Red Flag - Nabs wrong person w/ same name - Page 3

Red Flag - Nabs wrong person w/ same name

This is a discussion on Red Flag - Nabs wrong person w/ same name within the The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion forums, part of the Related Topics category; And sadly it won't stop 1 darn tragedy . You have to love it when they talk of dealing with the justice system as if ...

Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 1 2 3
Results 31 to 38 of 38
Like Tree104Likes

Thread: Red Flag - Nabs wrong person w/ same name

  1. #31
    Senior Member Array pskys2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2017
    Location
    Kansas
    Posts
    541
    And sadly it won't stop 1 darn tragedy.

    You have to love it when they talk of dealing with the justice system as if it's just going to the local 5 and dime?

    Yet those same people who scream for the RFL also scream how horrible the justice system is.

  2. #32
    VIP Member Array CWOUSCG's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Location
    Baja Oklahoma
    Posts
    2,799
    Quote Originally Posted by OldChap View Post
    @Nifty The most difficult part of my experience with law enforcement was not the officers, but the career bureaucrats. To this day I believe the ONLY criteria for hiring people for such positions was that they be terminally incompetent. Oh...and it helped if they had a Napoleon complex.

    The majority of our department's civilian employees were excellent and generally on-board with the mission. Some of the agencies we worked with...not so much. These lazy incompetents unfortunately give law enforcement a bad name.
    If they're hiring I think I know someone who could apply!
    OldChap and OldVet like this.


    Send bachelors and come heavily armed.

    Black Rifles Matter

  3. #33
    New Member Array taltexan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2015
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    17
    Quote Originally Posted by OldChap View Post
    Does anyone know for sure if red flag hearings require a jury? I would expect they don't as they have no defense counsel, therefore no voir dire. The whole focus seems to be speed, as in, " Let's get this travesty of justice done so we can hurry up and whitewash ourselves of any blame!"

    I cannot imagine ANY serious legal objections being raised.

    I also see now that the word "juy" might be "guy" and not "jury" as I first thought.
    RFL varies from jurisdiction to jurisdiction, all I have read a judge is all that is needed to secure the warrant . Some require the complaint to come from only law enforcement but others will allow family, teachers, co-workers and the little girl that I dipped her pigs tails in the inkwell in the second grade to bring the complaint to the judge. All boils down to abuse of our rights.

    I have emailed my reps (both state and federal) and have only received two in return. One from district 5 Lance
    Gooden and Cornyn. Both say they will not vote for rfl’s without due process. Time will tell......
    OldChap likes this.

  4. Remove Advertisements
    DefensiveCarry.com
    Advertisements
     

  5. #34
    Member Array retired badge 1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2018
    Location
    Pueblo, Colorado
    Posts
    401
    Quote Originally Posted by OldChap View Post
    Does anyone know for sure if red flag hearings require a jury? I would expect they don't as they have no defense counsel, therefore no voir dire. The whole focus seems to be speed, as in, " Let's get this travesty of justice done so we can hurry up and whitewash ourselves of any blame!"

    I cannot imagine ANY serious legal objections being raised.

    I also see now that the word "juy" might be "guy" and not "jury" as I first thought.
    Differences from one law to another, but the general rule is that any person claiming to have sufficient relationship to the named respondent may petition the court for a so-called Red Flag order, and that order is issued "ex parte" (no notice to the respondent, no court hearing prior to issuance or enforcement, and only a modicum of so-called "due process" allowed for the person to petition for review after the fact).

    In most cases a "significant other" (wife, girlfriend, former sweetie, etc), family member, neighbor, co-worker, clergyman, landlord, or just about anyone else who claims to be sufficiently acquainted with the respondent to render an opinion may petition for the order to strip the respondent of firearms. Such petition may be made in open court, or via sworn affidavit, or via tele-conference, etc. Depending on the legislation in question there may or may not be legal consequences for false or misleading statements.

    The general similarities are:

    1. There is no notice to the respondent, and no opportunity to question the accuser or offer any evidence prior to the order being issued.
    2. As soon as the order is issued law enforcement officers may forcibly enter the respondent's property and home and seize any and all firearms, ammunition, and other related items.
    3. The respondent has a limited amount of time in which to contest the action and bring further proceedings to overturn the action, all of which must be done at respondent's time and expense.
    4. There is no automatic compensation or reimbursement for the respondent in any case. Pursuit of claims against the complainant is a separate legal action, and the court and law enforcement are shielded from liability.

    Essentially, an ex-parte emergency court order issued solely upon the complaint and/or testimony of anyone claiming sufficient knowledge (no requirement for professional credentials or certification), done at any hour of the day or night, immediately enforceable, with no right to due process prior to enforcement, and only very limited rights to due process after the fact (at individual expense, with no guarantee of compensation or reimbursement).

