|
|
|
NOTE!
This is a real-time comments system. As such, it's also a
free speech zone within guidelines set forth on the Post
Comments page. Opinions expressed here may or may not
reflect those of KeepAndBearArms staff, members, or
any other living person besides the one who posted them.
Please keep that in mind. We ask that all who post
comments assure that they adhere to our Inclusion
Policy, but there's a bad apple in every
bunch, and we have no control over bigots and
other small-minded people. Thank you. --KeepAndBearArms.com
|
The
Below Comments Relate to this Newslink:
NY: Locals flag new gun law
Submitted by:
Mark A. Taff
Website: http://www.marktaff.com
|
There
are 2 comments
on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments
|
At last week’s meeting of the Public Safety Committee of the Yates County Legislature, District Attorney Todd Casella shared concerns about the newly enacted state Red Flag law, particularly; the risks law enforcement will face in trying to carry out court orders to seize firearms, the liability the county will face in possible lawsuits, and the logistical matter of storing seized weapons.
The essence of the law will permit family members, teachers, school administrators, and prosecutors to seek court orders to seize guns, according to information from Gov. Andrew Cuomo’s statement during the Feb. 25 signing of the law.
“It seems this is another law that’s not well thought out,” said Casella. |
| Comment by:
Stripeseven
(3/14/2019)
|
| The U. S. Constitution provides: "No person shall...be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law. |
| Comment by:
PHORTO
(3/14/2019)
|
Stripeseven - EXACLY!
Unless you enshrine due process guarantees in the text of the law itself, it will be unacceptable.
Due process means an adversarial hearing wherein the respondent can face his/her accusers, cross examine witnesses, and present witnesses and evidence on his/her behalf.
The problem with these laws is that they use ex parte hearings where the respondent often isn't even notified that one is taking place. That is an egregious circumvention of the commands in the 4th, 5th, 6th and 14th Amendments.
You can't take his liberty (i.e. his natural right to bear arms) or his property (i.e. his firearms) without first having an adversarial hearing and getting a probable cause ruling based upon all the evidence. |
|
|
| QUOTES
TO REMEMBER |
| No kingdom can be secured otherwise than by arming the people. The possession of arms is the distinction between a freeman and a slave. He, who has nothing, and who himself belongs to another, must be defended by him, whose property he is, and needs no arms. But he, who thinks he is his own master, and has what he can call his own, ought to have arms to defend himself, and what he possesses; else he lives precariously, and at discretion. — James Burgh, Political Disquisitions: Or, an Enquiry into Public Errors, Defects, and Abuses [London, 1774-1775]. |
|
|
