Page 8 of 9 FirstFirst ... 6789 LastLast
Results 106 to 120 of 124
  1. #106
    Join Date
    Dec 2017
    Posts
    3,219
    Thanks (Given)
    806
    Thanks (Received)
    992
    Likes (Given)
    53
    Likes (Received)
    678
    Piss Off (Given)
    0
    Piss Off (Received)
    0
    Mentioned
    6 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    5509725

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Kathianne View Post
    Yeah, like the President of the United States saying, 'Very angry, out of control. Nutty. No gun for you!'

    Think of divorce and accusations of abuse against spouse or kids. Due process isn't something to screw around with.
    Trump should in no way be an arbiter of who is nutty and who isn't LOL

    I'm pretty sure the defense of his tweet would be "hey I'm just asking the question......." but I feel it's an inappropriate question for the POTUS to be asking given his authority over the Justice Dept.

  2. #107
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Arizona
    Posts
    47,506
    Thanks (Given)
    23722
    Thanks (Received)
    17276
    Likes (Given)
    9555
    Likes (Received)
    6007
    Piss Off (Given)
    85
    Piss Off (Received)
    10
    Mentioned
    204 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    21475521

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by STTAB View Post
    Trump should in no way be an arbiter of who is nutty and who isn't LOL

    I'm pretty sure the defense of his tweet would be "hey I'm just asking the question......." but I feel it's an inappropriate question for the POTUS to be asking given his authority over the Justice Dept.

    The red flag laws, depending how they're written, would really make this ok to bring to court. Ok, maybe there was 'malice' involved, but the accused can bring that up after he has the 'no gun permitted' attached. Then he can hire a lawyer to get the judge to admit he was snookered. Judges love the self-reflection as a whole.


    "The government is a child that has found their parents credit card, and spends knowing that they never have to reconcile the bill with their own money"-Shannon Churchill


  3. Thanks STTAB thanked this post
  4. #108
    Join Date
    Dec 2017
    Posts
    3,219
    Thanks (Given)
    806
    Thanks (Received)
    992
    Likes (Given)
    53
    Likes (Received)
    678
    Piss Off (Given)
    0
    Piss Off (Received)
    0
    Mentioned
    6 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    5509725

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Kathianne View Post
    The red flag laws, depending how they're written, would really make this ok to bring to court. Ok, maybe there was 'malice' involved, but the accused can bring that up after he has the 'no gun permitted' attached. Then he can hire a lawyer to get the judge to admit he was snookered. Judges love the self-reflection as a whole.
    The only way red flag laws should ever happen is if they are handled the way say a TRO is handled. You can't simply go in and say "your honor this person scared me" and get a TRO. You must prove a real threat exists if the TRO isn't issued"

    And yeah if the guns are taken before any hearing. that's a clear violation of due process.

  5. #109
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Arizona
    Posts
    47,506
    Thanks (Given)
    23722
    Thanks (Received)
    17276
    Likes (Given)
    9555
    Likes (Received)
    6007
    Piss Off (Given)
    85
    Piss Off (Received)
    10
    Mentioned
    204 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    21475521

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by STTAB View Post
    The only way red flag laws should ever happen is if they are handled the way say a TRO is handled. You can't simply go in and say "your honor this person scared me" and get a TRO. You must prove a real threat exists if the TRO isn't issued"

    And yeah if the guns are taken before any hearing. that's a clear violation of due process.
    Temporary restraining orders require proof of immediate harm threat. Even when granted, for some weird reasons the restrained, doesn't. Offs the holder of the TRO. Nice comparison.

    red flag laws by the nature of what they are to prevent, would be absent proof, it's someone's 'gut.' Hell, might even be a kid in class hearing some nut job has her name on a rape or kill list. Now that would have been a good thing, but really are they going to keep those for years? When they would have expunged a record, IF the police had charged?


