States defying recent federal gun bill

[old dog]

Guilty until proven innocent has always been the law of the land.

What country do you live in? I know it's not America.

[Wilson2]

This new bill doesn't create a federal red flag law, it just provides money to states that enact them.

It still leaves it up to the states to work out what they want if anything in the form of red flag laws.

Its a bribe. Don't think the feds won't have their fingers in the state legislation, the feds determine if the state laws qualify for the bribe, and the feds will make sure the state laws are in the feds favor.

[East of the Beast]

Why I SOLD what guns I had....

me too

[Wildrose]

Better to give a private collection to someone who will use it for the purpose the guns were made for: firing bullets at evildoers in defense of freedom and justice.

If you can't keep up with the discussion best to stay out of it.

The idea that you tell them you sold your guns and don't go to jail is a laugh. They will arrest you for selling them without a license and you will be a convicted felon.

[Wildrose]

Its a bribe. Don't think the feds won't have their fingers in the state legislation, the feds determine if the state laws qualify for the bribe, and the feds will make sure the state laws are in the feds favor.

It's still left up to each state to design any such RFL's as they decide to or, to not do it at all.

Other than the fed's dangling money to encourage states to do so nothing has changed.

[Wildrose]

Let them eat cake.

These new red flag laws only apply to gun owners. False accusations have always been around for everything else. Guilty until proven innocent has always been the law of the land. Does being arrested make you look innocent?

The problem with most RFL's as proposed your guns may be seized on the flimsiest of evidence and it might well cost you tens of thousands to get them back fighting in court.

If a state is going to enact such laws there should be a requirement for clear and convincing evidence, enough evidence to equal probable cause for a warrant or arrest required before they are issued and draconian penalties for those who file false red flag reports.

[mrclose]

This new bill doesn't create a federal red flag law, it just provides money to states that enact them.

It still leaves it up to the states to work out what they want if anything in the form of red flag laws.

I repeat .. SCOTUS ruled that what applies to the Feds also applies to the states.
Go look up the definition of the Supremacy Clause: Article 6, Paragraph 2 of the United States Constitution

[Wildrose]

I repeat .. SCOTUS ruled that what applies to the Feds also applies to the states.
Go look up the definition of the Supremacy Clause: Article 6, Paragraph 2 of the United States Constitution

The Supremacy Clause simply states that where Federal and State Laws conflict Federal Law Trumps State law.

The SCOTUS has said nothing to date about Red Flag Laws at the federal or state levels.

Article VI, Paragraph 2 of the U.S. Constitution is commonly referred to as the Supremacy Clause. It establishes that the federal constitution, and federal law generally, take precedence over state laws, and even state constitutions. It prohibits states from interfering with the federal government's exercise of its constitutional powers, and from assuming any functions that are exclusively entrusted to the federal government. It does not, however, allow the federal government to review or veto state laws before they take effect.

The court has even upheld a lifetime ban on the Right To Keep and Bear for a misdemeanor domestic violence conviction so I am no overly confident they'll support a constitutional challenge to ERPO's.

[Wildrose]

scotus already ruled red flag laws unconstitutional 9-0 last year, these new bullshit laws are going to face the same challenges and, quite likely, be struck down.

Caniglia appealed his case until it was received by the Supreme Court in 2021. Justice Thomas succinctly expressed the majority opinion of all nine justices that such an overt violation of the Fourth Amendment was obviously unconstitutional.

The Supreme Court rightly protected the sanctity of the home on May 17th’s landmark decision. The First District court’s inadequately reasoned “caretaking exception” is an example of a ruse often used by the state when individual rights prevent it from getting what it wants.

This reaffirmation of both privacy and Second Amendment rights should give pause to advocates of red flag laws. Posing as defenders of public safety, red flag laws bypass the Second and Fourth Amendments while simultaneously abolishing due process.

https://libertas.org/personal-freedo...red-flag-laws/

That ruling does not address RFL's, it addressed an unconstitutional search and seizure lacking any probable cause or a warrant.

JUSTICE THOMAS delivered the opinion of the Court.Decades ago, this Court held that a warrantless search ofan impounded vehicle for an unsecured firearm did not violate the Fourth Amendment.

Cady v. Dombrowski, 413U. S. 433 (1973). In reaching this conclusion, the Court observed that police officers who patrol the “public highways”are often called to discharge noncriminal “community caretaking functions,” such as responding to disabled vehiclesor investigating accidents. Id., at 441.

The question todayis whether Cady’s acknowledgment of these “caretaking”duties creates a standalone doctrine that justifies warrantless searches and seizures in the home. It does not.

https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinion...0-157_8mjp.pdf

As yet no case I know of has made it up the ladder in which such a seizure was done with an Order of The Court but in all likelihood any such seizure would probably withstand court scrutiny as long as the respondent has a clear legal pathway to recover his guns quickly if the state cannot prove in court they are a danger to themselves or others.

Most existing ERPO's/RFL's allow only for temporary short term seizures and due process follows the seizure. Those I doubt would stand up in this current court absent clear evidence to justify the seizure.

[Authentic]

If you can't keep up with the discussion best to stay out of it.

Giving a private collection to someone who will use it for the purpose the guns were made for: firing bullets at evildoers in defense of freedom and justice, does not involve any exchange of money.