Cheesy FL-Vol
Junior Associate
"Life is either a daring adventure, or nothing." -- Helen Keller
Joined: Dec 17, 2010 16:13:50 GMT -5
Posts: 6,791
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":""}
|
Post by Cheesy FL-Vol on Feb 28, 2018 16:14:25 GMT -5
|
|
NomoreDramaQ1015
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 14:26:32 GMT -5
Posts: 47,327
|
Post by NomoreDramaQ1015 on Feb 28, 2018 16:16:52 GMT -5
Doesn't that kind of fly in the face of his party's stance regarding gun ownership?
Doesn't that also fall under illegal search and seizure since, up until the shooting, he had never committed a crime?
|
|
Cheesy FL-Vol
Junior Associate
"Life is either a daring adventure, or nothing." -- Helen Keller
Joined: Dec 17, 2010 16:13:50 GMT -5
Posts: 6,791
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":""}
|
Post by Cheesy FL-Vol on Feb 28, 2018 16:27:02 GMT -5
Doesn't that kind of fly in the face of his party's stance regarding gun ownership? Doesn't that also fall under illegal search and seizure since, up until the shooting, he had never committed a crime? My point maybe wasn't clear. If this becomes the norm in situations like this, how soon would it become the norm for anything else?
|
|
NastyWoman
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 24, 2010 20:50:37 GMT -5
Posts: 14,416
|
Post by NastyWoman on Feb 28, 2018 16:28:56 GMT -5
Doesn't that kind of fly in the face of his party's stance regarding gun ownership? Doesn't that also fall under illegal search and seizure since, up until the shooting, he had never committed a crime? My point maybe wasn't clear. If this becomes the norm in situations like this, how soon would it become the norm for anything else? Your point was perfectly clear and very well taken! This is another, not too subtle, step away from law and order and towards the "law of the jungle"
|
|
dezii
Distinguished Associate
Joined: May 18, 2017 14:26:36 GMT -5
Posts: 20,671
|
Post by dezii on Feb 28, 2018 16:31:29 GMT -5
He more and more talks like Schlep at the end of the bar who has been downing boilermakers all night and comes out every now and then with his pronouncements of how the world is all screwed up but he has the answer to fix it all and then starts his monologue...so many time a violation of written statutes,, Disses the law enforcement community, the courts, the judges, the laws on the books...enough already.....though to replace him with Pence and his holier then though feelings....hate to say it but am starting to really get pissed at Hillery on this one...
|
|
mollyanna58
Junior Associate
Joined: Jan 5, 2011 13:20:45 GMT -5
Posts: 6,672
|
Post by mollyanna58 on Feb 28, 2018 16:32:35 GMT -5
But, no; Mr. Trump was complaining just recently about the lack of due process.
Fortunately, most people in the criminal justice system do follow the law.
|
|
NomoreDramaQ1015
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 14:26:32 GMT -5
Posts: 47,327
|
Post by NomoreDramaQ1015 on Feb 28, 2018 16:32:52 GMT -5
Doesn't that kind of fly in the face of his party's stance regarding gun ownership? Doesn't that also fall under illegal search and seizure since, up until the shooting, he had never committed a crime? My point maybe wasn't clear. If this becomes the norm in situations like this, how soon would it become the norm for anything else? My point was this isn't exactly his party's stance. I find it fascinating when he flip flops like this. If I was a Republican I would be doing everything in my power to distance myself from that comment. What Congress should do is check his ass because that's their job. What he's suggesting is against the fourth amendment. But since Congress hasn't had the balls to do their constitutional duty in a long time at the very least they should not want to bite the hand that feeds them. They know the NRA lobby isn't going to tolerate any discussion of search and seizure.
|
|
Green Eyed Lady
Senior Associate
Look inna eye! Always look inna eye!
Joined: Jan 23, 2012 11:23:55 GMT -5
Posts: 19,629
|
Post by Green Eyed Lady on Feb 28, 2018 16:34:12 GMT -5
Goodness....he makes me sigh a lot...and not in a good way.
