DThrash, how did your local news report it? Do you have a link? LE is a profession with a risk factor I couldn't deal with. I'm thankful for folks like your brother! May he be protected and blessed each day.
Sorry Media
- Thread starter DThrash
- Start date
Umm guys, how are we feeling about the President's proposal of red flag laws? To me, these are the worst of gun control laws, enabling liberals to take your firearms for virtually any reason, without supporting evidence.
I am a firm constitutionalist when it comes to firearms. Better to have a few mentally deranged individuals armed than to disarm the greater citizenry, in my humble opinion. I am upset Trump appears to be taking a pacifying approach here.
I am a firm constitutionalist when it comes to firearms. Better to have a few mentally deranged individuals armed than to disarm the greater citizenry, in my humble opinion. I am upset Trump appears to be taking a pacifying approach here.
jmf78
Member
Equipment
BX23S W/ Factory Deluxe Cab, 60" MMM, 60" BX-2612 Snow Blade & BX-2816 Blower
I'm an absolutist when it comes to the Bill Of Rights. They state what the federal government cannot do in terms of limiting liberty. The states and local governments have the 10th to allow their constituents to limit their own liberty and, also makes it easier to fight against such acts or leave these states and local governments if so desired.
Red flag laws have already proven themselves to be destructive.
Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk
Red flag laws have already proven themselves to be destructive.
Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk
If we were working with "honest" people there would be solutions, but alas we are dealing with degenerates that will do and say anything today and renege tomorrow. The old "Camel nose in the tent" parable. If it was up to me I would say okay limit certain firearms and magazine capacity, but be able to carry handguns anywhere you want if you are a law abiding citizen. The other thing I always say is to solve the problems in Chicago then talk to me about my guns. Of course this will never happen because the big city issues are too hard to tackle, easier to control law abiding citizens than to confront law breakers.
We (citizens) are embarking on the slippery slope toward mandatory confiscation of firearms owned by citizens whether they are law abiding or not and then end game is socialism and autocratic rule. Along the way, the Second Amendment will be trashed as well.
Guess I need to have a boating accident and all my firearms go to the bottom of the lake...
One advantage I have is I'm old so I won't be here to see the results of this folly.
I support Trump because the alternatives are scary but I don't support Red Flag laws and I'm totally against them. Fix the opiod problem first.... if you can.
I respectfully disagree. The AR-platform rifles are the biggest targets because people think they look scary, but in terms of gun violence actually kill far less than handguns. So if you really thought you could solve or improve gun violence through regulations, you'd start with the handguns and not the AR's. This argument proves politicians play off people's fears rather than any rational sense of judgement.
I'm not in favor of limiting any type of firearm, since the Constitution does not. I don't feel an individual needs to justify why they choose one particular type or style over another.
North Idaho Wolfman
Moderator
Staff member
Lifetime Member
Equipment
L3450DT-GST, Woods FEL, B7100 HSD, FEL, 60" SB, 743 Bobcat with V2203, and more
CaveCreekRay
Well-known member
Lifetime Member
Equipment
L3800 HST, KingKutter box scraper, KingKutter 66" rake, County Pride Subsoiler
Red Flag laws?
My wife's friend and her hubby were driving to Idaho for a couple weeks of vacation, towing their boat up. The husband noticed he had not gotten the new "Gold Star" license that is used for air travel and a bunch of other stuff so, he runs down to DMV the week before they leave.
They DMV lady pulls up his file and then, she asks for his license. She puts the license in her drawer and informs him that his license has been revoked. When he asks why, she says its because of an prior alcohol related offense.
Twenty five years prior, while in college, he had been stopped with an open container in the car.
The gentleman asks the DMV attendant to pull out the license and look at the last renewal date: 2015. He asks, how could it be possible that he not only GOT a license from DMV years prior, but RENEWED it in 2015 with no problems? The DMV specialist said she had no idea but that he had to meet state requirements before he could re-apply for a new license. Once your license is revoked, it's toast. What might those requirements be he inquired...
