What's new
By:
USCHO Fan Forum

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • The USCHO Fan Forum has migrated to a new plaform, xenForo. Most of the function of the forum should work in familiar ways. Please note that you can switch between light and dark modes by clicking on the gear icon in the upper right of the main menu bar. We are hoping that this new platform will prove to be faster and more reliable. Please feel free to explore its features.

0 Days Since Last Shooting: But the Second Amendment!

Status
Not open for further replies.
Re: 0 Days Since Last Shooting: But the Second Amendment!

jerphisch said:
The difference is the red flag law would allow taking the guns BEFORE getting into court,
Click to expand...

I don't think that's what the bill said, although you can read it yourself. I think that you have to go in on an emergency petition and get a judge to sign off on it. Then there is a second court hearing to determine whether the guns should be taken away long term.

https://leg.colorado.gov/bills/hb18-1436
 
Re: 0 Days Since Last Shooting: But the Second Amendment!

SJHovey said:
I don't think that's what the bill said, although you can read it yourself. I think that you have to go in on an emergency petition and get a judge to sign off on it. Then there is a second court hearing to determine whether the guns should be taken away long term.

https://leg.colorado.gov/bills/hb18-1436
Click to expand...

Yeah I worded it poorly, but there would clearly be a lower burden of proof for the emergency petition that would speed the initial process.
 
jerphisch said:
So it's an excellent idea, but just in case it's overlappy with other laws let's not do it. Makes sense...
At least Drew will just come out and say he doesn't think being nuts and a threat yourself/others is reason to take someone's gun away.
Click to expand...

Wrong. I’ve posted plenty of times if a court determines someone is a threat to themselves or others they should lose their right to have guns. I do think the guns should be auctioned off or something like that and they should get the proceeds(as long as they haven’t been used in a crime.)
 
Re: 0 Days Since Last Shooting: But the Second Amendment!

Drew S. said:
Wrong. I’ve posted plenty of times if a court determines someone is a threat to themselves or others they should lose their right to have guns. I do think the guns should be auctioned off or something like that and they should get the proceeds(as long as they haven’t been used in a crime.)
Click to expand...

You've also posted plenty of times in favor of people deemed incapable of handling their finances being able to keep their guns, so, not wrong.
 
Re: 0 Days Since Last Shooting: But the Second Amendment!

Drew S. said:
Wrong. I’ve posted plenty of times if a court determines someone is a threat to themselves or others they should lose their right to have guns. I do think the guns should be auctioned off or something like that and they should get the proceeds(as long as they haven’t been used in a crime.)
Click to expand...

any confiscated guns should be held for a period of time to allow for appeals and then destroyed. we have enough guns.
 
Re: 0 Days Since Last Shooting: But the Second Amendment!

BassAle said:
any confiscated guns should be held for a period of time to allow for appeals and then destroyed. we have enough guns.
Click to expand...

If the appeals process proves (under HEAVY scrutiny) that the gun owner should be able to reclaim the guns? Guns returned. Otherwise, someone could just throw out a wild claim.
 
Brenthoven said:
If the appeals process proves (under HEAVY scrutiny) that the gun owner should be able to reclaim the guns? Guns returned. Otherwise, someone could just throw out a wild claim.
Click to expand...

That’s the whole ****ing reason i said to hold on to them for a period of time to allow for appeal.

Way to add nothing to the conversation.
 
Re: 0 Days Since Last Shooting: But the Second Amendment!

BassAle said:
That’s the whole ****ing reason i said to hold on to them for a period of time to allow for appeal.

Way to add nothing to the conversation.
Click to expand...

Your post made it sound like you wanted to destroy them, no matter what, in a snarky matter, as in "appeal it, sure, but guns are gone." If I misinterpreted that, I apologize, sincerely.
 
BassAle said:
any confiscated guns should be held for a period of time to allow for appeals and then destroyed. we have enough guns.
Click to expand...

I don’t think the government confiscating and ‘destroying’ someone’s property if they haven’t committed a crime is a road we want to go down.
 
Re: 0 Days Since Last Shooting: But the Second Amendment!

Drew S. said:
I don’t think the government confiscating and ‘destroying’ someone’s property if they haven’t committed a crime is a road we want to go down.
Click to expand...

But it's ok if they confiscate it and keep it, or sell it off to the highest bidder?
 
Re: 0 Days Since Last Shooting: But the Second Amendment!

Drew S. said:
I don’t think the government confiscating and ‘destroying’ someone’s property if they haven’t committed a crime is a road we want to go down.
Click to expand...

you're going to auction it off, so either way they don't get their property back
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top