|
|
steff
Senior Associate
I'll sleep when I'm dead
Joined: Dec 30, 2010 17:34:24 GMT -5
Posts: 10,772
|
Post by steff on Feb 28, 2018 16:43:17 GMT -5
He also shot down (pun sorta intended) Steve Scalise when he pushed the NRA new push to expand conceal carry laws. Told him it would never get passed and to not put it in the imaginary "bill". Diane Feinstein was damn near giddy when he said that AR-15 should be banned. A Republican aide after the meeting said "Someone didn't brief him properly before he went in there" He was the NRA worst nightmare today & the Democrats best friend. LOLOL Pence looked like he wanted to scream "STOP STOP STOP!". Oh and we need a rating system for movies and video games! What a novel idea, I wonder why no one thought of it before.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 17, 2024 6:48:01 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 28, 2018 17:14:46 GMT -5
My point maybe wasn't clear. If this becomes the norm in situations like this, how soon would it become the norm for anything else? My point was this isn't exactly his party's stance. I find it fascinating when he flip flops like this. If I was a Republican I would be doing everything in my power to distance myself from that comment. What Congress should do is check his ass because that's their job. What he's suggesting is against the fourth amendment. But since Congress hasn't had the balls to do their constitutional duty in a long time at the very least they should not want to bite the hand that feeds them. They know the NRA lobby isn't going to tolerate any discussion of search and seizure. Do you believe he even knows what his party's stance is on most issues? I mean I can appreciate a person choosing to think for themselves, but I'm not too sure that he thinks period before popping off at the mouth or with the fingertips.
|
|
thyme4change
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 26, 2010 13:54:08 GMT -5
Posts: 40,436
|
Post by thyme4change on Feb 28, 2018 19:59:29 GMT -5
Innocent until proven guilty only applies to rich republicans, not poor assholes.
|
|
NomoreDramaQ1015
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 14:26:32 GMT -5
Posts: 47,327
|
Post by NomoreDramaQ1015 on Mar 1, 2018 9:57:37 GMT -5
My point was this isn't exactly his party's stance. I find it fascinating when he flip flops like this. If I was a Republican I would be doing everything in my power to distance myself from that comment. What Congress should do is check his ass because that's their job. What he's suggesting is against the fourth amendment. But since Congress hasn't had the balls to do their constitutional duty in a long time at the very least they should not want to bite the hand that feeds them. They know the NRA lobby isn't going to tolerate any discussion of search and seizure. Do you believe he even knows what his party's stance is on most issues? I mean I can appreciate a person choosing to think for themselves, but I'm not too sure that he thinks period before popping off at the mouth or with the fingertips. I figure he had to in order to get the nomination. That being said I don't think he cares. I also don't think he has any actual stance on issues because he has no moral compass of his own. He's the type of person who changes on a dime based on what he feels will make him popular. Since America is crying "Do something!" he knows that saying stuff like this will get him attention. First rule of reality TV stardom: the more outlandish crap you say the better your ratings. I still maintain he ran thinking being President was the biggest popularity contest of all time.
|
|
happyhoix
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Oct 7, 2011 7:22:42 GMT -5
Posts: 20,928
|
Post by happyhoix on Mar 1, 2018 10:10:46 GMT -5
My point was this isn't exactly his party's stance. I find it fascinating when he flip flops like this. If I was a Republican I would be doing everything in my power to distance myself from that comment. What Congress should do is check his ass because that's their job. What he's suggesting is against the fourth amendment. But since Congress hasn't had the balls to do their constitutional duty in a long time at the very least they should not want to bite the hand that feeds them. They know the NRA lobby isn't going to tolerate any discussion of search and seizure. Do you believe he even knows what his party's stance is on most issues? I mean I can appreciate a person choosing to think for themselves, but I'm not too sure that he thinks period before popping off at the mouth or with the fingertips. No, he adopts the stance of whoever he most recently talked to, which is why the flip flops frequently on issues.
He did the same thing on DACA, he was for it until he was against it a few days later. He'll change his mind on seizing weapons without due process in a day or two, after he talks to some of his staff and/or Hannity.
So no point in the GOP and NRA getting upset at this, it will be reversed and denied shortly.
|
|
billisonboard
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 22:45:44 GMT -5
Posts: 37,510
|
Post by billisonboard on Mar 1, 2018 10:44:11 GMT -5
It is actually a brilliant mind game strategy that President Trump is employing here. What strategy you might ask. Well, to be honest, I don't know yet. But I am confident that as soon as they come up with what it is, AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP will let us know.
