Gary, betreger, Sirius B and Mr. Kevvy ---- Good Posts - thank you.

More thought and prayers are needed to ameliorate these senseless murders.

betreger Good post thank you.

Gary, I am surprised that your list made no mention that U.S. farms are also the recipients of one of the most expensive forms of social assistance: farm subsidies. Yet this is often ignored by many who claim to be for smaller government, reduced taxation and fewer handouts.

The federal government spends more than $20 billion a year on subsidies for farm businesses. About 39 percent of the nation's 2.1 million farms receive subsidies, with the lion's share of the handouts going to the largest producers of corn, soybeans, wheat, cotton, and rice.

So true, but those subsidies are not illegal. Many of the schemes that farmers do to get that money are fraud.

What is much more distressing is the politicization of law enforcement by:
these State of Colorado Sheriffs
By that action alone --- they are unfit to hold any office of profit or trust.

"Red Flag Laws" --- saves lives.
I can't see why these Colorado Sheriffs would be against "Red Flag Laws" ?????
"Red Flag Laws" by keeping guns out of the crazy's hands ...
Byron --- "Democratic Socialist" --- for a more just and peaceful Planet Earth
My Hero --- Mahatma Gandhi, the power of nonviolence

"Red Flag Laws" --- saves lives.
I can't see why these Colorado Sheriffs would be against "Red Flag Laws" ?????
"Red Flag Laws" by keeping guns out of the crazy's hands ...
Byron --- "Democratic Socialist" --- for a more just and peaceful Planet Earth

Red Flag Laws disregard the Constitutional Right to Due Process.

The clause in the Fifth Amendment reads:
No person shall ... be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law.

While the clause in the Fourteenth Amendment says:
...nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law.

Due process is the legal requirement that the state must respect all legal rights that are owed to a person. Due process balances the power of law of the land and protects the individual person from it. When a government harms a person without following the exact course of the law, this constitutes a due process violation, which offends the rule of law.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Due_process

One of those legal rights is :

The Confrontation Clause of the Sixth Amendment to the United States Constitution provides that "in all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right…to be confronted with the witnesses against him." Generally, the right is to have a face-to-face confrontation with witnesses who are offering testimonial evidence against the accused in the form of cross-examination during a trial.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confrontation_Clause
By obtaining an Order, from a Judge, to seize the Firearms of an individual due to an accusation, without allowing cross examination and discovery on the part of the accused therefor OBVIOUSLY violates the Constitution of the United States under the Fifth, Sixth and Fourteenth Amendments.

This is the legal argument supporting Colorado Sheriffs and Citizens refusal to recognize this so called 'Law'.

---

"Sour Grapes make a bitter Whine." <(0)>

Yes. US citizens have the RIGHT to kill other US citizens and others according to the holy Second amendment in the US constitution.

Just more evidence for the needs of constitutional reform in the U.S..

Yes. US citizens have the RIGHT to kill other US citizens and others according to the holy Second amendment in the US constitution.

....No, they don't. Not under ANY stretch of the meaning.

They do have the Right to Bear Arms without Infringement under that Amendment.

Your statement merely illustrates your frustration and demonstrates an amazing lack of understanding of the American Constitution.

---

"Sour Grapes make a bitter Whine." <(0)>

Yep, they're bearing arms and killing other citizens, freedom has a blood price attached to it.

Yep, they're bearing arms and killing other citizens, freedom has a blood price attached to it.

......some are. But unlike your system we refuse to trample on the Rights of law abiding citizens due to the actions of non law abiding citizens.

That's because American Citizens have Rights, not concessions from a Nanny State.

Our system is about limiting what the Government can force us to do, not what they 'allow' us to do.

---

"Sour Grapes make a bitter Whine." <(0)>

And exactly what "rights" are being trampled on hear Eye? Please do explain them.

Our "Red Flag" type laws do work well too, but then again we don't cater to the whims of the crazy minority over those of the more sensible majority.

You should try it Eye. ;-)

Eye is wrong. There is a judicial process that satisfies the Fifth and Fourteenth. As the process is not criminal the Sixth is never touched.

No different that any other order of protection, such as ordering a person to stay 100 yards away from another. Or a gang protection order that prevents more than two members of a criminal gang from being in the same place at the same time. All of these have been in the appellate courts and all have been adjudicated as legal and proper.

But if he wants another example, Grand Jury. The accused does not even have the right to know that there is a proceeding!

Eminent domain is yet another, kicked out of your castle.

Now I hate to bring up the FISA courts, but again, you do not have the right to even know there is a proceeding, or in many cases the result of the proceeding.

Again, all have been to the appellate courts, and they haven't been stopped.

Eye likes to attempt to pick cherries.

Not a gun issue, but this, https://futurism.com/cops-charge-man-stealing-gps-tracker poses questions.

Quick summary.

Police secretly place unmarked GPS tracking device on a car.

Owner see's it and removes it.
Police say that is theft.

But what if it was his ex that placed the device?
Apparently that is not a crime.

Eye is wrong.

Of cause he is, but he'll keep trying to spread the NRA/Rep/v2.0 (and other) B.S. until he turns blue in the face. ;-)

Your statement merely illustrates your frustration and demonstrates an amazing lack of understanding of the American Constitution.

Seems to me like US citizens have problem to understand the American Constitution.
https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/second_amendment
It's rather strange, that we in Sweden and Finland that like the US owns many guns, don't have mass shootings.
But then we have only police and military forces that are allowed to operate guns against humans...

But then we have only police and military forces that are allowed to operate guns against humans...

