Page 15 of 35 FirstFirst ... 5131415161725 ... LastLast
Results 141 to 150 of 341

Thread: Gun-seizure laws grow in popularity since Parkland shooting

  1. #141
    Sage

    Join Date
    Oct 2016
    Last Seen
    Today @ 10:37 PM
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    11,593

    Re: Gun-seizure laws grow in popularity since Parkland shooting

    Quote Originally Posted by DebateChallenge View Post
    Red flag laws violate due process and are unconstitutional. If somebody is deemed a threat they should be seized and then put through due process. Seizing any guns they might own beforehand violates their rights.
    Tru dat. If someone is deemed a threat to themselves, taking their guns and leaving them alone in a house full of ropes and belts doesn't do anything. Half of all suicides are by non-gun means. This isn't a law to protect at-risk people from themselves. It's a law to confiscate guns.
    Individuals can not be reasoned out of beliefs they were not reasoned into.

  2. #142
    Guru
    Join Date
    Aug 2018
    Last Seen
    Today @ 10:05 PM
    Gender
    Posts
    3,154

    Re: Gun-seizure laws grow in popularity since Parkland shooting

    Quote Originally Posted by Rucker61 View Post
    It's your claim, you stop being lazy. I provide support for my clsims, I suggest you do the same.

    Edit: your "facts" aren't facts. It's impossible to prove something that doesn't exist.
    Keep your head in the ground, what do I care.

    Choose to view propaganda as fact, what do I care.

    Trump needs you folks because not a reasoned person alive supports him.
    Trump is president because folks cant stand those they were brought up to look down on having passed them.

  3. #143
    Professor RaleBulgarian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2018
    Last Seen
    Today @ 10:36 PM
    Gender
    Posts
    2,090

    Re: Gun-seizure laws grow in popularity since Parkland shooting

    Quote Originally Posted by Rucker61 View Post
    From what, exactly, and by whom? Castle Rock v Gonzales and other SCOTUS decisions affirm that the State has no responsibility to protect any one citizen.

    Edit: are you claiming that this phrase gives the State the right to ignore other rights in that protection?
    Show me in Castle Rock v Gonzales where it says, or implies, the local pd had no responsibility to protect it's citizens. All I see is refusal to allow a lawsuit for failing to enforce a restraining order. It does not address the local pd’s responsibility to protect.

    The state has a responsibility to provide for the safety of all its citizens. Including from each other.

    Have you seen any of the “red flag” laws struck down? Why do you think they haven’t been?

  4. #144
    Sage

    Join Date
    Oct 2016
    Last Seen
    Today @ 10:37 PM
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    11,593

    Re: Gun-seizure laws grow in popularity since Parkland shooting

    Quote Originally Posted by RaleBulgarian View Post
    Show me in Castle Rock v Gonzales where it says, or implies, the local pd had no responsibility to protect it's citizens. All I see is refusal to allow a lawsuit for failing to enforce a restraining order. It does not address the local pd’s responsibility to protect.

    The state has a responsibility to provide for the safety of all its citizens. Including from each other.

    Have you seen any of the “red flag” laws struck down? Why do you think they haven’t been?
    "Castle Rock v. Gonzales, 545 U.S. 748 (2005),[1] is a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court ruled, 7–2, that a town and its police department could not be sued under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 for failing to enforce a restraining order, which had led to the murder of a woman's three children by her estranged husband"

    Town of Castle Rock v. Gonzales - Wikipedia

    "No. In a 7-2 decision, the Court ruled that Gonzales had no constitutionally-protected property interest in the enforcement of the restraining order, and therefore could not claim that the police had violated her right to due process. In order to have a "property interest" in a benefit as abstract as enforcement of a restraining order, the Court ruled, Gonzales would have needed a "legitimate claim of entitlement" to the benefit. The opinion by Justice Antonin Scalia found that state law did not entitle the holder of a restraining order to any specific mandatory action by the police. Instead, restraining orders only provide grounds for arresting the subject of the order. The specific action to be taken is up to the discretion of the police. The Court stated that "This is not the sort of 'entitlement' out of which a property interest is created." The Court concluded that since "Colorado has not created such an entitlement," Gonzales had no property interest and the Due Process Clause was therefore inapplicable. Justice John Paul Stevens, joined by Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, dissented."