|
|
AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 11:59:07 GMT -5
Posts: 31,709
Favorite Drink: Sweetwater 420
|
Post by AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP on Mar 1, 2018 19:28:47 GMT -5
He wasn't allowed to come to school with a backpack because they felt he was a security risk. He was ultimately expelled from school. There were somewhere between a minimum of 39 calls to the police and 66 calls to the police over the last 24 months depending on the reports you believe. There were two specific threats called in to the Federal Bureau of Investigation, and one specific threat called into the Broward County Sheriff's Office. There was at least one visit and evaluation by DFS which determined he was not a threat to himself or others. Obviously, they were wrong. But you have to wonder why in all those calls, no one saw fit to make an arrest? I'm all for due process, but there's also this other thing called "probable cause". Florida has something called the Baker Act. Seems perfectly appropriate for this guy- but it was never used once because Broward County had a policy of not making arrests because not arresting people is how they improved their crime stats-- for which they got money.
|
|
thyme4change
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 26, 2010 13:54:08 GMT -5
Posts: 40,436
|
Post by thyme4change on Mar 1, 2018 19:44:36 GMT -5
He wasn't allowed to come to school with a backpack because they felt he was a security risk. He was ultimately expelled from school. There were somewhere between a minimum of 39 calls to the police and 66 calls to the police over the last 24 months depending on the reports you believe. There were two specific threats called in to the Federal Bureau of Investigation, and one specific threat called into the Broward County Sheriff's Office. There was at least one visit and evaluation by DFS which determined he was not a threat to himself or others. Obviously, they were wrong. But you have to wonder why in all those calls, no one saw fit to make an arrest? I'm all for due process, but there's also this other thing called "probable cause". Florida has something called the Baker Act. Seems perfectly appropriate for this guy- but it was never used once because Broward County had a policy of not making arrests because not arresting people is how they improved their crime stats-- for which they got money. It sounds like he didn't meet the criteria for the Baker act. We need to expand the criteria of involuntary commitments to include potential violence with no other markers to make them applicable in situations such as this one.
|
|
AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 11:59:07 GMT -5
Posts: 31,709
Favorite Drink: Sweetwater 420
|
Post by AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP on Mar 1, 2018 19:54:31 GMT -5
He wasn't allowed to come to school with a backpack because they felt he was a security risk. He was ultimately expelled from school. There were somewhere between a minimum of 39 calls to the police and 66 calls to the police over the last 24 months depending on the reports you believe. There were two specific threats called in to the Federal Bureau of Investigation, and one specific threat called into the Broward County Sheriff's Office. There was at least one visit and evaluation by DFS which determined he was not a threat to himself or others. Obviously, they were wrong. But you have to wonder why in all those calls, no one saw fit to make an arrest? I'm all for due process, but there's also this other thing called "probable cause". Florida has something called the Baker Act. Seems perfectly appropriate for this guy- but it was never used once because Broward County had a policy of not making arrests because not arresting people is how they improved their crime stats-- for which they got money. It sounds like he didn't meet the criteria for the Baker act. We need to expand the criteria of involuntary commitments to include potential violence with no other markers to make them applicable in situations such as this one. He absolutely met the criteria. Friend of mine was undiagnosed bi-polar. I lost count how many times he was Baker-Acted for things as innocuous as playing his music too loud and refusing to answer the door. On Janurary 5th of this year, they got a specific threat with a name attached. They knew. This kid was on EVERYONE'S radar. But the policy was leniency. www.realclearinvestigations.com/articles/2018/02/28/obama_administration_school_discipline_policy_and_the_parkland_shooting.html
|
|
AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 11:59:07 GMT -5
Posts: 31,709
Favorite Drink: Sweetwater 420
|
Post by AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP on Mar 1, 2018 19:55:29 GMT -5
If this guy doesn't meet the criteria for Florida's Baker Act- then any gun control law re: mental health-- is moot.
|
|
Virgil Showlion
Distinguished Associate
Moderator
[b]leones potest resistere[/b]
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 15:19:33 GMT -5
Posts: 27,448
|
Post by Virgil Showlion on Mar 1, 2018 19:58:11 GMT -5
It is actually a brilliant mind game strategy that President Trump is employing here. What strategy you might ask. Well, to be honest, I don't know yet. But I am confident that as soon as they come up with what it is, AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP will let us know. Its true brilliance lies in its total lack of resemblance to brilliance.
|
|
Wisconsin Beth
Distinguished Associate
No, we don't walk away. But when we're holding on to something precious, we run.
