Fundraising for 2019/2020: 12 Months Renewed - We are good until October 2020. Paypal Donation Link Here

Gun Politics

For discussion of religion and politics

Moderators: LawBeefaroni, $iljanus

Post Reply
User avatar
Isgrimnur
Posts: 62902
Joined: Sun Oct 15, 2006 12:29 am
Location: Chookity pok
Contact:
Isgrimnur’s avatar
Snooze

Re: Gun Politics

Post by Isgrimnur » Thu Mar 14, 2019 12:50 pm

WaPo
Connecticut’s Supreme Court ruled Thursday that the manufacturer of the Bushmaster AR-15 rifle can be sued and potentially held liable in connection with the 2012 mass murder at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Conn.

The groundbreaking decision overturned a lower-court ruling barring the lawsuit, which was brought by the estates of nine victims killed by Adam Lanza, who was armed with the high-powered rifle during his assault on the school. Bushmaster is owned by Remington.

The families argued, among other things, that the rifle’s manufacturer and distributor negligently allowed and encouraged civilians to use a weapon suitable only for military and law enforcement use.

The firearms company had convinced a lower court that a federal law enacted in 2005 limited the liability of firearms manufacturers and dealers, essentially preempting wrongful death suits in state and federal courts.

The Connecticut high court disagreed. It also said the suit, which seeks unspecified damages for each death, could go forward under that state’s Unfair Trade Practices Law.

User avatar
LawBeefaroni
Forum Moderator
Posts: 46980
Joined: Fri Oct 15, 2004 3:08 pm
Location: Urbs in Horto, where we only use the old smilies

Re: Gun Politics

Post by LawBeefaroni » Thu Mar 14, 2019 2:35 pm

a weapon suitable only for military and law enforcement use.
It's not suitable for military use but regardless, there is nothing special about AR15s except being lightweigt and easy to operate. Is the argument that civilian firearms must be unwieldy and cumbersome?
" Hey OP, listen to my advice alright." -Tha General
"No scientific discovery is named after its original discoverer." -Stigler's Law of Eponymy, discovered by Robert K. Merton

MYT

User avatar
LawBeefaroni
Forum Moderator
Posts: 46980
Joined: Fri Oct 15, 2004 3:08 pm
Location: Urbs in Horto, where we only use the old smilies

Re: Gun Politics

Post by LawBeefaroni » Thu Mar 14, 2019 4:16 pm

So it looks like he Connecticut court says that the state's Unfair Trade Practices Act supercedes the federal the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act. The CUTPA is about advertising and marketing. The PLCAA is about liability of firearms manufacturers.

Connecticut law, the court wrote in the majority opinion, "does not permit advertisements that promote or encourage violent, criminal behavior." While federal law does offer protection for gun manufacturers, the majority wrote, "Congress did not intend to immunize firearms suppliers who engage in truly unethical and irresponsible marketing practices promoting criminal conduct, and given that statutes such as CUTPA are the only means available to address those types of wrongs, it falls to a jury to decide whether the promotional schemes alleged in the present case rise to the level of illegal trade practices and whether fault for the tragedy can be laid at their feet."
If Remington advertised and promoted criminal behavior, the ok.

This isn't about what an AR15 can or cannot do. It's about whether Remington made someone go on a murderous rampage with its marketing.
" Hey OP, listen to my advice alright." -Tha General
"No scientific discovery is named after its original discoverer." -Stigler's Law of Eponymy, discovered by Robert K. Merton

MYT

User avatar
Isgrimnur
Posts: 62902
Joined: Sun Oct 15, 2006 12:29 am
Location: Chookity pok
Contact:
Isgrimnur’s avatar
Snooze

Re: Gun Politics

Post by Isgrimnur » Thu Mar 14, 2019 4:19 pm

I'm sure that Hollywood loves that argument.

User avatar
Smoove_B
Posts: 40451
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 12:58 am
Location: Kaer Morhen

Re: Gun Politics

Post by Smoove_B » Fri Mar 22, 2019 4:47 pm

Is it still too early to talk about gun laws? MSD Community Mourns Loss Of Recent Grad Who Took Her Own Life:
The Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School community is mourning another loss. Sydney Aiello was a recent MSD graduate who was close friends with Meadow Pollack, one of the victims of the Parkland shooting.