    {{meta.fullTitle}}

    CASTLE ROCK V. GONZALES
    Individuals can not be reasoned out of beliefs they were not reasoned into.

  5. #145
    Sage

    Join Date
    Oct 2016
    Last Seen
    Today @ 10:37 PM
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    11,593

    Re: Gun-seizure laws grow in popularity since Parkland shooting

    Quote Originally Posted by noonereal View Post
    Keep your head in the ground, what do I care.

    Choose to view propaganda as fact, what do I care.
    C'mon, just one single link supporting this claim: "Carrying around a gun to so do is misguided and offer more danger than it does protection." BOnus points if the study separates risk of criminals carrying guns and law abiding citizens carrying guns. You lose points if you can only refer to the Philadelphia study.



    Trump needs you folks because not a reasoned person alive supports him.
    I'm not nor have I ever been a Trump supporter. His nomination caused me to avoid voting for a President for the first time since 1980.
    Individuals can not be reasoned out of beliefs they were not reasoned into.

  6. #146
    Professor RaleBulgarian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2018
    Last Seen
    Today @ 10:36 PM
    Gender
    Posts
    2,090

    Re: Gun-seizure laws grow in popularity since Parkland shooting

    Quote Originally Posted by Rucker61 View Post
    "Castle Rock v. Gonzales, 545 U.S. 748 (2005),[1] is a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court ruled, 7–2, that a town and its police department could not be sued under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 for failing to enforce a restraining order, which had led to the murder of a woman's three children by her estranged husband"

    Town of Castle Rock v. Gonzales - Wikipedia

    "No. In a 7-2 decision, the Court ruled that Gonzales had no constitutionally-protected property interest in the enforcement of the restraining order, and therefore could not claim that the police had violated her right to due process. In order to have a "property interest" in a benefit as abstract as enforcement of a restraining order, the Court ruled, Gonzales would have needed a "legitimate claim of entitlement" to the benefit. The opinion by Justice Antonin Scalia found that state law did not entitle the holder of a restraining order to any specific mandatory action by the police. Instead, restraining orders only provide grounds for arresting the subject of the order. The specific action to be taken is up to the discretion of the police. The Court stated that "This is not the sort of 'entitlement' out of which a property interest is created." The Court concluded that since "Colorado has not created such an entitlement," Gonzales had no property interest and the Due Process Clause was therefore inapplicable. Justice John Paul Stevens, joined by Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, dissented."

    {{meta.fullTitle}}

    CASTLE ROCK V. GONZALES
    Again, nowhere in the courts decision did it state or imply that Gonzales was not entitled to the same usual protections enjoyed by all other citizens . Only that the pd was not required to intervene, in the case of the restraining order, until it was violated.

    The order has absolutely nothing to do with the pd’s obligation to provide a safe environment for citizens.

    You still haven’t addressed why “red flag” laws, which are being adopted by more and more states, haven’t been struck down.

  7. #147
    Sage

    Join Date
    Oct 2016
    Last Seen
    Today @ 10:37 PM
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    11,593

    Re: Gun-seizure laws grow in popularity since Parkland shooting

    Quote Originally Posted by RaleBulgarian View Post
    Again, nowhere in the courts decision did it state or imply that Gonzales was not entitled to the same usual protections enjoyed by all other citizens . Only that the pd was not required to intervene, in the case of the restraining order, until it was violated.

    The order has absolutely nothing to do with the pd’s obligation to provide a safe environment for citizens.
    Equal protection under the law doesn't mean that every citizen is totally protected. Only that every citizen is entitled to the protection as everyone else. Given that PD's have no responsibility to protect an individual citizen, Gonzales was offered equal protection.