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 11:59:36 GMT -5
Posts: 30,626
|
Post by Wisconsin Beth on Mar 1, 2018 20:23:42 GMT -5
Trump apparently has a concealed carry permit for himself. He's apparently a hand gun type of guy.
|
|
thyme4change
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 26, 2010 13:54:08 GMT -5
Posts: 40,436
|
Post by thyme4change on Mar 2, 2018 15:21:12 GMT -5
It sounds like he didn't meet the criteria for the Baker act. We need to expand the criteria of involuntary commitments to include potential violence with no other markers to make them applicable in situations such as this one. He absolutely met the criteria. Friend of mine was undiagnosed bi-polar. I lost count how many times he was Baker-Acted for things as innocuous as playing his music too loud and refusing to answer the door. On Janurary 5th of this year, they got a specific threat with a name attached. They knew. This kid was on EVERYONE'S radar. But the policy was leniency. www.realclearinvestigations.com/articles/2018/02/28/obama_administration_school_discipline_policy_and_the_parkland_shooting.htmlI was only repeating what a legal guy said after doing the analysis of available information and what the emergency psychologist said about a similar case. You are correct that they didn't even try., so we don't know if the person on duty that day would find that the criteria was met.
|
|
NastyWoman
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 24, 2010 20:50:37 GMT -5
Posts: 14,416
|
Post by NastyWoman on Mar 2, 2018 19:22:00 GMT -5
If this guy doesn't meet the criteria for Florida's Baker Act- then any gun control law re: mental health-- is moot. You know who else meets these criteria (on a daily basis)?
"The Baker Act allows for involuntary examination (what some call emergency or involuntary commitment). It can be initiated by judges, law enforcement officials, physicians, or mental health professionals. There must be evidence that the person: possibly has a mental illness "
|
|
dezii
Distinguished Associate
Joined: May 18, 2017 14:26:36 GMT -5
Posts: 20,671
|
Post by dezii on Mar 6, 2018 11:14:16 GMT -5
Trump apparently has a concealed carry permit for himself. He's apparently a hand gun type of guy. does he? If so, doubt he would use/carry while POTUS...SS is charged with his protection, even to the point of taking one for the office...last thing they need is a amateur getting into a confrontation with a assailant...especially a over weight, not very athletic 71 year old male... more danger to himself and the agents....IMHO...
|
|
mollyanna58
Junior Associate
Joined: Jan 5, 2011 13:20:45 GMT -5
Posts: 6,672
|
Post by mollyanna58 on Mar 6, 2018 13:46:55 GMT -5
Trump apparently has a concealed carry permit for himself. He's apparently a hand gun type of guy. 1) I am always surprised by the number of people who own guns. 2) I am always surprised that people feel the need to carry guns around. 3) I suppose I am not surprised that Trump owns and carried a gun. Even before he was President, he had people who hated him for cheating them; or beating them in a business deal; or groped them; or whatever. I just hope he knows how to use it; it would be a tragedy if he accidentally shot someone.
|
|
billisonboard
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 22:45:44 GMT -5
Posts: 37,510
|
Post by billisonboard on Mar 6, 2018 15:17:40 GMT -5
Yes, I am quoting myself It is actually a brilliant mind game strategy that President Trump is employing here. What strategy you might ask. Well, to be honest, I don't know yet. But I am confident that as soon as they come up with what it is, AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP will let us know. Man, I hate being wrong. Apparently this statement by President Trump was so ... so ... something that not even Scott Adams nor AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP could come up with a way to make it brilliant.
|
|
Virgil Showlion
Distinguished Associate
Moderator
[b]leones potest resistere[/b]
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 15:19:33 GMT -5
Posts: 27,448
|
Post by Virgil Showlion on Mar 6, 2018 20:01:32 GMT -5
Who needs Pres. Trump when you have Seattle? Currently making the rounds though the rightosphere: In what many believe is the beginning of a Constitutional crisis, the Seattle Police Department confiscated a firearm from an individual. The new “red flag” law, which has taken hold in other states already, allows the courts and police to take away guns from individuals they deem are dangerous.
A man living in the Belltown neighborhood of Seattle, Washington became the first individual in the state to have his firearm confiscated without any formal arrest or charges.
The Washington man has not been identified, but he was the first victim of the new protection orders allowing police to confiscate his firearm amid mental health concerns. Neighbors complained that the man had been “staring” at people through storefront windows while wearing a holstered firearm.
Open carrying is legal in the area, so he was allowed to carry a firearm. Other residents also complained that the man’s open carrying made them feel “uncomfortable” and “unsafe.”
“He was roaming the hallways with a .25 caliber automatic,” said Tony Montana, a man who lives in the same apartment complex as the alleged suspect. “And it created a lot of fear obviously because I didn’t know if he was coming after me or gonna just start shooting the place up,” he added.
These lousy complaints from neighbors allowed police to use the newly passed state law to confiscate the man’s firearm because the man apparently stared at others. Under the extreme risk protection orders — also referred to as “erpos” or “red flag laws” — police and courts are allowed to infringe on a person’s Second Amendment rights and take their firearm if they are deemed dangerous. That means state government officials can now take guns away from an individual without even making an arrest.
This overreaching new law allows for dictatorial actions to confiscate weapons from citizens that are arbitrarily deemed guilty and/or dangerous without due process. What say you, YMAM? A step toward safety? A tottering toward tyranny? Both? Neither?
|
|
Tennesseer
Member Emeritus
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 21:58:42 GMT -5
Posts: 63,604
|
Post by Tennesseer on Mar 6, 2018 20:24:05 GMT -5
Who needs Pres. Trump when you have Seattle? Currently making the rounds though the rightosphere: In what many believe is the beginning of a Constitutional crisis, the Seattle Police Department confiscated a firearm from an individual. The new “red flag” law, which has taken hold in other states already, allows the courts and police to take away guns from individuals they deem are dangerous.
A man living in the Belltown neighborhood of Seattle, Washington became the first individual in the state to have his firearm confiscated without any formal arrest or charges.
The Washington man has not been identified, but he was the first victim of the new protection orders allowing police to confiscate his firearm amid mental health concerns. Neighbors complained that the man had been “staring” at people through storefront windows while wearing a holstered firearm.
Open carrying is legal in the area, so he was allowed to carry a firearm. Other residents also complained that the man’s open carrying made them feel “uncomfortable” and “unsafe.”
“He was roaming the hallways with a .25 caliber automatic,” said Tony Montana, a man who lives in the same apartment complex as the alleged suspect. “And it created a lot of fear obviously because I didn’t know if he was coming after me or gonna just start shooting the place up,” he added.
These lousy complaints from neighbors allowed police to use the newly passed state law to confiscate the man’s firearm because the man apparently stared at others. Under the extreme risk protection orders — also referred to as “erpos” or “red flag laws” — police and courts are allowed to infringe on a person’s Second Amendment rights and take their firearm if they are deemed dangerous. That means state government officials can now take guns away from an individual without even making an arrest.
This overreaching new law allows for dictatorial actions to confiscate weapons from citizens that are arbitrarily deemed guilty and/or dangerous without due process. What say you, YMAM? A step toward safety? A tottering toward tyranny? Both? Neither? I give little credence to the linked story. Too vague-could be anywhere USA or no where USA. No names other than a Tony Montana which could be a made up name. I found a similar story almost verbatim. Additionally, the similar story had this picture: Here is the link to the story with the picture: Seattle Police Begin NAZI STYLE Gun Confiscation: No Laws Broken, No Warrant, No ChargesWith 20 seconds of searching I found a April 25, 2017 article with the same picture. Link to the 2017 article: Washington D.C. To Hold Massive “Coordinated Terror Attack” Drill This WednesdaySo the picture is used to incite and scare. Lying in an article as if that was the police in this supposed event in Seattle is not good. This reviewer gives the alleged incident, based upon existing information,
|
|
Tennesseer
Member Emeritus
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 21:58:42 GMT -5
Posts: 63,604
|
Post by Tennesseer on Mar 6, 2018 20:31:57 GMT -5
|
|
tallguy
Senior Associate
Joined: Apr 2, 2011 19:21:59 GMT -5
Posts: 14,191
|
Post by tallguy on Mar 6, 2018 22:22:51 GMT -5
Chapter 7.94 RCW EXTREME RISK PROTECTION ORDER ACTThe court will, if it deems necessary (i.e. finds the person a threat) issue an order for a period of one year. That will either expire or be extended as the result of another hearing request by the petitioner. The respondent has the right every 12 months to request a hearing to prove he is not a threat. If he can do that, his gun(s) will be returned.
|
|
Virgil Showlion
Distinguished Associate
Moderator
[b]leones potest resistere[/b]
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 15:19:33 GMT -5
Posts: 27,448
|
Post by Virgil Showlion on Mar 6, 2018 23:15:35 GMT -5
They put stock photos in to depict tyranny, not because they expect readers will believe a 20-man SWAT team is needed to confiscate a single, law abiding man's gun. It's rank editorialism, but it's not deceptive. If your beef is with people using shocking imagery to stir up people's emotions for political reasons, go after the activists lying in heaps in front of the White House, or feminists dressed up as giant vaginas, or the groups setting up billboards to troll Hollywood about sexual misconduct, or...
|
|