Aiello’s mother said her daughter took her own life last weekend.

...

Aiello was described as a vibrant young woman who was focused on her grades and a joy to be around. Cara Aiello said her daughter was on campus the day of the shooting but not in Freshman Building. She said Sydney struggled with survivor’s guilt and was recently diagnosed with post-traumatic stress disorder. Cara said Sydney struggled to attend college classes because she was afraid of being in a classroom and was often sad recently but never asked for help before she killed herself.

Cara hopes Sydney’s story can help save others.

Ryan Petty’s daughter, Alaina, died in the MSD shooting. He’s focused a lot of effort on suicide prevention since the Parkland tragedy, worried that traumatized teens might take their own lives.

User avatar
Smoove_B
Posts: 40451
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 12:58 am
Location: Kaer Morhen

Re: Gun Politics

Post by Smoove_B » Sun Mar 24, 2019 2:15 pm

An alarming statistic from The American Journal of Medicine:
More children were shot dead in 2017 than on-duty police officers and active duty military

...
“It is sobering that in 2017, there were 144 police officers who died in the line of duty and about 1,000 active duty military throughout the world who died, whereas 2,462 school-age children were killed by firearms," the authors wrote of their findings based on children in the U.S.
Data analysis:
The team at Florida Atlantic University's Schmidt College of Medicine assessed the most recent data collected by the National Center for Health Statistics and found that 38,940 children aged between 5 to 18 years old died in circumstances involving a firearm between 1999 and 2017.

Some 6,464 deaths involved children between 5 to 14 years of age, amounting to 340 deaths annually on average. A further 32,478 children between 15 to 18 years old died, or 2,050 per year on average between 1999 and 2017.

Of these children, 61 percent were killed in an assault involving a firearm, while 32 percent died by suicide. A further 5 percent died in an accident. The death was undetermined in 2 percent of cases.

User avatar
GreenGoo
Posts: 40570
Joined: Thu Oct 14, 2004 10:46 pm
Location: Ottawa, ON

Re: Gun Politics

Post by GreenGoo » Sun Mar 24, 2019 2:38 pm

I don't trust those left wing doctor types.

What does the CDC have to say about it?

User avatar
LawBeefaroni
Forum Moderator
Posts: 46980
Joined: Fri Oct 15, 2004 3:08 pm
Location: Urbs in Horto, where we only use the old smilies

Re: Gun Politics

Post by LawBeefaroni » Sun Mar 24, 2019 4:58 pm

I don't don't the numbers but how many are gang/crime related? School-age doesn't mean at school or even in school.

It doesn't change the fact that there are far too many kids getting shot (and gang kids are still kids) but it's kind of misleading to imply that all 0-19 year olds getting shot are just school kids going about their school lives. It takes the spotlight off the crime problem and puts it on an inanimate object that is much easier to "solve."

Example.
“It is important to note that firearm injuries and especially deaths are typically not isolated events,” said Alex Piquero, a criminology researcher at the University of Texas at Dallas who wasn’t involved in the study [a different one than the one above but similar, for previous years].

“They often tend to co-occur with other crimes, whether gang-related, drug involved or other serious criminal activities, and for many of these crimes boys tend to be overrepresented compared to girls,”
" Hey OP, listen to my advice alright." -Tha General
"No scientific discovery is named after its original discoverer." -Stigler's Law of Eponymy, discovered by Robert K. Merton

MYT

User avatar
Holman
Posts: 21829
Joined: Sun Oct 24, 2004 8:00 pm
Location: Approximately Wissahickon

Re: Gun Politics

Post by Holman » Thu May 16, 2019 6:48 pm

Former SC Justice John Paul Stevens: The Supreme Court’s Worst Decision of My Tenure.

tl;dr: it was District of Columbia v. Heller, which expanded the 2nd amendment.
Until Heller, the invalidity of Second Amendment–based objections to firearms regulations had been uncontroversial. The first two federal laws directly restricting the civilian use and possession of firearms—the 1927 act prohibiting mail delivery of handguns and the 1934 act prohibiting the possession of sawed-off shotguns and machine guns—were enacted over minor Second Amendment objections that were dismissed by the vast majority of legislators participating in the debates. After reviewing many of the same sources that are discussed at greater length by Scalia in his majority opinion in Heller, the Miller Court unanimously concluded that the Second Amendment did not apply to the possession of a firearm that did not have “some relationship to the preservation or efficiency of a well regulated militia.” And in 1980, in a footnote to an opinion upholding a conviction for receipt of a firearm, the Court effectively affirmed Miller, writing: “[T]he Second Amendment guarantees no right to keep and bear a firearm that does not have ‘some reasonable relationship to the preservation or efficiency of a well regulated militia.’”