    You still haven’t addressed why “red flag” laws, which are being adopted by more and more states, haven’t been struck down.
    Because SCOTUS has just taken up their first 2A case in 9 years.

    Back to my question which predates yours:

    Given this statement: "14th Amendment - “nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within it's jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.”
    Citizens are entitled to be protected from others who may harm them."

    Are you claiming that this phrase gives the State the right to ignore other rights in that protection? IOW, what powers do you believe this statement gives the State.
    Individuals can not be reasoned out of beliefs they were not reasoned into.

  8. #148
    Professor RaleBulgarian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2018
    Last Seen
    Today @ 10:36 PM
    Gender
    Posts
    2,090

    Re: Gun-seizure laws grow in popularity since Parkland shooting

    Quote Originally Posted by Rucker61 View Post
    Equal protection under the law doesn't mean that every citizen is totally protected. Only that every citizen is entitled to the protection as everyone else. Given that PD's have no responsibility to protect an individual citizen, Gonzales was offered equal protection.
    No, it is not a given that pd’s have no responsibility to protect an individual citizen. Saying so is completely nonsensical and contradictory to every police department’s primary role.

    Quote Originally Posted by Rucker61 View Post
    Given this statement: "14th Amendment - “nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within it's jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.”
    Citizens are entitled to be protected from others who may harm them."

    Are you claiming that this phrase gives the State the right to ignore other rights in that protection? IOW, what powers do you believe this statement gives the State.
    Interpretation isn’t necessary. It means just what it says. Everyone is entitled to equal protection under the law. I’m entitled live my life free from harm by another. If someone reasonably presents a threat (as judged by courts), temporarily removing their access to firearms is the right thing to do. If you want to argue about “due process” rights, join a lawsuit. For now, red laws stand, and as long as they are implemented properly, this gun owner is happy about that.

  9. #149
    Sage

    Join Date
    Oct 2016
    Last Seen
    Today @ 10:37 PM
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    11,593

    Re: Gun-seizure laws grow in popularity since Parkland shooting

    Quote Originally Posted by RaleBulgarian View Post
    No, it is not a given that pd’s have no responsibility to protect an individual citizen. Saying so is completely nonsensical and contradictory to every police department’s primary role.
    They have no Constitutional responsibility to protect every individual. They take on that role willingly, though. It's not always carried out at the officer level, however. See "Parkland".


    Interpretation isn’t necessary. It means just what it says. Everyone is entitled to equal protection under the law. I’m entitled live my life free from harm by another. If someone reasonably presents a threat (as judged by courts), temporarily removing their access to firearms is the right thing to do. If you want to argue about “due process” rights, join a lawsuit. For now, red laws stand, and as long as they are implemented properly, this gun owner is happy about that.

    "If someone reasonably presents a threat (as judged by courts" then that threat isn't limited to just guns. Anything that can be used as a weapon should be kept away from this threat, or it's not about him being a threat. It's just about getting more gun control laws on the books.

    Given that many of the folks who want these laws in place consider the only use for semiautomatic weapons is to kill lots of people in a short period, and feel that anyone who owns one has to feel that way, I'm not willing to put my freedoms in the hands of virulently anti-gun people.
    Individuals can not be reasoned out of beliefs they were not reasoned into.

  10. #150
    Sage
    apdst's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Bagdad, La.
    Last Seen
    Today @ 10:26 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    97,769

    Re: Gun-seizure laws grow in popularity since Parkland shooting

    Quote Originally Posted by Obscurity View Post
    This is not Rwanda. You also stated there were no laws. That was a lie.
    And I'm right. Ever read Hustler Magazine?
    Quote Originally Posted by HenryChinaski View Post
    You people are my problem. You’re a major component of what’s wrong with this country.
    It's more important to be morally right than factually correct - Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez

Page 15 of 35 FirstFirst ... 5131415161725 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

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