Target Sports

HB135 bill.....no more private transfers

The #1 community for Gun Owners of the Gulf Coast States

Member Benefits:

  • Fewer Ads!
  • Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership
  • Discuss anti-gun legislation
  • Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section
  • Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses
  • Discover free outdoor shooting areas
  • View up to date on firearm-related events
  • Share photos & video with other members
  • ...and so much more!
  • FrommerStop

    Master
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Joined
    Apr 7, 2016
    Messages
    6,897
    Points
    113
    Location
    NWFL
    "So far"? Since when, just recently?
    I wouldn't give any of the elected shills in Tallahassee any credit. They cave to the idiot chants of hormonal children whose brains aren't even fully formed, yet.

    Wherever the political winds shift, you'll find those fair-weather politicians riding the popularity.

    Thankfully, this one got tabled. The fact that it was even proposed means there's more BS where that came from...
    Other than the bump stock and age thing, this is what normally happens. It definitely can shift as it did under pressure from the parkland shooting aftermath. Yes there is more of that in the antigun pipeline. It is a lot more dangerous than BS and draconian laws are how I would describe them. There are also antigun constitutional amendments about that I fear a lot more.
     

    FrommerStop

    Master
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Joined
    Apr 7, 2016
    Messages
    6,897
    Points
    113
    Location
    NWFL
    Still have the red flag law which to me is the most dangerous anti gun law in FL
    That is certainly a powerful antigun law to put in the hands of law enforcement. It is a law that is directed at individuals in that a persons name must be put on the order that is signed off on by a judge and there is some sort of due process eventually involved. I read last year somewhere between 900-1000 people state wide were subjects of this law to get their firearms seized.
    A danger I see is that a local politician or someone with strong clout could arrange through the police and a friendly judge to get one's guns seized.

    How does this red flag warning differ from the Baker Act? https://www.wlrn.org/post/how-floridas-new-red-flag-gun-law-working

    So, in some cases these petitions do arise after someone is Baker Acted but it gives the courts the ability to take someone's guns for a longer period of time, for up to one year. How it worked before this law was passed was that if you were Baker Acted there wasn't really a lot in the law that talked about how you should get your guns back if the police seize them from you. It was sort of a gray area. Some police departments would take them and then you might have to take them to court to get your guns back but this formalizes it.

    It is temporary, correct?

    It goes up to one year and then at the end of that year period it goes back before the judge and the judge can either decide to give that person their guns back or keep them for another year.

    How is someone to defend him or herself if they think they've been unfairly targeted by a red flag warning?

    When this happens temporarily the police will come once they get a judge to sign-off on the temporary order and take your guns and then after 14 days it goes to a hearing and that's when you can make your case to the judge as to why you think you should be able to keep your gun. Now, unlike criminal cases, there's no lawyer appointed for somebody who can't afford one. So, that's one criticism that some people have with the law is that some people that the ability to pay for their own lawyer will have to represent themselves.

    Is that the due process criticism among others as well as that 14 day stretch that somebody could be without their firearm under this red flag warning?

    Exactly. It's just a fear that since a lot of these cases target people with mental illness, you're essentially asking someone with a mentally ill person to make their own case to the judge.

    This story was updated after the August 10, 2018 episode of The Florida Roundup.
     

    Big Shrek

    Marksman
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Joined
    Mar 4, 2016
    Messages
    986
    Points
    63
    Location
    Pensacola, FL
    Well, here's the hook...can it be applied to those who DO NOT have a mental illness??
    Can just two people give false witness and cause a third to have their guns taken without ANY real evidence??
    That's what one has to wonder.
     

    FrommerStop

    Master
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Joined
    Apr 7, 2016
    Messages
    6,897
    Points
    113
    Location
    NWFL
    Well, here's the hook...can it be applied to those who DO NOT have a mental illness??
    Can just two people give false witness and cause a third to have their guns taken without ANY real evidence??
    That's what one has to wonder.
    That is the danger. The police take a document to a judge that is willing to sign off on it. The smart thing is maybe not to keep all of your guns where they can be readily found and seized. Once your guns are gone, your ability to defend yourself and your family is greatly diminished.
     

    Snake-Eyes

    Master
    Rating - 100%
    2   0   0
    Joined
    Jun 22, 2013
    Messages
    3,416
    Points
    113
    Location
    Florida
    The "red flag laws", "high risk protection orders", etc are GUN CONTROL. Period.
    They are explicitly meant to SIDESTEP Due Process; they are NOT a replacement or alternative.

    They don't address the problem they are tauted to be designed for: a person harming themself or others.
    Are car jeys confiscated? Knives? Axes? Swords? Medications? Alcohol? Sharp sticks? Chemistry sets or access to fertilizer and other readily obtainable items? How about shoelaces, rope, belts, etc?

    Ask yourself: what are patients/prisoners on "suicide watch" allowed to have? What is taken away? Why are the RedFlag RPO's less restrictive? Why only guns and ammo?

    Answer: because it has NOTHING to do with actually protecting people. It has EVERYHING to do with GUN CONTROL.

    If someone is a threat to themself or others, there are already acceptable ways to deal with it and give them the help, legal representation, and safe-guarded medical resources as appropriate. You don't execute a blanket search and seizure warrant.

    Those "900 to 1000" people were RAPED by the government using a Red Flag RPO warrant. How would you feel if you were wrongfully subjected to that kind of forced entry to your home, no consent required, home searched, firearms seized, ammo seized, take it up with the judge in two weeks. This is happening, and any resistance is a FELONY. ??

    ZERO representation of the accused. Guilty until proven innocent. You have to PROVE you are worthy to have your property returned to you. Who the fuck died and made these sons of bitches your parents?

    My blood boils just thinking about it.

    What kind of judge would approve that?
    What kind of LEO would carry it out?
    What kind of response should be expected?
    Would you honestly blame an innocent citizen if they decided NO, I will NOT simply "allow" you to violate me and my family, because of the mistakes and laziness of others?


    It's a shit-sandwich. Ingredients provided by the anti-gunners. Assembled by the spineless lawyers and handed to the weak-minded judges who tell a LEO they have to take a bite and then force feed the remainder to an innocent citizen.

    Nope. You eat it. And even GOD won't be much help to you if you try to make me take a bite.
     

    FrommerStop

    Master
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Joined
    Apr 7, 2016
    Messages
    6,897
    Points
    113
    Location
    NWFL
    I am not in favor of the law for sure. They will say statistically firearms are
    in the U.S. in 2011, 67 percent of homicide victims were killed using a firearm: 66 percent of single-victim homicides and 79 percent of multiple-victim homicides. (from google)
    and So this will be their justification for the ruling. About car keys and chemicals, let us not give these idiots too many ideas.

    This is part of what it boils down to:
    Would you honestly blame an innocent citizen if they decided NO, I will NOT simply "allow" you to violate me and my family, because of the mistakes and laziness of others?
    Just how willing is the average citizen willing to take on a SWAT team. You really just can not win such confrontations.
     

    FLT

    Master
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Joined
    May 15, 2017
    Messages
    3,847
    Points
    113
    Location
    Havana
    I think he knows that, it’s what the liberal glass lickers are counting on.
     

    fl57caveman

    eclectic atavist
    GCGF Supporter
    Rating - 100%
    5   0   0
    Joined
    Jan 23, 2015
    Messages
    12,176
    Points
    113
    Location
    n.w. florida
    The "red flag laws", "high risk protection orders", etc are GUN CONTROL. Period.
    They are explicitly meant to SIDESTEP Due Process; they are NOT a replacement or alternative.

    They don't address the problem they are tauted to be designed for: a person harming themself or others.
    Are car jeys confiscated? Knives? Axes? Swords? Medications? Alcohol? Sharp sticks? Chemistry sets or access to fertilizer and other readily obtainable items? How about shoelaces, rope, belts, etc?

    Ask yourself: what are patients/prisoners on "suicide watch" allowed to have? What is taken away? Why are the RedFlag RPO's less restrictive? Why only guns and ammo?

    Answer: because it has NOTHING to do with actually protecting people. It has EVERYHING to do with GUN CONTROL.

    If someone is a threat to themself or others, there are already acceptable ways to deal with it and give them the help, legal representation, and safe-guarded medical resources as appropriate. You don't execute a blanket search and seizure warrant.

    Those "900 to 1000" people were RAPED by the government using a Red Flag RPO warrant. How would you feel if you were wrongfully subjected to that kind of forced entry to your home, no consent required, home searched, firearms seized, ammo seized, take it up with the judge in two weeks. This is happening, and any resistance is a FELONY. ??

    ZERO representation of the accused. Guilty until proven innocent. You have to PROVE you are worthy to have your property returned to you. Who the fuck died and made these sons of bitches your parents?

    My blood boils just thinking about it.

    What kind of judge would approve that?
    What kind of LEO would carry it out?
    What kind of response should be expected?
    Would you honestly blame an innocent citizen if they decided NO, I will NOT simply "allow" you to violate me and my family, because of the mistakes and laziness of others?


    It's a shit-sandwich. Ingredients provided by the anti-gunners. Assembled by the spineless lawyers and handed to the weak-minded judges who tell a LEO they have to take a bite and then force feed the remainder to an innocent citizen.