    What could go wrong? Ask any cop who has ever dealt with a vindictive girlfriend or ex-wife or neighbor with an axe to grind. Ask anyone who has ever sued someone, won the case in court and received a judgement, then twiddled their thumbs for years without being able to collect a dime in damages.

    So-called Red Flag laws turn the concept of due process of law upside down; guilty until proven innocent, and only if you are willing to jump through all the legal hoops for a year or two in order to clear your name and recover your property.
    AzQkr, DaGunny, OldChap and 1 others like this.

  6. #35
    VIP Member Array OldChap's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    5,391
    Quote Originally Posted by retired badge 1 View Post
    Differences from one law to another, but the general rule is that any person claiming to have sufficient relationship to the named respondent may petition the court for a so-called Red Flag order, and that order is issued "ex parte" (no notice to the respondent, no court hearing prior to issuance or enforcement, and only a modicum of so-called "due process" allowed for the person to petition for review after the fact).

    In most cases a "significant other" (wife, girlfriend, former sweetie, etc), family member, neighbor, co-worker, clergyman, landlord, or just about anyone else who claims to be sufficiently acquainted with the respondent to render an opinion may petition for the order to strip the respondent of firearms. Such petition may be made in open court, or via sworn affidavit, or via tele-conference, etc. Depending on the legislation in question there may or may not be legal consequences for false or misleading statements.

    The general similarities are:

    1. There is no notice to the respondent, and no opportunity to question the accuser or offer any evidence prior to the order being issued.
    2. As soon as the order is issued law enforcement officers may forcibly enter the respondent's property and home and seize any and all firearms, ammunition, and other related items.
    3. The respondent has a limited amount of time in which to contest the action and bring further proceedings to overturn the action, all of which must be done at respondent's time and expense.
    4. There is no automatic compensation or reimbursement for the respondent in any case. Pursuit of claims against the complainant is a separate legal action, and the court and law enforcement are shielded from liability.

    Essentially, an ex-parte emergency court order issued solely upon the complaint and/or testimony of anyone claiming sufficient knowledge (no requirement for professional credentials or certification), done at any hour of the day or night, immediately enforceable, with no right to due process prior to enforcement, and only very limited rights to due process after the fact (at individual expense, with no guarantee of compensation or reimbursement).

    What could go wrong? Ask any cop who has ever dealt with a vindictive girlfriend or ex-wife or neighbor with an axe to grind. Ask anyone who has ever sued someone, won the case in court and received a judgement, then twiddled their thumbs for years without being able to collect a dime in damages.

    So-called Red Flag laws turn the concept of due process of law upside down; guilty until proven innocent, and only if you are willing to jump through all the legal hoops for a year or two in order to clear your name and recover your property.
    The more I read of these "laws", the more convinced I become that old King George III would absolutely love this little intrusion on the lives of his subjects. Vindictive girlfriend, wife, neighbor? I got sent to a lot of those calls to try and defuse the potential bomb. My thoughts and prayers go out to all the officers who will be ordered to carry out this travesty of justice and especially for those who will pay the ultimate price for it. My Chief would not allow no-knock warrant service. I can only imagine what he thinks about this.

    And I have to say that it seems the ultimate goal of such a law is to take the fertilizer away from a Timothy McVeigh, but leave all the other dangerous materials AND let him roam freely to carry out whatever he has in mind. IMHO anyway.
    taltexan and CWOUSCG like this.
    "The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has limits."

  7. #36
    Distinguished Member Array NECCdude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    Nebraska
    Posts
    1,684
    This is related to this topic and shows another red flag "tool" to be used against gun owners:

    https://bearingarms.com/tom-k/2019/0...ond-amendment/

    Maybe we should all abandon social media altogether??
    Member NRA, SAF, GOA, NFOA, USCCA

    Microwave radio technicians are fully deviated.

  8. #37
    VIP Member Array mr.stuart's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    East Texas
    Posts
    2,053
    When he met his first problem with Clerk of the Courts, he should have hired a lawyer and called all the local tv stations.
    Pain is the best teacher,but nobody wants to go to his class.


    When the past smothers the present, there is only desperation. When the future absorbs the present, life stands still. In either case a decision must be made because you only live now and you are only what you are now.

  9. #38
    VIP Member Array OldVet's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    The Florida Twilight Zone
    Posts
    31,420
    A YouTube clip on the thread subject.

    Risasi likes this.
    Retired USAF E-8. Curmudgeon on the loose.
    Lighten up and enjoy life because:
    Paranoia strikes deep, into your life it will creep. It starts when you're always afraid... Buffalo Springfield - For What It's Worth

Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 1 2 3

Sponsored Links

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •