|
Joined: Jun 2004
Posts: 11,116 Likes: 2
Campfire Outfitter
|
OP
Campfire Outfitter
Joined: Jun 2004
Posts: 11,116 Likes: 2 |
All in all, it's not as hideous as has been represented. The action is in the form of grants to states that pass red flag laws. Details are in Section 12003, and they lay out some pretty strong requirements for a state to qualify, including the requirement that the accused be informed of the action, the right to counsel, due process, and the right of the accused to present witnesses, and penalties for abuse of the program. I still have heartburn with the notion of punishing someone for something that someone imagines might happen in the future. Minority Report was fiction, not a roadmap. Courts will easily grant 14 day restraining orders based on past behavior, and that often includes seizure of firearms. I'm not fully on board with the firearms part without full evidence and due process rights, but that is the way it already is. We have provisions to involuntarily commit someone to a 72 hour psych evaluation, after which they can be further detained. All that seems like preventive enough. I should note that this is not yet law. It has been passed by the Senate, and will surely become law. SEC. 12003. USE OF BYRNE GRANTS FOR IMPLEMENTATION 6 OF STATE CRISIS INTERVENTION PROGRAMS.
7 (a) BYRNE JAG PROGRAM.—Section 501(a)(1) of 8 title I of the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act 9 of 1968 (34 U.S.C. 10152(a)(1)) is amended— 10 (1) in the matter preceding subparagraph (A), 11 by inserting ‘‘or civil proceedings’’ after ‘‘criminal 12 justice’’; and 13 (2) by adding at the end the following: 14 ‘‘(I) Implementation of State crisis inter15 vention court proceedings and related programs 16 or initiatives, including but not limited to— 17 ‘‘(i) mental health courts; 18 ‘‘(ii) drug courts; 19 ‘‘(iii) veterans courts; and 20 ‘‘(iv) extreme risk protection order 21 programs, which must include, at a min 22 imum— 23 ‘‘(I) pre-deprivation and post24 deprivation due process rights that 25 prevent any violation or infringement 34 OLL22583 HSF Discussion Draft S.L.C. 1 of the Constitution of the United 2 States, including but not limited to 3 the Bill of Rights, and the substantive 4 or procedural due process rights guar5 anteed under the Fifth and Four6 teenth Amendments to the Constitu7 tion of the United States, as applied 8 to the States, and as interpreted by 9 State courts and United States courts 10 (including the Supreme Court of the 11 United States). Such programs must 12 include, at the appropriate phase to 13 prevent any violation of constitutional 14 rights, at minimum, notice, the right 15 to an in-person hearing, an unbiased 16 adjudicator, the right to know oppos 17 ing evidence, the right to present evi 18 dence, and the right to confront ad 19 verse witnesses; 20 ‘‘(II) the right to be represented 21 by counsel at no expense to the gov 22 ernment; 23 ‘‘(III) pre-deprivation and post 24 deprivation heightened evidentiary 25 standards and proof which mean not 35 OLL22583 HSF Discussion Draft S.L.C. 1 less than the protections afforded to a 2 similarly situated litigant in Federal 3 court or promulgated by the State’s 4 evidentiary body, and sufficient to en 5 sure the full protections of the Con 6 stitution of the United States, includ 7 ing but not limited to the Bill of 8 Rights, and the substantive and pro 9 cedural due process rights guaranteed 10 under the Fifth and Fourteenth 11 Amendments to the Constitution of 12 the United States, as applied to the 13 States, and as interpreted by State 14 courts and United States courts (in15 cluding the Supreme Court of the 16 United States). The heightened evi17 dentiary standards and proof under 18 such programs must, at all appro 19 priate phases to prevent any violation 20 of any constitutional right, at min 21 imum, prevent reliance upon evidence 22 that is unsworn or unaffirmed, irrele 23 vant, based on inadmissible hearsay, 24 unreliable, vague, speculative, and 25 lacking a foundation; and 36 OLL22583 HSF Discussion Draft S.L.C. 1 ‘‘(IV) penalties for abuse of the 2 program.’’.
Last edited by denton; 06/24/22.
Be not weary in well doing.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2010
Posts: 8,821 Likes: 6
Campfire Outfitter
|
Campfire Outfitter
Joined: Oct 2010
Posts: 8,821 Likes: 6 |
Will Munny: It's a hell of a thing, killing a man. Take away all he's got and all he's ever gonna have.