    "The government is a child that has found their parents credit card, and spends knowing that they never have to reconcile the bill with their own money"-Shannon Churchill


  6. #110
    Join Date
    Dec 2017
    Posts
    3,219
    Thanks (Given)
    806
    Thanks (Received)
    992
    Likes (Given)
    53
    Likes (Received)
    678
    Piss Off (Given)
    0
    Piss Off (Received)
    0
    Mentioned
    6 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    5509725

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Kathianne View Post
    Temporary restraining orders require proof of immediate harm threat. Even when granted, for some weird reasons the restrained, doesn't. Offs the holder of the TRO. Nice comparison.

    red flag laws by the nature of what they are to prevent, would be absent proof, it's someone's 'gut.' Hell, might even be a kid in class hearing some nut job has her name on a rape or kill list. Now that would have been a good thing, but really are they going to keep those for years? When they would have expunged a record, IF the police had charged?
    TRO's are often issued absent proof but based on someone's gut........ THat person is a judge someone who hopefully is in the position they are in because we trust their judgement.

    The REAL question is how much would this log jam the already over burdened justice system? I'm assuming they would be heard in civil court rather than criminal court? In which case, someone's life could be ruined simply by an accusatoin because civil cases are not nearly as secret as criminal cases.

    "Mr STTAB thank you for applying for a job here, now looking through your application I see that twenty years ago you were involved in a civil litigation in which you were questioned about whether you should have access to guns" and that is probably the end of any real chance at said job. The interviewer likely won't care that the accusation was made by my angry ex wife, and probably will not take the time to dig further into what happened. Too many other candidates out there

    That's a real possibility, and one that we should be aware of before passing "red flag laws" I, of course, have no faith in Congress to actually think about the possible ramifications.

  7. #111
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Arizona
    Posts
    47,506
    Thanks (Given)
    23722
    Thanks (Received)
    17276
    Likes (Given)
    9555
    Likes (Received)
    6007
    Piss Off (Given)
    85
    Piss Off (Received)
    10
    Mentioned
    204 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    21475521

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by STTAB View Post
    TRO's are often issued absent proof but based on someone's gut........ THat person is a judge someone who hopefully is in the position they are in because we trust their judgement.

    The REAL question is how much would this log jam the already over burdened justice system? I'm assuming they would be heard in civil court rather than criminal court? In which case, someone's life could be ruined simply by an accusatoin because civil cases are not nearly as secret as criminal cases.

    "Mr STTAB thank you for applying for a job here, now looking through your application I see that twenty years ago you were involved in a civil litigation in which you were questioned about whether you should have access to guns" and that is probably the end of any real chance at said job. The interviewer likely won't care that the accusation was made by my angry ex wife, and probably will not take the time to dig further into what happened. Too many other candidates out there

    That's a real possibility, and one that we should be aware of before passing "red flag laws" I, of course, have no faith in Congress to actually think about the possible ramifications.
    Maybe in Arkansas, but not in IL. You don't just get a lawyer and convince the good judge that your ex has threatened to kill you. Nope, got to have evidence, from the hospital is best.


    "The government is a child that has found their parents credit card, and spends knowing that they never have to reconcile the bill with their own money"-Shannon Churchill


  8. #112
    Join Date
    Dec 2017
    Posts
    3,219
    Thanks (Given)
    806
    Thanks (Received)
    992
    Likes (Given)
    53
    Likes (Received)
    678
    Piss Off (Given)
    0
    Piss Off (Received)
    0
    Mentioned
    6 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    5509725

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Kathianne View Post
    Maybe in Arkansas, but not in IL. You don't just get a lawyer and convince the good judge that your ex has threatened to kill you. Nope, got to have evidence, from the hospital is best.
    IL won't grant a TRO unless a man has actually put a woman in the hospital? Yeah, they don't wait that long in Arkansas. We prefer our women not be beaten senseless before stepping in.

  9. #113
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Arizona
    Posts
    47,506
    Thanks (Given)
    23722
    Thanks (Received)
    17276
    Likes (Given)
    9555
    Likes (Received)
    6007
    Piss Off (Given)
    85
    Piss Off (Received)
    10
    Mentioned
    204 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    21475521

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by STTAB View Post
    IL won't grant a TRO unless a man has actually put a woman in the hospital? Yeah, they don't wait that long in Arkansas. We prefer our women not be beaten senseless before stepping in.
    Yeah, sounds like the schools where guys don't need no freakin' lawyer for their trials, no evidence. Everyone knows womin dont lie.


