The Truly Insidious Nature of Red Flag Laws - KrisAnne Hall, JD

[Sanguine]

Well,  I listened to the first 12 minutes,  and heard barely a word about red flag laws.   

Well, there you go.  Obviously nothing you can learn from that video.

[roamer_1]

Well, there you go.  Obviously nothing you can learn from that video.

; )

[sneakypete]

The population is woefully ignorant of history and our founding documents. KrisAnne is right about that. Thanks for the post @EdJames

@austingirl

Serious question.

Is American History still taught in the public schools,or is it PC World History?

IMHO,the most dangerous enemy our Republic and people have ever faced is the NEA.

[austingirl]

@austingirl

Serious question.

Is American History still taught in the public schools,or is it PC World History?

IMHO,the most dangerous enemy our Republic and people have ever faced is the NEA.

@sneakypete

I think what is taught varies from school district to school district. In my little town, I think they teach actual subjects rather than indoctrinate the kids into government propaganda.

[Sanguine]

@sneakypete

I think what is taught varies from school district to school district. In my little town, I think they teach actual subjects rather than indoctrinate the kids into government propaganda.

You would think so, but remember most teachers are a product of the progressive education system.  I'm guessing it would be very difficult to find a conservative teacher under 50-60 years old.

[libertybele]

Well,  I listened to the first 12 minutes,  and heard barely a word about red flag laws.   

Well, let's see...a huge debate is going on around the country regarding the second amendment, the proposed red flag laws and the title of the video is "The Truly Insidious Nature of Red Flag Laws". Obviously her speech;lecture touched heavily upon the 2nd amendment and how other rights (amendments) were entertwined; so I don't think she was talking about Little Red Riding Hood.   

[Bigun]

@sneakypete

I think what is taught varies from school district to school district. In my little town, I think they teach actual subjects rather than indoctrinate the kids into government propaganda.

What passes for American history in public schools today would be unrecognizable to those who attended those same schools 30 years ago.

[libertybele]

You would think so, but remember most teachers are a product of the progressive education system.  I'm guessing it would be very difficult to find a conservative teacher under 50-60 years old.

I never thought about that @Sanguine but you are absolutely correct.  I think you'd be hard pressed to find a conservative teacher these days .... though that's exactly what's been needed to combat the liberal indoctrination of our youth. Perhaps they still exist in private schools.

[sneakypete]

Hah!    If you truly believe that the 2A is the bulwark that secures our freedoms,  then don't do stupid stuff that will result in the demise of the 2A.

@Jazzhead

You are seriously making my head hurt. Unless there is another Constitutional Convention meeting that results in votes to disband the US and create another nation,THE BILL OF RIGHTS CAN NOT BE REVOKED.

Maybe if I type slowly it might not bounce off the back of your empty skull and out our ears? The whole purpose of these attacks on the Bill of Rights are to destroy America in order to create "World Wide Government,Inc" (my idea of an appropriate title) where once again,small family groups end up controlling the world and the people in it,and granting access to minions that behave "properly" and help increase their wealth and security.

The difference between these new "Kings and Queens" and those of the "Olde World" is that NONE of these will be warriors. They will all be bankers. The will have national armies enforce their dictates at first,but eventually there will be One Global Army to control the working classes and keep them slapped into line.

This is NOT possible as long as America exists,and it is not possible unless America becomes a part of the Borg. In order to accomplish this two things have to be done.

1: The Bill of Rights MUST be nullified in order before any sweeping changes are made in our form of government. The keys to this are to turn the public against the 2nd Amendment,and to convince everyone that whites are all racists looking to enslave them. Americans MUST be disarmed or we will be a danger to the survival of the globalist scum and their families. These people are NOT risk-takers. They never fight in anyone's army,and no one in their family has ever fought in anyone's army at any time in history. Their original families were the ones that lent European Royalty the money to wage wars against each other. They do NOT fight. Like the Schiff family in Czarist Russia,they grab what money they can and flee at the first hint the authorities are coming after them.

They are playing the "Long Game". It matters not to them if the ones alive today end up controlling the world,or if it is their grandchildren. The thing is they each want THEIR family to be at the top of the heap when the dust settles. They WILL resort to the murders of anyone that stands in their way,but they,themselves,will NOT take part in it. They are always several levels removed from positions where when the dust settles,no surviving governments can point fingers at them.