So well settled was the issue that, speaking on the PBS NewsHour in 1991, the retired Chief Justice Warren Burger described the National Rifle Association’s lobbying in support of an expansive interpretation of the Second Amendment in these terms: “One of the greatest pieces of fraud, I repeat the word fraud, on the American public by special-interest groups that I have ever seen in my lifetime.”

Even if the lobbyists who oppose gun-control regulation actually do endorse the dubious proposition that the Second Amendment was intended to limit the federal power to regulate the civilian use of handguns—that Burger incorrectly accused them of “fraud”—I find it incredible that policy makers in a democratic society have failed to impose more effective regulations on the ownership and use of firearms than they have.

And even if there were some merit to the legal arguments advanced in the Heller case, all could foresee the negative consequences of the decision, which should have provided my colleagues with the justification needed to apply stare decisis to Miller. At a minimum, it should have given them greater pause before announcing such a radical change in the law that would greatly tie the hands of state and national lawmakers endeavoring to find solutions to the gun problem in America. Their twin failure—first, the misreading of the intended meaning of the Second Amendment, and second, the failure to respect settled precedent—represents the worst self-inflicted wound in the Court’s history.
Much prefer my Nazis Nuremberged.

User avatar
Isgrimnur
Posts: 62902
Joined: Sun Oct 15, 2006 12:29 am
Location: Chookity pok
Contact:
Isgrimnur’s avatar
Snooze

Re: Gun Politics

Post by Isgrimnur » Thu May 30, 2019 10:37 am

WaPo
On its website, Salesforce.com touts retailer Camping World as a leading customer of its business software, highlighting its use of products to help sales staff move product. A Camping World executive is even quoted calling Salesforce’s software “magic.”

But behind the scenes in recent weeks, the Silicon Valley tech giant has delivered a different message to gun-selling retailers such as Camping World: Stop selling military-style rifles, or stop using our software.

The pressure Salesforce is exerting on those retailers — barring them from using its technology to market products, manage customer service operations and fulfill orders — puts them in a difficult position. Camping World, for example, spends more than $1 million a year on Salesforce’s e-commerce software, according to one analyst estimate. Switching to another provider now could cost the company double that to migrate data, reconfigure systems and retrain employees.

The change in Salesforce’s acceptable-use policy shows how a technology giant that is mostly unknown to the public is trying to influence what retailers in America sell and alter the dynamics of a charged social issue. While Salesforce is hardly a household name, it is a dominant provider of software and services that help businesses manage their customers. With roughly 40,000 employees and a market value of nearly $120 billion, it has become a behemoth in San Francisco. Its branded skyscraper also towers over the city as the tallest building and a major landmark.

But its decision to force its position on guns on retailers did not sit well with some industry advocates. These types of rules are “corporate-policy virtue signaling” and discriminate against gun owners, whose rights are protected by the Second Amendment, said Mark Oliva, public affairs director of the National Shooting Sports Foundation, a firearms trade group.

User avatar
LawBeefaroni
Forum Moderator
Posts: 46980
Joined: Fri Oct 15, 2004 3:08 pm
Location: Urbs in Horto, where we only use the old smilies

Re: Gun Politics

Post by LawBeefaroni » Thu May 30, 2019 10:52 am

They can do whatever they want as a corporation but what happens if a similar business tells a pharmacy to stop selling birth control or tells a grocery that they can only sell cage free eggs?
" Hey OP, listen to my advice alright." -Tha General
"No scientific discovery is named after its original discoverer." -Stigler's Law of Eponymy, discovered by Robert K. Merton

MYT

User avatar
Isgrimnur
Posts: 62902
Joined: Sun Oct 15, 2006 12:29 am
Location: Chookity pok
Contact:
Isgrimnur’s avatar
Snooze

Re: Gun Politics

Post by Isgrimnur » Thu May 30, 2019 10:56 am

As long as they're not a large enough market player to have a negative impact on competition, I doubt that anyone will care.