Again moomin, you misstate the issue. Americans are NOT allowed to operate guns against humans except in very explicit circumstances, namely self defense and defense of loved ones against violent attack. Your statement assumes this is done with impunity but the fact is every time anyone here uses a firearm against another person that incident is closely examined before fault is found or the user is exonerated.

While this system works to suppress an "Old West shoot 'em up" environment in the case of law abiding citizens, it does not deter evil intentions by criminals. Thus the need to provide a means of defense against those not able to control their violent impulses and use a firearm for nefarious and murderous purposes.

I think there is a lot of misconception by those not living here and by many who DO live here of just how many ILLEGALLY possessed guns there are in the US. Confiscation or prohibition of legal and known firearms will not affect that criminal element 's possession or use of guns. It will only disarm the innocents and make them even more vulnerable to predation by the armed criminal.

And even confiscation of ALL known firearms will not stop the truly determined criminal from manufacturing one. Example is the use of one of these 'Ghost' guns this last weekend in California. The handgun was made from parts that bore no serial numbers.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/ghost-gun-used-in-saugus-high-school-shooting-what-is-it-and-is-it-legal/ar-BBXayB7
Anyone with access to modern CAD machining equipment can build a gun. It's not a 'secret formula', the blueprints have been around for over a century (Browning model 1911 .45 caliber semi-auto for example).

I'm surprised that the Mexican Drug Cartels, with their access to $Billions of dollars haven't already set up their own factories to do just that(probably because it's cheaper to buy AKs out of South America). But you can bet that will be their(and others) means of obtaining firearms if the need should arise.

---

"Sour Grapes make a bitter Whine." <(0)>

Eye is wrong. There is a judicial process that satisfies the Fifth and Fourteenth. As the process is not criminal the Sixth is never touched.

No different that any other order of protection, such as ordering a person to stay 100 yards away from another. Or a gang protection order that prevents more than two members of a criminal gang from being in the same place at the same time. All of these have been in the appellate courts and all have been adjudicated as legal and proper.

But if he wants another example, Grand Jury. The accused does not even have the right to know that there is a proceeding!

Eminent domain is yet another, kicked out of your castle.

Now I hate to bring up the FISA courts, but again, you do not have the right to even know there is a proceeding, or in many cases the result of the proceeding.

Again, all have been to the appellate courts, and they haven't been stopped.

Eye likes to attempt to pick cherries.

Grary and Wiggo --- from your post I understand better now.

Byron --- "Democratic Socialist" --- for a more just and peaceful Planet Earth
My Hero --- Mahatma Gandhi, the power of nonviolence

Americans are NOT allowed to operate guns against humans except

And there begins the issue. Americans are allowed to operate guns against humans. Something an NRA brain simply can't understand. Only being able to fire at food or inanimate objects. NRA brain believes it must be able to fire at human beings.

Americans are NOT allowed to operate guns against humans except

And there begins the issue. Americans are allowed to operate guns against humans. Something an NRA brain simply can't understand. Only being able to fire at food or inanimate objects. NRA brain believes it must be able to fire at human beings.

Gary --- ok that makes sense.

Byron --- "Democratic Socialist" --- for a more just and peaceful Planet Earth
My Hero --- Mahatma Gandhi, the power of nonviolence

Sorry to disappoint(not) but the examples you gave of protection orders do not 'deprive a citizen "of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law". Big difference and a point that will be argued in a court of law the first time a Red Flag Law is used to seize lawfully obtained and owned property. The accused if later found innocent will still have incurred the expense of legal defense and recovery of the property and the adverse publicity.

I am not saying dangerous persons should be allowed access to firearms, I'm saying that innocent people WILL BE HARMED(by property seizure) by accusation without the ability to refute the accusation. There are sufficient laws on the books allowing such seizures in cases of mental stability, they need to be enforced.

There are already too many cases of malicious persecution and prosecution based on innuendo or for an ulterior purpose such as revenge or personal gain(divorce proceedings, spurned lovers, fallout of business partners, etc.), these laws will be another avenue for that behavior.

---

"Sour Grapes make a bitter Whine." <(0)>

The accused if later found innocent will still have incurred the expense of legal defense and recovery of the property and the adverse publicity.

Another reason for why your legal system needs reform.

Sorry to disappoint(not) but the examples you gave of protection orders do not 'deprive a citizen "of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law". Big difference and a point that will be argued in a court of law the first time a Red Flag Law is used to seize lawfully obtained and owned property. The accused if later found innocent will still have incurred the expense of legal defense and recovery of the property and the adverse publicity.

I am not saying dangerous persons should be allowed access to firearms, I'm saying that innocent people WILL BE HARMED(by property seizure) by accusation without the ability to refute the accusation. There are sufficient laws on the books allowing such seizures in cases of mental stability, they need to be enforced.

There are already too many cases of malicious persecution and prosecution based on innuendo or for an ulterior purpose such as revenge or personal gain(divorce proceedings, spurned lovers, fallout of business partners, etc.), these laws will be another avenue for that behavior.

Huh?

Some Colorado counties are opposing a new state gun law that goes into effect in 2020. The red flag law allows a judge to issue an extreme risk protection order so that law enforcement can remove firearms from people posing a threat to themselves or others.

Where are you getting innocent? Where are you getting prosecution? No criminal matter at all. Civil case. Are you that confused over a temporary restraining order?

https://leg.colorado.gov/bills/hb19-1177

Another reason for why your legal system needs reform.

I would hardly call adding another venue for attorney enrichment a 'reform'.

---

"Sour Grapes make a bitter Whine." <(0)>