2:America's army MUST become populated primarily be young soldiers from 3rd World countries that know and care nothing about the Bill of Rights,or even freedom. They are here and in the army because they want to earn a living,eat regularly,and have a comfortable and safe place to live and raise children. To keep their jobs,they will NOT hesitate to open fire on native-born Americans that head to NG armories to arm themselves. Hell,some of them have so much resentment towards the "rich yanquis" they might even look forward to opening fire on them.

Too many here are too stubborn to believe it,  but the individual RKBA - the right that secures your natural right to defend you person and your personal property -  exists by reason of a 5-4 SCOTUS majority.  That's it.  That's all.   The decision affirming the individual right was joined by each conservative SCOTUS member,  and rejected by every liberal one.   

Technically,I don't believe that is true. They can ALTER it and get away with it IF they gain firm control over the SC,the Justice Department,Congress,and the WH,but they can't really eliminate any of our individual freedoms without dissolving America and creating a "new country" that is no longer a Constitutional Republic.

Which leads to one of MY biggest personal peeves. My head wants to explode every time I hear a teebee talking head,a congresscritter,or even a President refer to America as a "Democracy".

We are NOT,and NEVER HAVE BEEN a freaking Democracy.  A Democracy is defined as "government by mob rule". We are a CONSTITUTION REPUBLIC,and the only way our system can be changed is by vote or military defeat.

Thus the dumbing down of our educational system.

There is no question in my mind that if a Dem President and Senate is elected in 2020,  and Clarence Thomas or another conservative steps down,  then the Heller decision will be overturned and the 2A interpreted to not secure the individual right.

 

Nor is there any question in my mind about that.

States will be free to ban whole classes of weapons and otherwise prohibit that what you take for granted now. 

And they will,because most of our states are now ran by mob rule,thanks to the leftists domination of the Dim Party,and the influx of all the 3rd world cannon fodder they brought in.

 

That is what is at stake in this election.  And yet many are promising to stay home if the President, in reaction to a wave of mass shootings,  dares to support doing something about it that would inconvenience gun owners in a minor way.   

Once again,I agree,even though I am NOT glad about it.

Although,to be perfectly honest,I do NOT think Trump is going to go along with this,no matter how much he hints he will. I fully expect him to pull the rug out from under their feet at the last instant.

Gun owners have the political clout to secure the Presidency for the Democrats,  and some appear willing and even eager to do that.   But you do so at your peril.  Your rights hang by a thread.

The truth is,with the urbanization of America along with the influx of 3rd worlders who have never even heard of the Bill of Rights,it is MY opinion that we have no more than one more presidential election left before the choice will be between "Globalist Number One",or Globalist Number Two".

Either Trump wins in 2020,yanks the rugs out from under the feet of the left by using judicial appointments and appointees that are not and never have been beltway insiders,or 2020 is when the Second American Revolution begins,and maybe,America ends. I am as serious as a heart attack about this.

[Sanguine]

Well said, @sneakypete.  What a slender reed our future is based on.

[Bigun]

I'm not so sure as to the timing but the rest I am in complete agreement with @sneakypete.

[libertybele]

@Jazzhead


Either Trump wins in 2020,yanks the rugs out from under the feet of the left by using judicial appointments and appointees that are not and never have been beltway insiders,or 2020 is when the Second American Revolution begins,and maybe,America ends. I am as serious as a heart attack about this.

I agree. I see that the Second American Revolution could very easily be just around the corner.  That is why it is so disturbing and in fact alarming that Trump is advocating red flag laws; especially with his mention of due process later.  If a revolution should occur, in order to preserve our Constitution and retain this Republic we must insist on the 2nd Amendment not being dismantled in any way, otherwise I agree we may just see the end of America as we know her.

I don't really think many see how fragile our Country is right now.  Frightening really.

[sneakypete]

@sneakypete

I think what is taught varies from school district to school district. In my little town, I think they teach actual subjects rather than indoctrinate the kids into government propaganda.

@austingirl

Thanks! As long as actual history is being taught in some areas,there is still hope.

[txradioguy]

@austingirl

Thanks! As long as actual history is being taught in some areas,there is still hope.

