|
|
|
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:
‘Red Flag’ Gun Law Should Include Minors, Washington State Prosecutors Say
Submitted by:
jac
|
There
is 1 comment
on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments
|
Prosecutors in Washington are demanding that minors be covered by the state's “red flag” law, which allows for guns to be seized with a court order, according to a report.
State law is silent on whether a judge can issue an Extreme Risk Protection Order, or ERPO, in the case of a minor....
She said the case involves an 18-year-old charged with a crime whose father owns guns but who refuses to tell cops where they are still being kept in the home.
“We would file the ERPO against the juvenile because the father has access to firearms in the home, and the father is not being cooperative with law enforcement to confirm that the firearms are out of the home,” Wyatt said.
Submitters note: Predictable. |
| Comment by:
PHORTO
(11/26/2018)
|
"Police and family can apply for the order to seize the guns of persons deemed a threat to themselves or others, even if no crime was committed."
That facially violates the 5th Amendment, which states that "No person . . . shall be denied life, liberty, or property, without due process of law;"
Due process means an adversarial hearing wherein the respondent can face accusers, cross examine witnesses and present evidence on one's behalf.
No due process, no suspension of rights or taking of property.
Period. |
|
|
| QUOTES
TO REMEMBER |
| "Some people think that the Second Amendment is an outdated relic of an earlier time. Doubtless some also think that constitutional protections of other rights are outdated relics of earlier times. We The People own those rights regardless, unless and until We The People repeal them. For those who believe it to be outdated, the Second Amendment provides a good test of whether their allegiance is really to the Constitution of the United States, or only to their preferences in public policies and audiences. The Constitution is law, not vague aspirations, and we are obligated to protect, defend, and apply it. If the Second Amendment were truly an outdated relic, the Constitution provides a method for repeal. The Constitution does not furnish the federal courts with an eraser." --9th Circuit Court Judge Andrew Kleinfeld, dissenting opinion in which the court refused to rehear the case while citing deeply flawed anti-Second Amendment nonsense (Nordyke v. King; opinion filed April 5, 2004) |
|
|