    "The government is a child that has found their parents credit card, and spends knowing that they never have to reconcile the bill with their own money"-Shannon Churchill


  10. #114
    Join Date
    Dec 2017
    Posts
    3,219
    Thanks (Given)
    806
    Thanks (Received)
    992
    Likes (Given)
    53
    Likes (Received)
    678
    Piss Off (Given)
    0
    Piss Off (Received)
    0
    Mentioned
    6 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    5509725

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Kathianne View Post
    Yeah, sounds like the schools where guys don't need no freakin' lawyer for their trials, no evidence. Everyone knows womin dont lie.
    And pissy Kath is back.............


    The gap from just taking a woman's word for it, to waiting until she has to go to the hospital is HUGE and you know it.

  11. #115
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Arizona
    Posts
    47,506
    Thanks (Given)
    23722
    Thanks (Received)
    17276
    Likes (Given)
    9555
    Likes (Received)
    6007
    Piss Off (Given)
    85
    Piss Off (Received)
    10
    Mentioned
    204 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    21475521

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by STTAB View Post
    And pissy Kath is back.............


    The gap from just taking a woman's word for it, to waiting until she has to go to the hospital is HUGE and you know it.
    Let's review due process and the rule of law once again. There are reasons we need warrants, evidence, etc.

    It would be great if every cop and judge were really human lie detectors, but they are not.


    "The government is a child that has found their parents credit card, and spends knowing that they never have to reconcile the bill with their own money"-Shannon Churchill


  12. #116
    Join Date
    Dec 2017
    Posts
    3,219
    Thanks (Given)
    806
    Thanks (Received)
    992
    Likes (Given)
    53
    Likes (Received)
    678
    Piss Off (Given)
    0
    Piss Off (Received)
    0
    Mentioned
    6 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    5509725

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Kathianne View Post
    Let's review due process and the rule of law once again. There are reasons we need warrants, evidence, etc.

    It would be great if every cop and judge were really human lie detectors, but they are not.
    By all means , let's do.

    Do you understand that a TRO is a protection against future facts, rather than a reaction to past ones? In other words, a woman doesn't have to prove that a man beat the shit out of her in order to get one, instead she must convince a judge that he WILL do so of he can doesn't issue one.

    And a TRO can be issued without the other party even knowing about it. There doesn't even need to be a hearing, the judge can just look at evidence in his or her chamber and sign the TRO which is then presented to the person being restrained and there is no appeal process.

    Due process absolutely positively does not apply to TRO's.

  13. #117
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Arizona
    Posts
    47,506
    Thanks (Given)
    23722
    Thanks (Received)
    17276
    Likes (Given)
    9555
    Likes (Received)
    6007
    Piss Off (Given)
    85
    Piss Off (Received)
    10
    Mentioned
    204 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    21475521

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by STTAB View Post
    By all means , let's do.

    Do you understand that a TRO is a protection against future facts, rather than a reaction to past ones? In other words, a woman doesn't have to prove that a man beat the shit out of her in order to get one, instead she must convince a judge that he WILL do so of he can doesn't issue one.

    And a TRO can be issued without the other party even knowing about it. There doesn't even need to be a hearing, the judge can just look at evidence in his or her chamber and sign the TRO which is then presented to the person being restrained and there is no appeal process.

    Due process absolutely positively does not apply to TRO's.

    Due process has everything to do with being able to respond to charges. Pretty hard to be responsive if there is no charges-red state laws.

    TRO's other than from your friends in Arkansas are used for 'protection' after there's enough evidence to convince a judge that there are reasons to think the person has real reason to fear immediate threat from a specific person.

    Most of us don't get overly optimistic since 'real threatening' people tend not to follow the laws. Imagine that. Sometimes a bit of hope if the threatening person really doesn't want to hurt someone more than they wish to avoid jail.

    The red state laws would not only do away with reasonable level of evidence; but the only way to get off the list would be to incur an attorney to help get it 'removed.' On top of that, does anyone think in the wonderful world of the internet that you're being nutty enough for the no buy list, will not become available to future employers and such?