IMHO the most accurate versions of history being taught these days are to kids that are home schooled.  Something the Liberals absolutely hate.

[Sighlass]

Well after hearing the gripe about not being able to listen to her (squeaky voice and all).... I downloaded the audio and altered it via a free program (Voxal free version)....

Here is the audio only in a lower tone.... in Mp3 format at 192 kbps

https://mab.to/blbhrBWm7

Personally I thought it was a brilliant speech... Meat not Milk...

3 Days Only Download

[Smokin Joe]

Fine, then do so in your own dang state and leave mine the hell alone.

People 3000 miles away have no business telling me what to do.

Well, you hit on the problem. People who live in the people hives like NYC and other major urban areas just can't wrap their heads around life in a rural environment. But they think they should be able to dictate how we live in what to them is as alien as another planet.

It is small wonder that their "solutions" for the problems had by people living in their environment just don't make one damned bit of sense where we are.
But an analog was found in the 60s by John B Calhoun, who worked at NIMH.https://eprints.lse.ac.uk/22514/1/2308Ramadams.pdf

Employed in the Laboratory of Psychology of the National Institute of Mental Health from 1954, Calhoun repeated the experiment in specially constructed “rodent universes” – room-sized pens which could be viewed from the attic above via windows cut through the ceiling.
Using a variety of strains of rats and mice, he once more provided his populations with food, bedding, and shelter.
With no predators and with exposure to disease kept at a minimum, Calhoun described his experimental universes as “rat utopia,” “mouse paradise.”

With all their visible needs met, the animals bred rapidly. The only restriction Calhoun imposed on his population was of space – and as the population grew, this became increasingly problematic.

As the pens heaved with animals, one of his assistants described rodent “utopia” as having become “hell” (Marsden 1972).

Dominant males became aggressive, some moving in groups, attacking females and the young.
Mating behaviors were disrupted.
Some became exclusively homosexual.
Others became pansexual and hypersexual, attempting to mount any rat they encountered.
Mothers neglected their infants, first failing to construct proper nests, and then carelessly abandoning and even attacking their pups.
In certain sections of the pens, infant mortality rose as high as 96%, the dead cannibalized by adults.

Subordinate animals withdrew psychologically, surviving in a physical sense but at an immense psychological cost. They were the majority in the late phases of growth, existing as a vacant, huddled mass in the centre of the pens.
Unable to breed, the population plummeted and did not recover.

The crowded rodents had lost the ability to co-exist harmoniously, even after the population numbers once again fell to low levels. At a certain density, they had ceased to act like rats and mice, and the change was permanent.
Accepted for publication in the Spring 2009 edition of The Journal of Social History
3 Calhoun published the results of his early experiments with the rats at NIMH in a 1962 edition of Scientific American.

[Jazzhead]

Either Trump wins in 2020,yanks the rugs out from under the feet of the left by using judicial appointments and appointees that are not and never have been beltway insiders,or 2020 is when the Second American Revolution begins,and maybe,America ends. I am as serious as a heart attack about this.

A hell of a lot is at stake to place at the feet of one Donald J. Trump.   Is he the best we can do?   

[sneakypete]

A hell of a lot is at stake to place at the feet of one Donald J. Trump.   Is he the best we can do?   

@Jazzhead

The rest of us don't live in that rich fantasy world inside your head. We live in the real world,and have to deal with the players on the field.

Trump IS "the best we can do" because he IS who we have.

[Jazzhead]

Well, there you go.  Obviously nothing you can learn from that video.

Well, I do wish that woman would get to the point.   After 12 minutes,  I decided to go work out at the gym.   

But here's my beef with her and those who think like her:   The 2A as written is obsolete.   This is not about killing the king.   We threw out the king, and installed in its place a representative government of the people, by the people,  with explicit protections for individual rights.    We don't need pitchforks and assault weapons to take down our leaders,  we have the ballot box.    I am offended by this notion that guns secure our freedoms - our Constitution and our traditions of self-government do.    When a President or Congress overreaches (like, say, after what Obama did with the ACA),   the voters throw the bums out.    That's going to be the battleground next year - whether to throw the bums out.   I agree that, nowadays,  the biased and unprofessional media has their thumb on the scales,  but the answer is still not armed insurrection.    Our institutions still work.     