    Nope. You eat it. And even GOD won't be much help to you if you try to make me take a bite.



    damn skippy…

    what he said^^^
     

    Snake-Eyes

    Master
    Rating - 100%
    2   0   0
    Joined
    Jun 22, 2013
    Messages
    3,416
    Points
    113
    Location
    Florida
    ... This is part of what it boils down to: Just how willing is the average citizen willing to take on a SWAT team. You really just can not win such confrontations.

    Agreed. Everyone loses something.

    Imagine a SWAT team rolls up on your house. Tells you they have a warrant, signed by a judge, and it says they have to rape your wife and/or daughter right there. That's your impossible situation.

    Option 1: Let it happen, then fight in the courts (the same ones that failed you) to somehow get an apology? Because they'll never be able to undo the experience.

    Option 2: Let it happen, then fight in the streets to exact your pound of flesh revenge on everyone involved?

    Option 3: Don't let it happen. Fight right there.

    Option 4: Let it happen, and curl up in a ball for the rest of your life, "hoping" your masters never do anything worse to you.

    To each his own. I know where my lines are drawn.

    At first glance, this is all off-topic for the thread, but in reality: gun control, in all its forms, is the same insidious bastard. It's just a mechanism to enable tyranny. The evil claim it's "for the children". The ignorant believe them. The rest of us know it's about the future of a Nation.

    Where you allow the first steps downhill, vs being pushed, vs pushing back, vs throwing the aggressor down the hill instead.... that's the real meat-n-potatoes.
     

    FrommerStop

    Master
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Joined
    Apr 7, 2016
    Messages
    6,897
    Points
    113
    Location
    NWFL
    I think he knows that, it’s what the liberal glass lickers are counting on.

    It is usually what most proponents for most laws are counting on is that they will be enforced. Most know that is usually enforced when needed by bullets from the guns of the police that are enforcing those laws. The liberals seldom think through to likely outcomes.
    Even for child custody cases Swat times get called out. THE ELIAN GONZALEZ CASE because US Marshall found out that someone in the house hold had a CCW permit a Swat team gets called out as shown below. The red flag laws obviously states that you have firearms and are danger to not only yourself, but anyone else. I assume that they do not announce that they coming and it is done by surprise. After one reflexive move due to being surprised that could be possibly interpreted as hostile and you get shot.
    THE ELIAN GONZALEZ CASE.jpg
     

    Attachments

    • THE ELIAN GONZALEZ CASE.jpg
      THE ELIAN GONZALEZ CASE.jpg
      81.9 KB · Views: 274

    FLT

    Master
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Joined
    May 15, 2017
    Messages
    3,847
    Points
    113
    Location
    Havana
    Swat teams are mostly uncalled for, it’s just more of the government over reach. Most of those warrants could be served by a unarmed non threatening process server in broad day light. The trouble with that is it isn’t spectacular and won’t make the morning news. Most folks will react to masked dressed in all black armed men breaking into their homes in the middle of the night much differently than they will with someone in uniform knocking on their door in the daylight hours.
     

    IronBeard

    Master
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Joined
    Sep 26, 2014
    Messages
    2,739
    Points
    113
    Location
    32566
    Swat teams are mostly uncalled for, it’s just more of the government over reach. Most of those warrants could be served by a unarmed non threatening process server in broad day light. The trouble with that is it isn’t spectacular and won’t make the morning news. Most folks will react to masked dressed in all black armed men breaking into their homes in the middle of the night much differently than they will with someone in uniform knocking on their door in the daylight hours.

    Yes, but which process justifies military-grade training/tactics/equipment and comforts the general public because, we have you covered, and we mean business?
     

    FrommerStop

    Master
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Joined
    Apr 7, 2016
    Messages
    6,897
    Points
    113
    Location
    NWFL
    The SWAT team is intended more for the safety and well being of the LEO and not so much that of John Q public. The major problem when it does occur is their deployment when it is not really needed. But monday morning quarterbacking is easier to do than the initial planning and deployment.
     

    FLT

    Master
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Joined
    May 15, 2017
    Messages
    3,847
    Points
    113
    Location
    Havana
    Being mistakenly swatted is a real concern . The larger the town the more likely it is to happen.
     

    Big Shrek

    Marksman
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Joined
    Mar 4, 2016
    Messages
    986
    Points
    63
    Location
    Pensacola, FL
    Being mistakenly swatted is a real concern . The larger the town the more likely it is to happen.

    Also depends on how many of 'em go to the local range to shoot...
    Certain Leo's would definitely not want to go to certain houses
    without an MBEV on!! Can you imagine someone trying to SWAT Jerry Miculek???
    "Oh Heck no! Send the jarheads with a tank or two!!
    Maybe a Warthog with two Spectre 130's flying high cover!!"
    :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D
     
    Last edited:
    Top Bottom