The Schofield Kid: Yeah, well, I guess they had it coming.
Will Munny: We all got it coming, kid.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 2,995 Likes: 2
Campfire Regular
|
Campfire Regular
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 2,995 Likes: 2 |
I believe they're unconstitutional, and will be used by the left to target groups that don't fall in line with their doctrine - Christians, conservatives, libertarians. We're all unstable because we don't believe like them, so we are a threat and hence a target.
"Blessed is the man whose wife is his best friend - especially if she likes to HUNT!"
"Love the Lord your God with all your heart, soul, mind and strength, and love your neighbor as yourself. There is no commandment greater than these."
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2001
Posts: 4,238 Likes: 2
Campfire Tracker
|
Campfire Tracker
Joined: Jun 2001
Posts: 4,238 Likes: 2 |
You may not see an issue with it but I sure do. The fact of the matter is that Red Flag Laws are UNCONSTITUTIONAL and the fed govt should not be funding anything that is UNCONSTITUTIONAL. Nobody can be deprived of a constitutional right based on someone saying they "may do" something at a latter time. If this is the case then someone can also deprive you of a right under the 1st amendment because of something you may say or print etc... Can't have it both ways.
You get out of life what you are willing to accept. If you ain't happy, do something about it!
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2001
Posts: 10,797 Likes: 1
Campfire Outfitter
|
Campfire Outfitter
Joined: Jun 2001
Posts: 10,797 Likes: 1 |
Red Flag laws are bullsheit.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 59,177 Likes: 3
Campfire Kahuna
|
Campfire Kahuna
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 59,177 Likes: 3 |
Nah... "THEY'RE" unconstitutional...
Ex- USN (SS) '66-'69 Pro-Constitution. LET'S GO BRANDON!!!
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 59,177 Likes: 3
Campfire Kahuna
|
Campfire Kahuna
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 59,177 Likes: 3 |
Red Flag laws are bullsheit. Oh, you BETCHA!!!
Ex- USN (SS) '66-'69 Pro-Constitution. LET'S GO BRANDON!!!
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 131,801 Likes: 23
Campfire Sage
|
Campfire Sage
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 131,801 Likes: 23 |
They are indeed unconstitutional, and strike at the very heart of several of the planks of of the Bill of Rights.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 2,080 Likes: 1
Campfire Regular
|
Campfire Regular
Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 2,080 Likes: 1 |
The worst part of this new law is the way they think they've gotten around the due process issue. It looks like they do provide for some due process. They even allow you to have an attorney represent you--at NO COST TO THE GOVERNMENT. How considerate of them. Drag your ass into court for a hearing based on someone else's anger, dislikes, fear, etc. in an effort to disarm you and if you choose to fight for your rights you have to spend thousands of dollars to hire an attorney to defend yourself in an attempt to prove your innocence. The burden of proof now rests on the accused.
~Molɔ̀ːn Labé Skýla~
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 131,801 Likes: 23
Campfire Sage
|
Campfire Sage
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 131,801 Likes: 23 |
The worst part of this new law is the way they think they've gotten around the due process issue. It looks like they do provide for some due process. They even allow you to have an attorney represent you--at NO COST TO THE GOVERNMENT. How considerate of them. Drag your ass into court for a hearing based on someone else's anger, dislikes, fear, etc. in an effort to disarm you and if you choose to fight for your rights you have to spend thousands of dollars to hire an attorney to defend yourself in an attempt to prove your innocence. The burden of proof now rests on the accused. Which is why the current Supreme Court will likely find them unconstitutional as soon as a case reaches them.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2011
Posts: 69,308 Likes: 16
Campfire Kahuna
|
Campfire Kahuna
Joined: Apr 2011
Posts: 69,308 Likes: 16 |
You may not see an issue with it but I sure do. The fact of the matter is that Red Flag Laws are UNCONSTITUTIONAL and the fed govt should not be funding anything that is UNCONSTITUTIONAL. Nobody can be deprived of a constitutional right based on someone saying they "may do" something at a latter time. If this is the case then someone can also deprive you of a right under the 1st amendment because of something you may say or print etc... Can't have it both ways. Yep. SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED!