The 2A protects no natural, individual right.   The 2A addresses matters of civil and community defense, from a time when a key role was played by citizen militias.  It is obsolete in today's world.    The natural right to self defense of person and property is an unenumerated right similar to the individual rights of privacy and self-determination.   These are protected by Constitution,  to be sure,  but there is an ongoing tension between the courts and the legislatures since a sizable portion of the population disagrees with the courts that these rights are in fact protected.   If close to half the nation wants to abolish the Constitution's protection for abortion,  then I'd think a similar percentage likely wants to abolish the Constitution's protection (by means of Heller) of the individual right to keep a firearm for self protection. 

The angst and anger that folks feel has as its source this tension.  We are all hypocrites.  Rights for me but not for thee.   Those who most zealously guard their RKBA are often the first to demand that a woman's right to choose be denied.   And those who most zealously guard the woman's choice right see no hypocrisy in demanding laws that would take away a man's right to defend his home and family.   

Can a constitutional republic survive when half the country doesn't share the values of the other half?   That's the open question,  but matters would be helped if both sides could manage to recognize their selfishness.   

[sneakypete]

Well, I do wish that woman would get to the point.   After 12 minutes,  I decided to go work out at the gym.   

But here's my beef with her and those who think like her:   The 2A as written is obsolete.   This is not about killing the king.   We threw out the king, and installed in its place representative government.   

@Jazzhead

You are clearly delusional if you don't understand and accept as truth the statement that "Freedom requires eternal vigilance" because since the dawn of history there has always been people seeking power to enable them to enslave us all,and that these people will always exist

You sir,are a natural slave.

[Bigun]

Well after hearing the gripe about not being able to listen to her (squeaky voice and all).... I downloaded the audio and altered it via a free program (Voxal free version)....

Here is the audio only in a lower tone.... in Mp3 format at 192 kbps

https://mab.to/blbhrBWm7

Personally I thought it was a brilliant speech... Meat not Milk...

3 Days Only Download

Thank you SO Much @Sighlass but the tip Sanguine provided earlier worked just fine and it was indeed a  BRILLIANT speech!

[skeeter]

Well, I do wish that woman would get to the point.   After 12 minutes,  I decided to go work out at the gym.   

But here's my beef with her and those who think like her:   

Honestly, why do you think we would care what you think about what she said? You went to the gym.

[Jazzhead]

You are clearly delusional if you don't understand and accept as truth the statement that "Freedom requires eternal vigilance" because since the dawn of history there has always been people seeking power to enable them to enslave us all,and that these people will always exist

You sir,are a natural slave.

No, I simply don't share your paranoia, @sneakypete .   Of course,  freedom requires citizen vigilance,  but in the context of a constitutional republic,  that vigilance is exercised by means of the vote and political action, not by acquiring arsenals so as to be prepared to kill peace officers.   

You demand we be ready to kill the king.  In America,  WE are the king.  We govern OURSELVES, with the ballot not the bullet.   You advocate the destruction of our beautiful nation.   That is not the mindset of a patriot, and that is the reason I reject your warped ideology, totally.   

[sneakypete]

No, I simply don't share your paranoia, @sneakypete .   Of course,  freedom requires citizen vigilance,  but in the context of a constitutional republic,  that vigilance is exercised by means of the vote and political action, not by acquiring arsenals so as to be prepared to kill peace officers.   

You demand we be ready to kill the king.  In America,  WE are the king.  We govern OURSELVES, with the ballot not the bullet.   You advocate the destruction of our beautiful nation.   That is not the mindset of a patriot, and that is the reason I reject your sickness, totally.

@Jazzhead

And we all live on puppy-dog hugs and kisses,safe in the knowledge that Santa is coming.

[Jazzhead]

Honestly, why do you think we would care what you think about what she said? You went to the gym.

Why should I care about what you think when your avatar depicts a kid with a load in his pants?     

[skeeter]

Why should I care about what you think when your avatar depicts a kid with a load in his pants?     

Thats wasn't a load, it was a Sig P2022.

[Jazzhead]

Thats wasn't a load, it was a Sig P2022.