First, he had to get a shrink to certify him not an alcoholic and a danger to others. When he met with the psychologist, she could not believe they were hammering him for a simple screw up 25 years earlier. She signed him off.
THEN, the state required him to go get a breathalyzer installed in his car ($600!) before DMV would accept his application. That device was required to be active for one year from the date his license was issued. If he were found driving any vehicle without that device, he would be a felon. The device goes off randomly and the driver must blow and pass or the engine stops. It is GPS equipped and it takes a photo of him every time he blows into it.
A friend of his is an attorney who is helping him pro bono but they have discovered THERE IS NO APPEAL PROCESS for this automatic decision by DMV. Every time he calls DMV, he gets another answer. Someone somewhere came across this data from 25 years ago and BOOM. He is guilty, despite there being ZERO incidents on record in the intervening 25 years. The attorney is telling him, they best they can do is get the court to only require the breathalyzer be installed for six months.
Arizona has seen dozens of wrong-way drunk drivers. Many people have been killed or injured. In a response to public outcry, the state started harsh penalties for any alcohol related offenses. Problem is, when they started hooking up other databases to the AZ DMV system, nobody thought it through. This poor guy has been driving for God knows how long on a revoked license, which is a big deal. Did anyone from DMV drop him a note or give him a call? NO! And, when they got strict on drunk driving offenses, nobody envisioned a stupid teenage incident from 25 years ago in another state would follow him and get his license revoked. Nor did they figure out what to do to poor guys like him when the system SCREWS UP. An appeals process MUST be included in any new legislation.
Driving is a privilege. Gun ownership is a right. If somebody doesn't like your orange tractor hat because it looks red, does that give the state the right to remove your weapons for cause in the name of "public safety?"
It's only a matter of time before a few people are wrongly accused in Red Law states. Those people will file class action lawsuits and challenge these laws. Perhaps some states will see this problem in advance and seek far wiser options.
There was a ray of sunshine: His wife is quite at home pulling his boat now after nearly 4000 miles.
My wife's friend and her hubby were driving to Idaho for a couple weeks of vacation, towing their boat up. The husband noticed he had not gotten the new "Gold Star" license that is used for air travel and a bunch of other stuff so, he runs down to DMV the week before they leave.
They DMV lady pulls up his file and then, she asks for his license. She puts the license in her drawer and informs him that his license has been revoked. When he asks why, she says its because of an prior alcohol related offense.
Twenty five years prior, while in college, he had been stopped with an open container in the car.
The gentleman asks the DMV attendant to pull out the license and look at the last renewal date: 2015. He asks, how could it be possible that he not only GOT a license from DMV years prior, but RENEWED it in 2015 with no problems? The DMV specialist said she had no idea but that he had to meet state requirements before he could re-apply for a new license. Once your license is revoked, it's toast. What might those requirements be he inquired...
First, he had to get a shrink to certify him not an alcoholic and a danger to others. When he met with the psychologist, she could not believe they were hammering him for a simple screw up 25 years earlier. She signed him off.
THEN, the state required him to go get a breathalyzer installed in his car ($600!) before DMV would accept his application. That device was required to be active for one year from the date his license was issued. If he were found driving any vehicle without that device, he would be a felon. The device goes off randomly and the driver must blow and pass or the engine stops. It is GPS equipped and it takes a photo of him every time he blows into it.
A friend of his is an attorney who is helping him pro bono but they have discovered THERE IS NO APPEAL PROCESS for this automatic decision by DMV. Every time he calls DMV, he gets another answer. Someone somewhere came across this data from 25 years ago and BOOM. He is guilty, despite there being ZERO incidents on record in the intervening 25 years. The attorney is telling him, they best they can do is get the court to only require the breathalyzer be installed for six months.
Arizona has seen dozens of wrong-way drunk drivers. Many people have been killed or injured. In a response to public outcry, the state started harsh penalties for any alcohol related offenses. Problem is, when they started hooking up other databases to the AZ DMV system, nobody thought it through. This poor guy has been driving for God knows how long on a revoked license, which is a big deal. Did anyone from DMV drop him a note or give him a call? NO! And, when they got strict on drunk driving offenses, nobody envisioned a stupid teenage incident from 25 years ago in another state would follow him and get his license revoked. Nor did they figure out what to do to poor guys like him when the system SCREWS UP. An appeals process MUST be included in any new legislation.
