New gun control laws

TheFamousGrouse wrote:

The problem right now is that the shoe is on the other foot. The people who are being abused are the people who are threatened by a mentally ill individual with weapons. What crime have they committed to be punished like this?

Part, if not the majority, of the reason we have a law against drunk driving is because of the drunk driver’s potential to do harm to others.

So you’d rather wait until he commits a crime by harming or killing your spouse or child in order to preserve his right to possess the weapons that could allow him to do so? It’s literally that serious.

You will not convince me that the right of a paranoid schizophreniac to participate in his skeet league should trump somebody else’s right not to live in fear of this individual killing him or his family. No right is unlimited.

Grouse

Part of the reason it is difficult to argue against your points Grouse is that they are incorrect from the premise.

Yes, the laws of western cultures are founded on waiting until a crime has been committed before the law can step in. It is that way be design to prevent the very thing you are suggesting. What you are suggesting is the thought police.
Under you logic, people are guilty for having bad thoughts. Not for their actions. This is an slippery slope that western culture has avoided for centuries. That anyone is all for it is amazing to me.

Your example of the process of obtaining a search warrant is flawed because your example ignores the details of the requirements for obtaining a search warrant.
To obtain a search warrant there needs to be probable cause that a crime has already been committed, to extract evidence for a crime already committed, or it is certain that the person is intent on using items to commit a crime.

That last piece basically already covers the point of this new Red Flag law, making the new version either a.) either superfluous, or b.) a new intent to confiscate firearms.

Also, please explain this “right to not live in fear”. Fear is an emotion. As far as I know, there are no “right” protections for emotions. You keep claiming it like it is a real thing.

Ed and Randy nailed it. If anyone personally has, or knows anyone who has been divorced in Anoka County, they can tell you stories about how they were treated, especially if kids are involved. All it takes is is one nasty split or false allegation, and you are in a world of hurt. Guilty until you jump through enough legal hoops. Even then I bet it stays on your record. Good luck getting another firearm.

This morning at the doctor’s office the nurse asked me the following:
“IF you have guns in your home do you feel safe?”
Backhanded question that forces most to confirm whether or not they have firearms. I said, “no comment” to that question.

suzuki wrote:

This morning at the doctor’s office the nurse asked me the following:
“IF you have guns in your home do you feel safe?”
Backhanded question that forces most to confirm whether or not they have firearms. I said, “no comment” to that question.

They ask that ? of children being treated at most Dr. offices. They then ask if the gun is secured with a gun lock. I’m sure the answers to these ?’s are being forwarded someplace.

For the last 10 doc visits or so I have been hit with these very questions and I finally had it and told the idiot nurse I wasn’t there for 20 questions and that if any guns were in the house they’d be secure. I told to put my answers on the chart and to ask me those again as they’ve already been answered. This stuff just pi$$es me off.

One time the nurse asked me if I “felt safe at home”. I said, “Who do you think I live with, Andre the Giant? Who’s going to mess with me in my own home?”.

They should stick to doctoring.

S.R.

Google the question:

why does my doctor ask if i own a gun

Pages of articles on the topic.

-J.

Jon Jordan wrote:

Google the question:

why does my doctor ask if i own a gun

Pages of articles on the topic.

-J.

OMG! what is this country turning into.
This kind of stuff only protects the Nuts out there.
A law abiding person will say answer the question honestly, a fruitcake will say “nope, I gots no guns at home”

I think drugs should be illegal and only be bought from a licensed pharmacist. Back ground checks for using drugs. Wonder how the war on drugs is going!
Outlaw guns then only Outlaws will have guns!
I don’t think my kids should have to pay a back ground check if I give or will them a gun! Or if I let a family member or friend try out a gun!
As far as someone saying you are evil to social services. WOW been there and done that. It cost her nothing to make claims to have the County step in so I wouldn’t see my son! cost me thousands to fight, to prove my innocents. It meant nothing to those people that I was accused just to satisfy her!
Last I knew it was illegal to use a gun for a crime! Criminals DON”T CARE ABOUT LAWS!

I can’t help but wonder about the importance of cavemen, Native Americans, African tribal members, and anyone’s forefathers passing along the stories to keep their history alive. History always repeats itself. Hard to imagine at times in the so-called modern world we live in, many people can’t remember yesterday. Yet we have one of the most famous examples in our own American history of how gun control works.

In the “Old West”, it was very common for new cities or towns to have strict gun laws and you had to turn them in while visiting. On October 26, 1881 3 known criminals refused to disarm while all the town folk were disarmed. It was fortunate at the time that the lawmen walked away from that incident (as well as any bystanders) while Tom McLaury, Frank McLaury and Billy Clanton were killed.

So here we are nearly 138 years later talking about gun control and restricting/disarming innocent people while criminals will continue to disobey the law and strut through town as if we are all freakin idiots.

I’d like to see forks regulated. Making forks illegal….will stop obesity, thereby drop the cost of healthcare & as a bonus – stop people from using them to eat pizza.

I can tell believe I live in such an insanely backwards state. Libs have their way and our way of life will be ruined for good. Why anyone would vote these nuts into office baffles me.

Forks don’t make people fat, people make people fat.

There’s no doubt that a fork in the wrong hands is a dangerous tool and could make people fat. It could even make a lot of people fat. I guess they could be banned at buffets because them of the high likelihood of making people fat.

You’re not gonna get my forks though. I’m a responsible fork owner that is exercising their given right to own fork. The government has no right to tell me how many I can own or what kind of fork I can own. I also think if children are taught to use forks at a young age, they are more likely to lead more responsible lives.

Yes forks can be used to feed my family but thats not the true reason our founding fathers wanted us to have the right to own forks. Its true purpose is to protect us against sushi invasion. If sushi were to take hold in this country, it’ll be the end of forks as we know it.

I work in health care…our hospital asks “do you feel safe at home,” which is valid but have NEVER heard or witnessed our RN’s asking about guns with our patients…that’s interesting. Will need to google as to why.

I’m not following closely but bump stocks are gone now right?

Yes required to turn in your bump stocks a week or so ago. If you still have one, congratulations you are now a criminal…

ClownColor wrote:

I’m not following closely but bump stocks are gone now right?

yes, most sank in tragic boating accidents.

If you give them an inch, they’re gonna want a mile.

From what I understand the thing with red flag laws is all about how thy are written. There is a big difference between something like the Violence Against Women Act that goes after people who are “convicted” and proposed laws that strip rights when people are simply accused of something.

Just keep fighting. They will not stop in their pursuit to disarm citizens.

“Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.”