"Allways speak the truth and you will never have to remember what you said before..." Sam Houston Texans, "We say Grace, We Say Mam, If You Don't Like it, We Don't Give a Damn!"
~Molɔ̀ːn Labé Skýla~
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 6,890
Campfire Tracker
|
Campfire Tracker
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 6,890 |
Is their a provision in the new law that states that if the accuser can be prosecuted if proved the claim is BS?
It's a bullshidt law.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2002
Posts: 2,338
Campfire Regular
|
Campfire Regular
Joined: Oct 2002
Posts: 2,338 |
No doubt it is unconstitutional.
But just for knowledge sake is there a provision to identify the accuser?
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 30,959 Likes: 3
Campfire 'Bwana
|
Campfire 'Bwana
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 30,959 Likes: 3 |
You may not see an issue with it but I sure do. The fact of the matter is that Red Flag Laws are UNCONSTITUTIONAL and the fed govt should not be funding anything that is UNCONSTITUTIONAL. Nobody can be deprived of a constitutional right based on someone saying they "may do" something at a latter time. If this is the case then someone can also deprive you of a right under the 1st amendment because of something you may say or print etc... Can't have it both ways. Definitely unconstitutional
I got banned on another web site for a debate that happened on this site. That's a first
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 586
Campfire Regular
|
Campfire Regular
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 586 |
Those azzbags could of put punishment in there for false reports. Retaliation if necessary.
SC will take care of it.
Last edited by MD521; 06/24/22.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2021
Posts: 10,844 Likes: 3
Campfire Outfitter
|
Campfire Outfitter
Joined: Oct 2021
Posts: 10,844 Likes: 3 |
The worst part of this new law is the way they think they've gotten around the due process issue. It looks like they do provide for some due process. They even allow you to have an attorney represent you--at NO COST TO THE GOVERNMENT. How considerate of them. Drag your ass into court for a hearing based on someone else's anger, dislikes, fear, etc. in an effort to disarm you and if you choose to fight for your rights you have to spend thousands of dollars to hire an attorney to defend yourself in an attempt to prove your innocence. The burden of proof now rests on the accused. Which is why the current Supreme Court will likely find them unconstitutional as soon as a case reaches them. Hopefully soon and if so that they will hear it.
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 1,903 Likes: 1
Campfire Regular
|
Campfire Regular
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 1,903 Likes: 1 |
This is typical leftist agenda, they are thinking long game. Small moves toward total disarmament. I agree it will get ruled unconstitutional, but they will keep trying in small increments as much as they can. People don’t see the fence being built around them until the gate slams shut and then it’s too late. The constitution is a problem for them and they want it abolished. The second amendment slows them down considerably.
NRA Endowment Member
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2010
Posts: 8,821 Likes: 6
Campfire Outfitter
|
Campfire Outfitter
Joined: Oct 2010
Posts: 8,821 Likes: 6 |
Nah... "THEY'RE" unconstitutional... You are correct Sir, they’re unconstitutional 😉
Will Munny: It's a hell of a thing, killing a man. Take away all he's got and all he's ever gonna have.
The Schofield Kid: Yeah, well, I guess they had it coming.
Will Munny: We all got it coming, kid.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2021
Posts: 4,328 Likes: 1
Campfire Tracker
|
Campfire Tracker
Joined: Feb 2021
Posts: 4,328 Likes: 1 |
Any gun law passed is Infringement, No Gun Laws needed in this country everyone has the right to carry.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 11,506
Campfire Outfitter
|
Campfire Outfitter
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 11,506 |
Actually, this could be a good deal for us. The red flag part may actually eliminate some of the onerous provisions of state red flag laws. Also there are no provisions for confiscation of AR15s, magazine capacity, or expanding background checks for private transfers. The democrats have shot their wad for the next 30 years or so, just like they did in 1994, and eliminated gun control as a 2022 campaign issue.
Don't blame me. I voted for Trump.
Democrats would burn this country to the ground, if they could rule over the ashes.
|
|
|
|
500 members (16gage, 10gaugeman, 10Glocks, 10gaugemag, 160user, 10ring1, 50 invisible),
2,298
guests, and
1,156
robots. |
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
Forums81
Topics1,192,858
Posts18,497,114
Members73,979
|
Most Online11,491 Jul 7th, 2023
|
|
|
|