User avatar
LawBeefaroni
Forum Moderator
Posts: 46980
Joined: Fri Oct 15, 2004 3:08 pm
Location: Urbs in Horto, where we only use the old smilies

Re: Gun Politics

Post by LawBeefaroni » Thu May 30, 2019 11:09 am

I guess it just becomes a money question: is it worth the $1M hit to switch or not?
" Hey OP, listen to my advice alright." -Tha General
"No scientific discovery is named after its original discoverer." -Stigler's Law of Eponymy, discovered by Robert K. Merton

MYT

User avatar
gameoverman
Posts: 5325
Joined: Wed Oct 26, 2005 2:21 pm
Location: Glendora, CA

Re: Gun Politics

Post by gameoverman » Thu May 30, 2019 4:02 pm

I must be missing something in that article on Salesforce and guns. When people turn on their tv they are watching what someone else deemed acceptable for them to be allowed to watch. When I go to the supermarket, the items on the shelves are the ones someone has deemed acceptable for me to buy. People who shop at Walmart are choosing from items Walmart deems acceptable to be in their stores.

So then, if someone provides software to do business rather than a physical store, how is that any different? It feels to me like they are trying to imply some kind of new, insidious manipulation is going on. It's just the same shiat, done using a different method.

User avatar
Isgrimnur
Posts: 62902
Joined: Sun Oct 15, 2006 12:29 am
Location: Chookity pok
Contact:
Isgrimnur’s avatar
Snooze

Re: Gun Politics

Post by Isgrimnur » Thu May 30, 2019 4:09 pm

The company that services the fire extinguishers at your local Walmart isn't trying to tell them that they can't sell Heinz products.

User avatar
GreenGoo
Posts: 40570
Joined: Thu Oct 14, 2004 10:46 pm
Location: Ottawa, ON

Re: Gun Politics

Post by GreenGoo » Thu May 30, 2019 5:11 pm

Isgrimnur wrote:
Thu May 30, 2019 4:09 pm
The company that services the fire extinguishers at your local Walmart isn't trying to tell them that they can't sell Heinz products.
Maybe they should.

User avatar
Isgrimnur
Posts: 62902
Joined: Sun Oct 15, 2006 12:29 am
Location: Chookity pok
Contact:
Isgrimnur’s avatar
Snooze

Re: Gun Politics

Post by Isgrimnur » Thu May 30, 2019 5:16 pm

GreenGoo wrote:
Thu May 30, 2019 5:11 pm
Isgrimnur wrote:
Thu May 30, 2019 4:09 pm
The company that services the fire extinguishers at your local Walmart isn't trying to tell them that they can't sell Heinz products.
Maybe they should.
We don't all have access to French's down here.

User avatar
Jaymon
Posts: 1684
Joined: Wed Sep 10, 2008 12:51 pm

Re: Gun Politics

Post by Jaymon » Thu May 30, 2019 5:21 pm

its a very weird and possibly unpredicted future. Corporations are working towards gun safety while the government won't. I don't think William Gibson ever could have predicted that.

its also a very weird legal stance. Salesforce is trying to enforce policy on its customers to not sell certain products, but none of those product are illegal. And it doesn't come under the "refuse to do business with some customers" because they still want some of those customers business.
I think a legal challenge against this policy would succeed, that sounds like discrimination. What if mcDonalds said "its ok to buy our food via drive thru, but you are not allowed to then give it to people in green shirts"

On the other hand, if there is a legal challenge, salesforce might make a big deal out of it, which could harm the client companies image. image this news story
Salesforce - camping world sued us so they can keep using our software to sell GUNS THAT KILL KIDS
Bunnies like beer because its made from hops.

