Lindsey Graham supports ERPOs

DanGuy48 said:

Just saw this video, about why ERPO laws are BS, and thought it would appropriate to this thread.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?feature=youtu.be&v=20O9GsACsOQ

Click to expand...

Senate Judiciary hearing was today.

https://www.judiciary.senate.gov/meetings/red-flag-laws-examining-guidelines-for-state-action

DanGuy48 said:

Just saw this video, about why ERPO laws are BS, and thought it would appropriate to this thread.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?feature=youtu.be&v=20O9GsACsOQ

Click to expand...

DanGuy, thanks for posting this. Wowness.

Dr. Chuck Baldwin needs a WE WILL NOT COMPLY t-shirt!! I know he would wear it.

Thank you Danguy

I get why these leftists want these protection orders. It really does little practical good, IMHO, but it creates the illusion they are making society safer from armed people who show the possibility for violence. Presumption of innocence be damned. Say, like a a domestic violence situation. But if you look at many of the domestic violence crimes, many are beatings, stabbings or strangling.

For instance, a neighbor in my neighborhood, one I know has guns, as we talked. He was arrested TWICE last year for domestic violence. First time was knife related. Second time he strangled her. She did survive, but was beaten and knocked unconscious.

Also, like the Parkland shooter, the the school, police, and FBI had a heads up on him. Did nothing. A school employee saw him walking on campus, and just avoided him, not confronting or reporting him. The sheriff deputies on the scene held back from engaging him. It seems like there were instances this could have been nipped in the bud, but government proved incompetent. The same government they want to be able to take.guns willy nillly and say they will protect people.

Another concern I have is broadening input scopes. I think right now it is limited to family and close neighbors. But, I see eventually them expanding to the see something, say something mentality. It could expand to include complaints from spiteful ex wives, teachers at school who saw, or were told there were pics online of you taking your kid shooting, and them holding a gun. People on social media who don't agree and file a false complaint out of spite, like that democrat who wanted people wearing Will Not Comply shirts doxxed. Someone at work who doesn't like you, or your political affiliation, and hears you talking about guns and reports his fear of an imminent workplace shooting.

I think these instances of confiscation and violation of rights, before due process is a very slippery and dangerous slope. Certainly there are dangerous people out there. There are people who should not have weapons. But our government has shown time and again, they are unwilling, or unable to protect us, and this bill appears to me, to be aimed at 2A people to either;
1. Confiscate weapons, THEN look for disqualifying crimes
2. Temporarily confiscate weapons, then record serial numbers, and compile a listing of firearms by person. A registration scheme that isn't technically registration.

They don't seem to really be looking at the corner pharmacist in Baltimore who has been arrested 50 times for weapons violations, slapped on thw wrist, yet still manages to get a handgun despite many laws prohibiting them.