JohnMD1022
Member
Sun articles are behind a paywall.
This can be bypassed with Epic browser.
Free download at
https://www.epicbrowser.com
This can be bypassed with Epic browser.
Free download at
https://www.epicbrowser.com
What do you propose? That they leave the guns at home and arrest the respondent until a court determines that he’s not a threat? Then you’d be crying about how that violated his rights. Seems to me that securing the guns for a short period of time is the much better alternative. Take “over ma dead body” away from the equation for a minute. I don’t see how any rational member of a civilized society can say that separating a potentially crazy and dangerous person from guns until a court can figure out whether he’s a danger is a bad thing. I just don’t get it.
I don’t see how any rational member of a civilized society can say that separating a potentially crazy and dangerous person from guns until a court can figure out whether he’s a danger is a bad thing. I just don’t get it.
You are a statist. I can't figure out how anyone who values freedom can think this is a good thing. If you don't have the evidence to lock the person up, you don't have the evidence to suspend their civil rights.
I also can't figure out how any rational person thinks this will deter a person who is homicidal. You arrest the guns and leave the weapon free to kill.
Stop making sense
You are a statist. I can't figure out how anyone who values freedom can think this is a good thing. If you don't have the evidence to lock the person up, you don't have the evidence to suspend their civil rights.
I also can't figure out how any rational person thinks this will deter a person who is homicidal. You arrest the guns and leave the weapon free to kill.
You are a statist. I can't figure out how anyone who values freedom can think this is a good thing. If you don't have the evidence to lock the person up, you don't have the evidence to suspend their civil rights.
I also can't figure out how any rational person thinks this will deter a person who is homicidal. You arrest the guns and leave the weapon free to kill.
You are a statist. I can't figure out how anyone who values freedom can think this is a good thing. If you don't have the evidence to lock the person up, you don't have the evidence to suspend their civil rights.
I also can't figure out how any rational person thinks this will deter a person who is homicidal. You arrest the guns and leave the weapon free to kill.
I’m not confusing anything. I am lucid at the moment and know exactly the situation to which this thread relates.
I’m not confusing anything. I am lucid at the moment and know exactly the situation to which this thread relates.
There are several statist on this site.
For what it's worth, member Ed Hershon and I were chatting up the AACo Chief of Police after the last Task Farce meeting and he told us that he is "a gun guy BUT he supports the red flag law" because it "keeps his officers safe".
And which county in MD has the most ERPO's served?
For what it's worth, member Ed Hershon and I were chatting up the AACo Chief of Police after the last Task Farce meeting and he told us that he is "a gun guy BUT he supports the red flag law" because it "keeps his officers safe".
And which county in MD has the most ERPO's served?