Democrats resist concept of singling out gang members to target them with "red flag" laws

Discussion in 'Gun Control' started by kazenatsu, Sep 15, 2019.

  1. kazenatsu

    kazenatsu Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    May 15, 2017
    Messages:
    34,640
    Likes Received:
    11,208
    Trophy Points:
    113
    This proves that the whole push for "red flag" laws really has nothing to do with making us safer. Democrats would rather not take away their guns if it means singling out known gang members, which apparently would constitute "discrimination" against one of their underprivileged groups they have a warm spot in their heart for.

    When you step back and think about this a bit, this is almost unbelievable.


    House Democrats this week advanced a new measure to encourage states to pass "red flag" laws, known as extreme risk protection orders, that authorize removing guns and ammunition from dangerous individuals.

    Democrats on the House Judiciary Committee amended the measure during a Wednesday mark-up to authorize the federal government to issue extreme risk protection orders in some instances, but they rejected an amendment that would have red-flagged anyone who law enforcement lists as a gang member.

    "The majority of violent crime, including gun violence, in the United States is linked to gangs," Rep. Ken Buck, a Colorado Republican who sponsored the amendment, said Wednesday. “My amendment is quite simple. It would allow the issuance of a red flag order against anyone whose name appears in a gang database if there was probable cause to include that individual in the database."

    Like the no-fly lists, which have erroneously flagged many innocent individuals as terrorists (including the late Sen. Ted Kennedy), the gang databases are often inaccurate, Democrats said.

    Democrats kept objecting, arguing someone could be misidentified as gang members simply for writing "13" on a piece of paper and having it wrongly identified as an MS-13 gang sign.

    The amendment ultimately failed 11-21, but not before the top Republican on the panel, Rep. Doug Collins of Georgia, called out Democrats for their hypocrisy.

    "If we can't bring this list up, even with due process put in, then don't ever bring the 'No Fly, No Buy' list up again."
    "Don't ever bring it up again because there is no due process on that list."

    "Maybe you are just doodling because it is the 13th of June," Judiciary Committee Chairman Jerry Nadler of New York said. ...
    https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/...n-targeting-gang-databases-with-red-flag-laws


    It's all about touchy feely emotions and perceived enemies. Gangs are apparently not on their list of "perceived enemies". There is so much hypocrisy and inconsistency on display here.
     
    Last edited: Sep 15, 2019
    roorooroo likes this.
  2. Well Bonded

    Well Bonded Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2018
    Messages:
    9,049
    Likes Received:
    4,354
    Trophy Points:
    113
    The Democrats like the GCA's need mayhem, crime and death to promote their various causes.

    They fully understand a disarmed populace places a greater need for government intervention, intervention, they if in power, can dole out to those who support them and deny to those who don't.

    Their causes have nothing to do with lowering crimes or making the U.S. a safer place to live, the reality of it is exactly the opposite, they point to Australia gun laws as an example the U.S. should follow while ignoring the fact assaults in Australia, have risen 40% since the 90's when the various gun bans went into place and while knives are the first choice, almost a fourth of assaults are committed with a firearm.

    And that number may be much higher "Data on other categories of violent crime are arguably less reliable for a number of reasons. First, some crimes are not reported to police, and violent crimes are particularly affected by a general reluctance to report. Estimates from Australian Bureau of Statistics victimisation surveys (ABS 2006a, 2006b) have suggested that as many as two-thirds of such crimes are not reported."

    They Democrats and GCA's know in their hearts a disarmed populace is an at risk populace and a populace that needs to rely on others for their protection.

    What follows is excerpted from an article titled Murder by Gun Control by L. Neil Smith.

    Special to TLE


    Why is everybody being so damned polite?

    No sane individual living in the last days of the 20th century would knowingly welcome Nazis, the KGB, the Khmer Rouge, the ATF, or the FBI into their homes. We've learned too much from what happened to Jews in Germany, Kulaks in Russia, "landlords" in China, everybody in Cambodia, and victims of state terrorism at Ruby Ridge and Waco.

    But let the Jackbooted Thugs' Ladies' Auxiliary slap on makeup and broomstick skirts, let them prattle in squeaky little girl voices and breathe their vegetarian breath all over us, and for some reason we think we have to ask them in and offer them chamomile tea.

    Well, to hell with that. I used to give a lecture at the local university that began like this: "Until this morning you could plead ignorance for positions you take or fail to take on the moral and political issues of the day. When you leave this classroom an hour from now, having heard the facts I'm about to present, it'll either be as a brand new libertarian, or as a fully self-aware fascist monster."