 

[LMAO]

I don’t own many guns

I’m not a member of the NRA

It would be great where anybody who wanted to harm somebody else with a gun would  never be able to do it

But in the case where I am being asked do I want to trust bureaucrats or my guns, I think I’ll have to go with my guns

[thackney]

It would be great where anybody who wanted to harm somebody else with a gun wind never be able to do it

Make that the goal.

[Bigun]

Armed Real Estate Agent Shoots Attacker at House Showing

https://www.secondamendmentdaily.com/2019/08/armed-real-estate-agent-shoots-attacker-at-house-showing/

[Maj. Bill Martin]

Hah!    If you truly believe that the 2A is the bulwark that secures our freedoms,  then don't do stupid stuff that will result in the demise of the 2A.

Too many here are too stubborn to believe it,  but the individual RKBA - the right that secures your natural right to defend you person and your personal property -  exists by reason of a 5-4 SCOTUS majority.  That's it.  That's all.   The decision affirming the individual right was joined by each conservative SCOTUS member,  and rejected by every liberal one.   

There is no question in my mind that if a Dem President and Senate is elected in 2020,  and Clarence Thomas or another conservative steps down,  then the Heller decision will be overturned and the 2A interpreted to not secure the individual right.  States will be free to ban whole classes of weapons and otherwise prohibit that what you take for granted now.    That is what is at stake in this election.  And yet many are promising to stay home if the President, in reaction to a wave of mass shootings,  dares to support doing something about it that would inconvenience gun owners in a minor way.   

Gun owners have the political clout to secure the Presidency for the Democrats,  and some appear willing and even eager to do that.   But you do so at your peril.  Your rights hang by a thread. 

Don't be fools   

@Jazzhead

So let's say a radical Muslim - a citizen born in this country -- owns legally purchased firearms, starts talking on social media about how he is getting ready to kill infidels, and is amassing weapons and ammo to do so.  Again, all weapons and ammo are legally owned.  Oh yeah, and lets add to it that his sister has called the police, says that her brother is mentally ill and off his meds, and that she's afraid he's going to do something violent.

Do we have to station cops around his house and tail him 24/7 indefinitely in the event that this is the day he decides to follow through on his threats?  Or do we just wait until he starts shooting people to do something about him having guns and ammo?

Because those are the kind of questions a Republican candidate is going to be asked if he states a blanket opposition to any red flag law.

[thackney]

@Jazzhead

So let's say a radical Muslim who entered this country legally and owns legally purchased firearms, starts talking on social media about how he is getting ready to kill infidels, and is amassing weapons and ammo to do so.  Again, all weapons and ammo are legally owned.  Oh yeah, and lets add to it that his sister has called the police, says that her brother is mentally ill and off his meds, and that she's afraid he's going to do something violent.

Do we have to station cops around his house and tail him 24/7 indefinitely in the event that this is the day he decides to follow through on his threats?  Or do we just wait until he starts shooting people to do something about him having guns and ammo?

Because those are the kind of questions a Republican candidate is going to be asked if he states a blanket opposition to any red flag law.

If given due process and is determined to be a substantial risk to others, he should not be left in public to drive a truck through a crowd on the sidewalk.

[Maj. Bill Martin]

If given due process and is determined to be a substantial risk to others, he should not be left in public to drive a truck through a crowd on the sidewalk.

So you're saying we should be able to take his truck away from him?  Okay.

Should he be permitted to keep his guns and ammo?

[Bigun]

@Jazzhead

So let's say a radical Muslim who entered this country legally and owns legally purchased firearms, starts talking on social media about how he is getting ready to kill infidels, and is amassing weapons and ammo to do so.  Again, all weapons and ammo are legally owned.  Oh yeah, and lets add to it that his sister has called the police, says that her brother is mentally ill and off his meds, and that she's afraid he's going to do something violent.

Do we have to station cops around his house and tail him 24/7 indefinitely in the event that this is the day he decides to follow through on his threats?  Or do we just wait until he starts shooting people to do something about him having guns and ammo?

Because those are the kind of questions a Republican candidate is going to be asked if he states a blanket opposition to any red flag law.

First and foremost ALL of his potential victims should have the ability to defend themselves.

[Maj. Bill Martin]

First and foremost ALL of his potential victims should have the ability to defend themselves.

That's nice, but it doesn't answer the question.

Should he be able to keep those guns and ammo, or not?