    "The government is a child that has found their parents credit card, and spends knowing that they never have to reconcile the bill with their own money"-Shannon Churchill


  14. #118
    Join Date
    Nov 2014
    Location
    Mouth of the Rogue River, Oregon USA
    Posts
    9,585
    Thanks (Given)
    8103
    Thanks (Received)
    7926
    Likes (Given)
    1479
    Likes (Received)
    1560
    Piss Off (Given)
    3
    Piss Off (Received)
    0
    Mentioned
    42 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    19808673

    Default

    In Oregon, open carry of sidearms is legal and not unusual. Now whether folks have to register with local / county LE is
    unknown to me without googling it. In the rural areas, which comprises 90% of the state, it is not unusual to see rifles
    or shotguns on a rack inside a vehicle on public roads, in parking lots, etc. I imagine they must be unloaded though
    unless on private land.

    In Long Beach CA, I used to take my bow to the Olympic Archery range to target shoot. Had the bow hung on a rack.
    LB city cop stopped me one day, checked my credentials, and told me the bow needed to cased/covered, and unstrung.
    Anyone who has used a compound bow knows that constant stringing and unstringing it is hard on the arms of it,
    resulting in it being unbalanced. I quit going there after that incident.
    I have lost my mind. If found, please give it a snack and return it?

    "I won't be wronged. I won't be insulted. I won't be laid a hand on. I don't do these things to other people, and I require the same of others"...John Wayne in "The Shootist"

    A Deplorable!

  15. Likes High_Plains_Drifter liked this post
  16. #119
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Location
    Podunk, WI
    Posts
    9,836
    Thanks (Given)
    4248
    Thanks (Received)
    4521
    Likes (Given)
    4519
    Likes (Received)
    2812
    Piss Off (Given)
    0
    Piss Off (Received)
    0
    Mentioned
    38 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    0

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Elessar View Post
    In Oregon, open carry of sidearms is legal and not unusual. Now whether folks have to register with local / county LE is
    unknown to me without googling it. In the rural areas, which comprises 90% of the state, it is not unusual to see rifles
    or shotguns on a rack inside a vehicle on public roads, in parking lots, etc. I imagine they must be unloaded though
    unless on private land.

    In Long Beach CA, I used to take my bow to the Olympic Archery range to target shoot. Had the bow hung on a rack.
    LB city cop stopped me one day, checked my credentials, and told me the bow needed to cased/covered, and unstrung.
    Anyone who has used a compound bow knows that constant stringing and unstringing it is hard on the arms of it,
    resulting in it being unbalanced. I quit going there after that incident.
    It's not odd in Wisconsin either. During deer hunting season there's guns everywhere. We register harvested deer right at the local gas stations, and there's always a bunch of people around someone registering a big buck, and it's not unusual for them to pull out their rifles and compare them either. Just not a big deal, no one thinks a thing of it. People are hunting with pistols here now too since they changed that law. They have to meet certain ballistics, but the .44 mag is getting real popular since much of the shooting here is done in close range. People will wear their pistol all over, even loaded. So long as it's visible it's legal, and even then, if the person has a CCW it's still not an issue. We used to ride the motorcycles around NV wearing our pistols too. Passed many a cop and they hardly paid any attention.
    Last edited by High_Plains_Drifter; 08-13-2019 at 06:52 PM.

  17. #120
    Join Date
    Dec 2017
    Location
    USA East Coast
    Posts
    3,091
    Thanks (Given)
    3048
    Thanks (Received)
    2042
    Likes (Given)
    4798
    Likes (Received)
    1751
    Piss Off (Given)
    230
    Piss Off (Received)
    13
    Mentioned
    37 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    6803333

    Default Here's the REAL reason Democrat politicians want to take away our 2nd amendment right

    Short, and Sweet. Politicians (all of them), know. Removing a citizen's right to BEAR ARMS makes it very easy for GOVERNMENT to control every person....AT THE POINT OF A GUN!

    Giving Government more power over 'WE THE PEOPLE' by removing any of our Constitutional Rights. Gives up our rights, across the board, ONE, BY ONE. Until...as the Radical Socialist, Democrats would like...DESTROY the America we all know, and love. To allow Politicians to gain the POWER they need.

    I may be older than most. I may say things not everybody will like.
    But despite all of that. I will never lower myself to the level of Liars, Haters, Cheats, and Hypocrites.
    Philippians 4:13 I Can Do All Things Through Christ Who Strengthens Me:

  18. Likes High_Plains_Drifter liked this post

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Debate Policy - Political Forums