek the ERPO, SB 719A will allow people who are not mental health professionals, who may be mistaken, and who may only have minimal contact with the respondent to file a petition with the court and testify on the respondent’s state of mind. This ex parte order, which strips the accused of their Second Amendment rights, will be issued by a judge based on the brief statement of the petitioner. The accused will not be afforded the chance to appear in court to defend themselves against the allegations when the ERPO is issued. These orders may be issued without any allegations of criminal behavior.

In most states, family members are the primary "reporters," so they certainly have more than "minimal contact" with the respondent. The judge will take into consideration EVERY warning above, because judges are there to uphold the laws, not subvert them. Taking away a person's guns is serious business. I think those of you who are fighting taking guns from suicidal/homicidal people in crisis are doing a great disservice to our judiciary. At least the judges I've known are smart enough to know a "con job" when they see one. That's what you're afraid of, isn't it?
Connecticut has had red flag laws for ten years. Do you hear a lot about people complaining their guns were taken away? I haven't, and you'd think around this board, anyway, those kind of complaints would be front and center of attention.

These petitions are almost never denied so the judge isn't really considering anything but the testimony of a person who is not a mental health professional.

So you live in CT and look up every instance of a red flag law being used or abused?

I don't have the means or the time to scour court orders do you?

The fact is a person can have his second, 4th and 5th amendment rights denied him because one person who is not at all qualified to report on anyone's mental health says he or she is afraid.

And then that person has to prove himself innocent even though there are no criminal charges filed against him.



Red flag laws are a blatant and disgusting violation of the Constitution.

 

[Blues Man]

Payable with a small tax on gun owners

Then we should also combat voter fraud with a poll tax

We should tax free speech too.

How about a per letter tax on all the shit people post on the internet?

 

[rightwinger]

Payable with a small tax on gun owners

Then we should also combat voter fraud with a poll tax

We should tax free speech too.

How about a per letter tax on all the shit people post on the internet?

With the amount of voter fraud proven in this country, you could fight it with the change I find in my soda cushions

 

[Blues Man]

Payable with a small tax on gun owners

Then we should also combat voter fraud with a poll tax

We should tax free speech too.

How about a per letter tax on all the shit people post on the internet?

With the amount of voter fraud proven in this country, you could fight it with the change I find in my soda cushions

So we can use the poll tax to fund something else

We could tax everyone for their 4th and 5th amendment rights and fund police forces with the revenue

We can tax every letter people type and post on the internet and fund public schools

So let's tax all rights and balance the budget