[thackney]

Should he be permitted to keep his guns and ammo?

If he is intent on harming others, he is the risk, not the legally obtained guns and ammo.

To pretend he could not get others illegally is silly.  He is the risk, not the tools.

[thackney]

So you're saying we should be able to take his truck away from him?  Okay.

No, he should be taken away from society.

[Maj. Bill Martin]

If he is intent on harming others, he is the risk, not the legally obtained guns and ammo.

To pretend he could not get others illegally is silly.  He is the risk, not the tools.

Okay, you didn't answer the question either.  Should be be able to keep his guns and ammo, or not?

[Maj. Bill Martin]

No, he should be taken away from society.

Oh.  So you're okay with gun owners being locked up -- just not having their guns taken away?  And for exactly how long do we keep them locked up?

[Bigun]

That's nice, but it doesn't answer the question.

Should he be able to keep those guns and ammo, or not?

Yes, he should until such time as he shows intent to use one or more in the commission of a crime.

[thackney]

Oh.  So you're okay with gun owners being locked up -- just not having their guns taken away?  And for exactly how long do we keep them locked up?

It is not about gun owners, it is about threatening others with substantiated proof he is a real threat to others. 

Don't take away just their guns and pretend society is safe.  That is foolish.

[roamer_1]

Oh.  So you're okay with gun owners being locked up -- just not having their guns taken away?  And for exactly how long do we keep them locked up?

2 hrs and 500 bucks, and he's got another gun. Now what?

[Elderberry]

So let's say a radical Muslim who entered this country legally and owns legally purchased firearms, starts talking on social media about how he is getting ready to kill infidels, and is amassing weapons and ammo to do so.  Again, all weapons and ammo are legally owned.  Oh yeah, and lets add to it that his sister has called the police, says that her brother is mentally ill and off his meds, and that she's afraid he's going to do something violent.

Do we have to station cops around his house and tail him 24/7 indefinitely in the event that this is the day he decides to follow through on his threats?  Or do we just wait until he starts shooting people to do something about him having guns and ammo?

Because those are the kind of questions a Republican candidate is going to be asked if he states a blanket opposition to any red flag law.

In this case, take his citizenship away and deport him.

[Jazzhead]

Interesting that some here prefer taking a man's freedom away (at great expense to the taxpayer) before taking his gun away.   

[thackney]

Interesting that some here prefer taking a man's freedom away (at great expense to the taxpayer) before taking his gun away.

Yes, he is either a real threat to others or he is not.  The gun is not the problem, he is.

Mass Murder without Guns
https://www.nationalreview.com/2019/08/mass-murder-without-guns/

...Even today, there are a lot of non-firearm mass murders in America: In USA Today’s collection of mass murders for the period 2006 to 2017, nearly a quarter were done without guns. And most of them you have probably not heard about because they do not advance the Left’s cause of disarming the peasants....

[Maj. Bill Martin]

Yes, he should until such time as he shows intent to use one or more in the commission of a crime.

Yes.

Well, that's where we differ.  Your position is that a Muslim radical who has amassed guns and ammo, posted online about his desire to kill infidels, and whose sister has said he is off his meds and a danger to others, should be able to keep his guns and ammo as a matter of right, without any kind of process available to potentially deprive him of those before he kills a bunch of people.

I don't.

[Jazzhead]

2 hrs and 500 bucks, and he's got another gun. Now what?

Sure, because he can just buy one off the back of a truck.

All transfers of ownership should take place through the medium of a licensed gun dealer.   

[Maj. Bill Martin]

In this case, take his citizenship away and deport him.

Assume he's a citizen.  There are naturally born American citizens who become radicalized.  Can't deport them.

Are you okay with him keeping those guns, or not?

[thackney]

Sure, because he can just buy one off the back of a truck.

All transfers of ownership should take place through the medium of a licensed gun dealer.   

Absolutely, then just like all drugs, all sales would go through a registered pharmacists or licensed dealer.

[Maj. Bill Martin]

2 hrs and 500 bucks, and he's got another gun. Now what?

Maybe yes, maybe not.  If he's clearly off his rocker, he may have a tough time getting another gun and all that ammo.

But I assume that means you're also fine with leaving him with all his guns and ammo as well.  Right?