Thoughts and Prayers!!!

Tell me, what Red Flag law would have prevented this?
Tell me that one wouldn’t have. I don’t know the specifics of this one, but was merely illustrating a broader point. That point is mass shootings like this potentially can be prevented in certain cases. There is no one fix for these shootings. Take away everyone’s guns?  No, that’s not the answer. Temporarily take away guns from those deemed a threat to themselves or others?  Yes. It’s only logical to include this in a multi pronged approach to minimize these types of attacks. To oppose Red Flag laws is pure nonsense. 

 
Tell me that one wouldn’t have. I don’t know the specifics of this one, but was merely illustrating a broader point. That point is mass shootings like this potentially can be prevented in certain cases. There is no one fix for these shootings. Take away everyone’s guns?  No, that’s not the answer. Temporarily take away guns from those deemed a threat to themselves or others?  Yes. It’s only logical to include this in a multi pronged approach to minimize these types of attacks. To oppose Red Flag laws is pure nonsense. 


No, it's not.  If the red flag law is poorly written and does little to punish law breakers and only punishes law abiding gun owners, then it does nothing to prevent a shooting.

 
No, it's not.  If the red flag law is poorly written and does little to punish law breakers and only punishes law abiding gun owners, then it does nothing to prevent a shooting.
Your being too vague.
Two questions. And I’m referring to Nebraska’s proposed law. 
How is it poorly written ?

How does it punish law abiding gun owners?

 
Your being too vague.
Two questions. And I’m referring to Nebraska’s proposed law. 
How is it poorly written ?

How does it punish law abiding gun owners?


Well for one, how would a Nebraska Red Flag law prevent a Milwaukee shooting?

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Christ!  But it IS how discussion boards work...


No need to get all huffy, I'm really not being difficult.  The discussion was about a Milwaukee shooting and talked about NE red flag law:

Thank goodness no pesky Red Flag laws got in the way of this shooters right to exercise his freedom.  Isn’t that how it’s supposed to be, Gov Ricketts?


Yes, you can pretend and make up hypotheticals all you want if you only want to have part of the discussion I suppose.  I'd prefer to be honest about it I guess.  Like this:

Evers’ proposed red flag law for Wisconsin requires a hearing within 14 days of the preliminary order, and makes a final order valid for a year. It says guns should be seized if the judge finds "reasonable grounds that the respondent is substantially likely" to harm themselves or others. Requests can be made to either extend the final order or end it early.


Essentially this red flag law requires a Judge to be psychic to be effective.  How does this remotely help a situation like this one if the shooter has no priors and was a law abiding citizen before the incident?

 
Well for one, how would a Nebraska Red Flag law prevent a Milwaukee shooting?
Read my original post. I was illustrating a broader point considering red flag laws. To my knowledge WI doesn’t have them.  But I was hoping you could provide answers to my questions.  I like to get others thoughts on gun control issues.  But with specific reasoning, instead of vague “canned “ responses that say a politician would give. 
 

Why do I care about this so much?  Because something has to be done. Gun violence is already out of control and with inaction it’s only going to get worse.  Also, as a hunter and gun owner myself, I fail to see how the gun control proposals that are popular today (universal background checks, red flag laws, banning assault rifles and high capacity magazines, etc.) are in any way a bad idea.  So I would like to hear specifics on why people think they are so bad so we can debate it. 

 
How does this remotely help a situation like this one if the shooter has no priors and was a law abiding citizen before the incident?
To clarify again. I made the original comment about this case before any facts were known to ILLUSTRATE a broader point. Please stop focusing just on the validity of this case. 

 
To clarify again. I made the original comment about this case before any facts were known to ILLUSTRATE a broader point. Please stop focusing just on the validity of this case. 


But making generalizations before we even have all the details help nothing.  Everyone supporting red flag laws is making the same broad point: "Gun violence bad"

Read my original post. I was illustrating a broader point considering red flag laws. To my knowledge WI doesn’t have them.  But I was hoping you could provide answers to my questions.  I like to get others thoughts on gun control issues.  But with specific reasoning, instead of vague “canned “ responses that say a politician would give. 
 

Why do I care about this so much?  Because something has to be done. Gun violence is already out of control and with inaction it’s only going to get worse.  Also, as a hunter and gun owner myself, I fail to see how the gun control proposals that are popular today (universal background checks, red flag laws, banning assault rifles and high capacity magazines, etc.) are in any way a bad idea.  So I would like to hear specifics on why people think they are so bad so we can debate it. 


The devil is in the details.  And if this turns out as I expect, no red flag law would have changed this unfortunate outcome.  I could easily be wrong about this though.

Yes, of course it does.  But poorly worded preemptive gun seizing laws aren't my favorite approach to this issue.  And for the record I've argued this the other way as well.  You can find me forever online in video form saying "If I thought turning MY weapons in would prevent a shooting I would do it".

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Back
Top