    Today I say the same to politicians, bureaucrats, cops, Handgun Control, Inc., Colorado Governor Bill Owens, and those so miserably lacking in originality that they had to plagiarize Louis Farrakan (of all people) and launch a "Million Moms March". Also, anybody else who thinks it's morally acceptable to use the hired guns of government to take everybody else's guns away.

    Gun control may have felt like a nice, warm, fuzzy idea to its advocates back in the 1960s. However today, owing to a great deal of serious legal and historical scholarship -- and a series of horrifying but highly educational events -- anyone who wishes to violate the fundamental covenant on which this nation is based, by attempting to outlaw personal weapons, has to get past three extremely inconvenient but absolutely incontrovertible facts.

    (1) Every year, in this nation of more than a quarter billion individuals, a few thousand (three quarters of them suicides) are killed with firearms, while _millions_ of Americans successfully use personal weapons to save themselves and others from injury or death. Guns save many, many times more lives than they take.

    (2) In every jurisdiction that has made it even microscopically easier for individuals to carry weapons, violent crime rates have plummeted by double-digit percentages. Vermont, where no permission of any kind is required to carry a gun, is named in many respectable surveys as the safest state to live in.

    (3) More telling and urgent, every episode of genocidal mass murder in history has been preceded by a period of intense disarming of the civil population, usually with "public safety" or "national security" as an excuse.

    According to Amnesty International -- hardly a gang of right wing crazies -- in the 20th century alone (in events entirely separate from war), governments have slaughtered more than a hundred million people, usually their own citizens.

    https://ncc-1776.org/tle2000/libe68-20000331-07.html
     
    Last edited: Oct 3, 2019
  3. APACHERAT

    APACHERAT Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2013
    Messages:
    38,026
    Likes Received:
    16,042
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    In California Hispanic gangs are a protected class.
     
    kazenatsu likes this.
  4. Margot2

    Margot2 Banned

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2013
    Messages:
    73,644
    Likes Received:
    13,766
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Here's the REASON from your article.

    Like the no-fly lists, which have erroneously flagged many innocent individuals as terrorists (including the late Sen. Ted Kennedy), the gang databases are often inaccurate, Democrats said.
     
  5. Well Bonded

    Well Bonded Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2018
    Messages:
    9,049
    Likes Received:
    4,354
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Then clean up the database and don't let the gangbanging animals be armed.
     
    Margot2 likes this.
  6. kazenatsu

    kazenatsu Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    May 15, 2017
    Messages:
    34,640
    Likes Received:
    11,208
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Not wanting to risk selectively discriminating against minority groups in any way apparently ranks higher on their priority list than taking away guns from a greater number of people and keeping neighborhoods safe.

    Either that, or maybe this shows that keeping neighborhoods safe is not truly the real drive behind their push for gun control.
     
    Last edited: Oct 3, 2019
  7. Xenamnes

    Xenamnes Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2015
    Messages:
    23,895
    Likes Received:
    7,537
    Trophy Points:
    113
    The obvious question of "so what?" must be asked with regard to the above. What ultimate, meaningful difference does such actually make?

    If the affected individuals are neither criminals, nor truly present a risk of harm to themselves or others, they will eventually have the opportunity to correct their erroneous listing and affecting. They can eventually go before a court to argue their case and demonstrate, at their own cost and time, that their red flag listing was factually incorrect. They will be able to achieve due process at some point, so why does it matter if individuals who are suspected of gang association are included in databases for the purpose of having their constitutional rights severed in a preemptive approach?
     
  8. APACHERAT

    APACHERAT Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2013
    Messages:
    38,026
    Likes Received:
    16,042
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male

    In California the U.S. Constitution isn't protected.
     
  9. Well Bonded

    Well Bonded Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2018
    Messages:
    9,049
    Likes Received:
    4,354
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Is California still part of the U.S.?
     
  10. APACHERAT

    APACHERAT Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2013
    Messages:
    38,026
    Likes Received:
    16,042
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Only on some maps.

    The Democratic progressives in California own it all...
    Homelessness
    Medieval diseases (typhus, typhoid)
    Biblical diseases (loporsy)
    Balkanization and tribalism
    Gangs
    Corruption
    No common language
    Lack of affordable housing
    Voter fraud
    Crumbling infrastructure
    Extremely high taxes (gas, sales tax, state income tax, cow fart taxes)
    Poverty
    Sidewalks covered with human feces
    Crappy public schools
    Lack of U-Haul trucks and trailers to escape California
     
  11. Well Bonded

    Well Bonded Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2018
    Messages:
    9,049
    Likes Received:
    4,354
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Sounds like what South Florida is turning into, and guess who runs South Florida, the Democrats.
     
    APACHERAT likes this.

Share This Page