User avatar
em2nought
Posts: 3595
Joined: Fri Oct 15, 2004 5:48 am

Re: Gun Politics

Post by em2nought » Thu May 30, 2019 5:42 pm

Jaymon wrote:
Thu May 30, 2019 5:21 pm
its a very weird and possibly unpredicted future. Corporations are working towards gun safety while the government won't. I don't think William Gibson ever could have predicted that.

its also a very weird legal stance. Salesforce is trying to enforce policy on its customers to not sell certain products, but none of those product are illegal. And it doesn't come under the "refuse to do business with some customers" because they still want some of those customers business.
I think a legal challenge against this policy would succeed, that sounds like discrimination. What if mcDonalds said "its ok to buy our food via drive thru, but you are not allowed to then give it to people in green shirts"

On the other hand, if there is a legal challenge, salesforce might make a big deal out of it, which could harm the client companies image. image this news story
Salesforce - camping world sued us so they can keep using our software to sell GUNS THAT KILL KIDS
You'd think they would have to compensate you for the expense to move to different software if they imposed their will on you after the fact. :think:
Waiting for the tide to bring me a sail.

User avatar
ImLawBoy
Forum Admin
Posts: 11784
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 9:49 pm
Location: Chicago, IL
Contact:

Re: Gun Politics

Post by ImLawBoy » Thu May 30, 2019 5:44 pm

Jaymon wrote:
Thu May 30, 2019 5:21 pm
its a very weird and possibly unpredicted future. Corporations are working towards gun safety while the government won't. I don't think William Gibson ever could have predicted that.

its also a very weird legal stance. Salesforce is trying to enforce policy on its customers to not sell certain products, but none of those product are illegal. And it doesn't come under the "refuse to do business with some customers" because they still want some of those customers business.
I think a legal challenge against this policy would succeed, that sounds like discrimination. What if mcDonalds said "its ok to buy our food via drive thru, but you are not allowed to then give it to people in green shirts"

On the other hand, if there is a legal challenge, salesforce might make a big deal out of it, which could harm the client companies image. image this news story
Salesforce - camping world sued us so they can keep using our software to sell GUNS THAT KILL KIDS
There's nothing illegal about discriminating against people wearing green shirts, since that's not a protected class. Whether this would survive a court challenge would likely fall entirely to the terms of the contract between the companies since they are private actors.
That's my purse! I don't know you!

User avatar
Isgrimnur
Posts: 62902
Joined: Sun Oct 15, 2006 12:29 am
Location: Chookity pok
Contact:
Isgrimnur’s avatar
Snooze

Re: Gun Politics

Post by Isgrimnur » Thu May 30, 2019 7:10 pm

They’re smarter than that.
The change affects “a small number of existing customers when their current contracts expire,” as well as all new customers, Salesforce spokeswoman Gina Sheibley said.

User avatar
Isgrimnur
Posts: 62902
Joined: Sun Oct 15, 2006 12:29 am
Location: Chookity pok
Contact:
Isgrimnur’s avatar
Snooze

Re: Gun Politics

Post by Isgrimnur » Mon Jun 10, 2019 4:25 pm

CNN
The Supreme Court on Monday left intact a federal law that requires the registration of some firearms, including silencers, and turned away a request to consider whether such firearm accessories are protected by the Second Amendment.

An appeals court had held that a silencer is not a "bearable" arm protected by the Constitution.
...
The order was issued without comment or recorded dissent.

Shane Cox owned an army surplus store in Kansas where he sold unregistered homemade silencers and Jeremy Kettler bought one of them. They were convicted under the National Firearms Act, passed in 1934, which requires individuals to register silencers and to pay a federal tax of about $200. The law has the effect of limiting the number of silencers, but not banning them. It also makes it harder to transfer them.

Eight states and Washington, DC, go further and ban silencers altogether, others ban them unless registered with the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms.

User avatar
LawBeefaroni
Forum Moderator
Posts: 46980
Joined: Fri Oct 15, 2004 3:08 pm
Location: Urbs in Horto, where we only use the old smilies

Re: Gun Politics

Post by LawBeefaroni » Mon Jun 10, 2019 4:42 pm

IIRC, Kettler was so excited about his unlicensed NFA item he posted on Facebook. The ATF saw it. It not for that, this whole case probably never happens.

