Social New study on CA's red flag law: law may have prevented murders

[Deleted member 159002]

https://www.google.com/amp/s/time.com/5654815/california-red-flag-law-mass-shootings-study/?amp=true



The term "common sense gun control" gets thrown around loosely. Red flag laws like California's clearly seem to fit the bill.

 

[Bloody Pulp]

I’m pretty sure we can all agree taking guns away from people might help prevent violence. It’s the whole going about it without it being abused and violating people’s rights without due process part that I think most take issue with.

 

[Serenity Now]

 

[andnowweknow]

I’m pretty sure we can all agree taking guns away from people might help prevent violence. It’s the whole going about it without it being abused and violating people’s rights without due process part that I think most take issue with.

Ie, slippery slope...lazy and a distraction to induce a change equal to zilch. Generally, you are right.

 

[Javelina]

https://www.google.com/amp/s/time.com/5654815/california-red-flag-law-mass-shootings-study/?amp=true



The term "common sense gun control" gets thrown around loosely. Red flag laws like California's clearly seem to fit the bill.

you don't see any possibility of abuse here?

@SIRGAY HARITONOB!

 

[Ophydian]

So we are better off protecting the rare few Americans that might get their civil right violated instead of protecting the lives of children because of the “slippery slope”. These same Americans who can fight this and have their rights restored while the dead lose their god given right.

 

[Ophydian]

Gun nuts and abortion nuts need to sit down and get your shit straight because one argument tramples on the other.

At this point in history, you can’t be pro 2A and anti-abortion. The only people who’s right aren’t being shit on at this point is the NRA and gun dealers.

 

[all caps]

So we are better off protecting the rare few Americans that might get their civil right violated instead of protecting the lives of children because of the “slippery slope”. These same Americans who can fight this and have their rights restored while the dead lose their god given right.

One persons rights being violated = every persons rights violated.

 

[Ophydian]

One persons rights being violated = every persons rights violated.

Not really because Right now a bunch of Latinos are having their rights violated and the only people seem to care are not the ones claim “slippery slope”

You want to talk slopes? Think about losing your right to due process.

 

[Trotsky]

you don't see any possibility of abuse here?

@SIRGAY HARITONOB!

Every law can be abused if it's not sufficiently tailored. Laws against murder, rape, or taking dumps on public transit can all host "the possibility of abuse" if not both tailored and made able to be appealed. So how's about you make the argument that this law or laws have some problem like those instead of vaguely referencing some sort of abuse.

 

[Javelina]

Every law can be abused if it's not sufficiently tailored. Laws against murder, rape, or taking dumps on public transit can all host "the possibility of abuse" if not both tailored and made able to be appealed. So how's about you make the argument that this law or laws have some problem like those instead of vaguely referencing some sort of abuse.

'shall not be infringed"

 

[all caps]

Not really because Right now a bunch of Latinos are having their rights violated and the only people seem to care are not the ones claim “slippery slope”

You want to talk slopes? Think about losing your right to due process.

I'm against that too. You think I'm ok with that why?

 

[Javelina]

i never knew my good bud @Ophydian was a racist

 

[Javelina]

justice delayed is justice denied

 

[BAKM]

Gun nuts and abortion nuts need to sit down and get your shit straight because one argument tramples on the other.

At this point in history, you can’t be pro 2A and anti-abortion. The only people who’s right aren’t being shit on at this point is the NRA and gun dealers.

I was with you until this, care to elaborate?

 

[jeffk]

The NRA made Trump their bitch again.

https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2019/08/trump-background-checks-nra/596413/

Ivanka Trump, had proposed the idea of a televised Rose Garden appearance as a way to nudge her father toward supporting universal background checks. The president had recently suggested he was open to the gun-control measure, tweeting, “Republicans and Democrats must come together and get strong background checks, perhaps marrying this legislation with desperately needed immigration reform.” To be sure, this was similar to how he’d responded to other mass shootings during his 31-month presidency, and each time, the push for action fizzled. But the prospect of a Rose Garden ceremony, his daughter thought, where Trump could sign a document and call it “historic” and “unprecedented”—and receive positive media attention—might be the best chance of yielding real change.

The president reportedly asked LaPierre whether the NRA was willing to give in at all on background checks. LaPierre’s response, the sources said, was unequivocal: “No.” With that, “the Rose Garden fantasy,” as the NRA official described it to me, was scrapped as quickly as it had been dreamed up.

 

[Ophydian]

I'm against that too. You think I'm ok with that why?

My comment was more directed at anyone who promotes both.

 

[Ophydian]

The NRA made Trump their bitch again.

https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2019/08/trump-background-checks-nra/596413/

Ivanka Trump, had proposed the idea of a televised Rose Garden appearance as a way to nudge her father toward supporting universal background checks. The president had recently suggested he was open to the gun-control measure, tweeting, “Republicans and Democrats must come together and get strong background checks, perhaps marrying this legislation with desperately needed immigration reform.” To be sure, this was similar to how he’d responded to other mass shootings during his 31-month presidency, and each time, the push for action fizzled. But the prospect of a Rose Garden ceremony, his daughter thought, where Trump could sign a document and call it “historic” and “unprecedented”—and receive positive media attention—might be the best chance of yielding real change.

The president reportedly asked LaPierre whether the NRA was willing to give in at all on background checks. LaPierre’s response, the sources said, was unequivocal: “No.” With that, “the Rose Garden fantasy,” as the NRA official described it to me, was scrapped as quickly as it had been dreamed up.

This is what is wrong in this country, regardless of left or right, when the POTUS has to ask a lobbyist group if it’s open to draft a specific law.

 

[Happy Man]

The left loves this KGB shit.

Turn on your neighbors. The Stalinist fear.

Hey that guy made a comment that he may be a conservative! Let’s contact the authorities and say he may be armed and wanting to harm someone.

Leftist authoritarianism will be defeated

 

[Happy Man]

This is what is wrong in this country, regardless of left or right, when the POTUS has to ask a lobbyist group if it’s open to draft a specific law.

NRA did not exist before people’s expressed desire for tjen2nd amendment.
The only reason the NRA came into existence is because the AMERICAN PEOPLE have always enjoyed the rights given to them in the 2nd amendment.

It’s a red herring used by leftist media. We can’t do ‘X’ because of the NRA. Not true. Leftist can’t get their gun control because of the American people and their support for the 2nd amendment, not because of the NRA.