Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunter's Campfire Due Process

You get that with a red flag, just like you do with a protective order. At least all the proposals that I’ve seen.

Not true. In most cases, the first time the victim knows there's any sort of legal action against him is when he gets the 5:00 AM knock on the door by the SWAT team who are there to take his guns. That's a violation of the notice requirement of due process.

No, not true. All that I’ve seen require a hearing anywhere from five to twenty-one days after the order is granted. And one won’t be granted without a sworn pleading and/or affidavit.

If you want to be mad about red flag orders, you should be FAR MORE upset about protective orders which are granted in the thousands every single day in every single jurisdiction of the country and not only restrict one’s access to firearms but restrict freedom of movement as well.

You all just see the Liberal Socialist Democrats video presentation.


You wanna talk about media sensationalism...

Wonder how much that little pollyanna production cost us taxpayers...


JFC.....

And honestly, I’m not really trying to argue it. I’m just pointing out that it’s already been going on for a long time. Getting a divorce and got custody issues? In some jurisdictions attorneys use an Ex Parte Order as a standard thing. Boom, you are prohibited from possessing a firearm. The first you hear of it is when the sheriff serves you. If you lose your hearing, which in some jurisdictions you almost always do because the standard of proof is merely a preponderance of evidence standard, then you can’t own a firearm for two years.

Did you and your old lady get in an argument in 1986 where the cops were called? Did they charge you with misdemeanor domestic violence? Were you embarrassed and just paid the ticket to get it over? Boom, you are now ex post facto prevented fro ever possessing a firearm.

Got a crazy and vindictive ex girlfriend who filed a bullschit protective order?

The list goes on. The Rubicon was crossed long ago. In that respect the red flag orders don’t operate any differently than lots of things they’ve already been doing for a long time.

The thing is, it doesn't matter how long they've been happening, they were and always will be wrong. Red Flags are simply more of the same. Getting raped in prison by a guy with a 10" dick might be more uncomfortable than getting raped by a 6" one. They're both still rape.

You are wrong.

Again.

You’ve been watching too many movies, Hawk. You might should consider real life for a change and your opinions on this matter don’t weigh jackscchhitt.

I’m not even arguing that. All I’m arguing, if you want to call it that, is that it is probably counterproductive (because it’s easily proved wrong) to argue that red flags are something new and unprecedented AND if red flags make you mad, you should probably be madder about what has been going on for decades in lots of other places.

For instance, if In the unlikely event Texas passed a red flag law, I suspect in a lot of counties they would be very hard to get and come under a lot of scrutiny because of the 2nd Amendment concerns. On the other hand, the same damned judges in the same damned counties would probably grant a protective order that does the same damned thing as a red flag case without much more than a second thought.