If I read right, they tried to use the Kansas 2nd amendment protections (SAPA) to defend against the actions of the ATF. Trying to use a state law supporting the US Constitution to nullify a federal agency's actions. Seems like someone would have just used the actual US Constitution against the ATF if it were that easy.
" Hey OP, listen to my advice alright." -Tha General
"No scientific discovery is named after its original discoverer." -Stigler's Law of Eponymy, discovered by Robert K. Merton

MYT

User avatar
Isgrimnur
Posts: 62902
Joined: Sun Oct 15, 2006 12:29 am
Location: Chookity pok
Contact:
Isgrimnur’s avatar
Snooze

Re: Gun Politics

Post by Isgrimnur » Mon Jun 10, 2019 4:47 pm

I'm pretty sure that parchment doesn't hold up against a dynamic entry.

User avatar
Max Peck
Posts: 7864
Joined: Fri Aug 05, 2005 8:09 pm
Location: Down the Rabbit-Hole

Re: Gun Politics

Post by Max Peck » Fri Sep 20, 2019 8:33 am

Colt suspends AR-15 rifle production for civilians
US gun manufacturer Colt has said it will suspend the production of sporting rifles for consumers.

Those include the AR-15, a semi-automatic rifle that has been used in several recent US mass shootings.

Colt says it remains committed to the right to bear arms, but that the US market is already saturated with similar weapons.

It will focus instead on fulfilling contracts for customers in the military and police, it added.

Colt's decision is unlikely to make it more difficult for people to get hold of semi-automatic weapons, as many other manufacturers make similar rifles, observers say.

"The fact of the matter is that over the last few years, the market for modern sporting rifles has experienced significant excess manufacturing capacity," Colt's chief executive officer, Dennis Veilleux, said in a written statement.

"Given this level of manufacturing capacity, we believe there is adequate supply for modern sporting rifles for the foreseeable future."
Time and tide melt the snowman.

There are worlds out there where the sky is burning, where the sea's asleep and the rivers dream, people made of smoke and cities made of song. Somewhere there's danger, somewhere there's injustice and somewhere else the tea is getting cold. Come on, Ace, we've got work to do.
-- The Doctor

User avatar
LawBeefaroni
Forum Moderator
Posts: 46980
Joined: Fri Oct 15, 2004 3:08 pm
Location: Urbs in Horto, where we only use the old smilies

Re: Gun Politics

Post by LawBeefaroni » Fri Sep 20, 2019 8:50 am

Colt's move was a business decision, not a moral one. Their AR-15s were higher price for lower quality. People stopped buying on name alone so the civilian market has been bad for them.
" Hey OP, listen to my advice alright." -Tha General
"No scientific discovery is named after its original discoverer." -Stigler's Law of Eponymy, discovered by Robert K. Merton

MYT

User avatar
Isgrimnur
Posts: 62902
Joined: Sun Oct 15, 2006 12:29 am
Location: Chookity pok
Contact:
Isgrimnur’s avatar
Snooze

Re: Gun Politics

Post by Isgrimnur » Tue Nov 12, 2019 11:56 am

CNBC
The Supreme Court said Tuesday that it will not hear a closely watched case against gunmaker Remington, a move the company has warned could potentially increase the liability of firearm manufacturers to suits brought by victims of gun crimes.

The court’s action will allow the family members of children killed in the 2012 Sandy Hook Elementary school massacre to move forward with their lawsuit.
...
They claim that Remington marketed the weapon “as a highly lethal weapon designed for purposes that are illegal — namely, killing other human beings.”

The Connecticut Supreme Court ruled in a divided opinion earlier this year that the family members could pursue their lawsuit, rejecting Remington’s argument. The court wrote that the family members are “entitled to have the opportunity to prove their wrongful marketing allegations.”

The Supreme Court’s move will allow the lower court’s decision to stand, potentially opening the door to more lawsuits from victims of gun crime.

User avatar
Smoove_B
Posts: 40451
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 12:58 am
Location: Kaer Morhen

Re: Gun Politics

Post by Smoove_B » Tue Nov 12, 2019 12:04 pm

Obama NJ is coming for your guns:
Posts that a Mercer County man made on Facebook were so concerning that authorities have temporarily seized his firearms, and jailed him on a felony terroristic threats charge, police said.

Hasheem Williams, 27, of Princeton, was arrested Friday in an early usage of a state “red flag” law allowing cops to seize a person’s firearms if they pose "a significant danger of causing bodily injury.”

...

To seize a suspect’s firearms, law enforcement, relatives or roommates must demonstrate to a state Superior Court judge that they believe a person presents “an immediate and present danger to others.”
I probably don't visit the right circles, but I'm surprised this isn't making more national news.

User avatar
LawBeefaroni
Forum Moderator
Posts: 46980
Joined: Fri Oct 15, 2004 3:08 pm
Location: Urbs in Horto, where we only use the old smilies

Re: Gun Politics

Post by LawBeefaroni » Tue Nov 12, 2019 3:00 pm

Smoove_B wrote:
Tue Nov 12, 2019 12:04 pm
Obama NJ is coming for your guns:
Posts that a Mercer County man made on Facebook were so concerning that authorities have temporarily seized his firearms, and jailed him on a felony terroristic threats charge, police said.

Hasheem Williams, 27, of Princeton, was arrested Friday in an early usage of a state “red flag” law allowing cops to seize a person’s firearms if they pose "a significant danger of causing bodily injury.”

...

To seize a suspect’s firearms, law enforcement, relatives or roommates must demonstrate to a state Superior Court judge that they believe a person presents “an immediate and present danger to others.”
I probably don't visit the right circles, but I'm surprised this isn't making more national news.
Red flag laws have been around and have been used, I think effectively on some cases. They have also been abused. Most of them don't include a penalty for false or malicious reporting.


This particular case, not sure about.
" Hey OP, listen to my advice alright." -Tha General
"No scientific discovery is named after its original discoverer." -Stigler's Law of Eponymy, discovered by Robert K. Merton

MYT

User avatar
Holman
Posts: 21829
Joined: Sun Oct 24, 2004 8:00 pm
Location: Approximately Wissahickon

Re: Gun Politics

Post by Holman » Tue Nov 12, 2019 9:34 pm

Came across this RED DAWN clip recently: Soviet devils shoot up an American high school.



It's chilling to watch in light of what we know about who actually shoots up American schools and what reasonable responses to that threat we can't seem to make happen.

Spoiler:
Spoiler:
Fucking Spetsnaz parachuting into Colorado aren't the actual problem.
Much prefer my Nazis Nuremberged.

User avatar
Max Peck
Posts: 7864
Joined: Fri Aug 05, 2005 8:09 pm
Location: Down the Rabbit-Hole

Re: Gun Politics

Post by Max Peck » Wed Nov 20, 2019 11:28 pm

Time and tide melt the snowman.

There are worlds out there where the sky is burning, where the sea's asleep and the rivers dream, people made of smoke and cities made of song. Somewhere there's danger, somewhere there's injustice and somewhere else the tea is getting cold. Come on, Ace, we've got work to do.
-- The Doctor

User avatar
Isgrimnur
Posts: 62902
Joined: Sun Oct 15, 2006 12:29 am
Location: Chookity pok
Contact:
Isgrimnur’s avatar
Snooze

Re: Gun Politics

Post by Isgrimnur » Tue Nov 26, 2019 1:55 am

wonderpug wrote:
Fri Oct 06, 2017 11:30 am
[*]varmint control - probably don't need semi-auto rifles for minor critters, but for feral hogs or something that could attack you, I could see an argument for semi-auto rifles being better to have[/list]

I'm not saying all these reasons are my own, but those are the most common 'societal benefit' reasons I could think of that come up.
CNN
A Texas woman was found dead after pre-dawn attack by a group of feral hogs outside a home, the Chambers County sheriff said.

Christine Rollins, a 59-year old caregiver to an elderly couple in Anahuac, failed to show up at her normal time on Sunday, the sheriff's office said. The 84-year-old homeowner found her lying in the front yard between her car and the house.

Sheriff Brian Hawthorne said in a news conference Monday that "multiple hogs" assaulted Rollins when she arrived at work, likely between 6 and 6:30 a.m., when it was still dark outside.

"In my 35 years, I will tell you it's one of the worst things I've ever seen," Hawthorne told reporters.

Jefferson County Medical Examiner Selly Rivers determined Rollins was attacked by different hogs because of the various size of the bites on her body, Hawthorne said.

Post Reply