Driving is a privilege. Gun ownership is a right. If somebody doesn't like your orange tractor hat because it looks red, does that give the state the right to remove your weapons for cause in the name of "public safety?"
It's only a matter of time before a few people are wrongly accused in Red Law states. Those people will file class action lawsuits and challenge these laws. Perhaps some states will see this problem in advance and seek far wiser options.
There was a ray of sunshine: His wife is quite at home pulling his boat now after nearly 4000 miles.
Last edited:
I completely agree, especially about the Red Flag Laws. I'll still vote for POTUS but I'll still be watching closely.
Here's a video to watch that will stir some feelings.
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1fjLIBoN8VeydMlxSUxhemic3R5KEsfd5/view
Poohbear
Active member
Equipment
L3301 HST, LA525, LP shredder, BB1566 box blade, QH10, Worksaver pallet fork
Without the 2nd Amendment, there will be no rights except what the guvment lets you have and they will be few if any.what did Orwell write, " some pigs are more equal than others ".
Our young have /are being manipulated into weakness. Today a motorcycle backfired in NYC and the mass panic was on. The snowball to the end of our great nation has picked up a lot of momentum lately. The media keeps scareing the thoughtless by saying all the problems are " gun violence " and not mentally deranged violence
Rule #3 from Rules for Radicals Saul Alinsky
3. "Whenever possible, go outside the expertise of the enemy. Look for ways to increase insecurity, anxiety and uncertainty. (This happens all the time. Watch how many organizations under attack are blind-sided by seemingly irrelevant arguments that they are then forced to address.)
This is all over the school systems and news media, fear mongering is a powerful tool
3. "Whenever possible, go outside the expertise of the enemy. Look for ways to increase insecurity, anxiety and uncertainty. (This happens all the time. Watch how many organizations under attack are blind-sided by seemingly irrelevant arguments that they are then forced to address.)
This is all over the school systems and news media, fear mongering is a powerful tool
The media, once a tool for good, has become a tool for evil.
Way back in the day before my time, families used to gather around the radio and listen to the news and perhaps a radio program. Eventually, the television came along and now we could get news along with much more entertainment. However...there were rules. You couldn't just say anything on air, or show anything. Broadcasting watchdogs quickly pointed out 'yellow journalism' and 'sensationalism.' For the most part, the media kept it's dignity and the news we watched was factual and unbiased.
The advent of the Internet changed everything. Suddenly, there were no rules - and news outlets quickly formed a large online presence. As time went on and people became less shocked by things, mainly because of their widespread availability online, news became more divisive. Now we are at the point where there is basically no unbiased news. There is always an agenda. Which "team" do you root for...Fox or CNN? News companies shouldn't be like a team where you love one and hare the opponents. They should be basically equals, and you watch which ever channel has better looking anchors...but the info is basically the same.
Yet we are trained to watch and read, and so we do. And by this, the media essentially controls the way we think.
Way back in the day before my time, families used to gather around the radio and listen to the news and perhaps a radio program. Eventually, the television came along and now we could get news along with much more entertainment. However...there were rules. You couldn't just say anything on air, or show anything. Broadcasting watchdogs quickly pointed out 'yellow journalism' and 'sensationalism.' For the most part, the media kept it's dignity and the news we watched was factual and unbiased.
The advent of the Internet changed everything. Suddenly, there were no rules - and news outlets quickly formed a large online presence. As time went on and people became less shocked by things, mainly because of their widespread availability online, news became more divisive. Now we are at the point where there is basically no unbiased news. There is always an agenda. Which "team" do you root for...Fox or CNN? News companies shouldn't be like a team where you love one and hare the opponents. They should be basically equals, and you watch which ever channel has better looking anchors...but the info is basically the same.
Yet we are trained to watch and read, and so we do. And by this, the media essentially controls the way we think.
Living in the country, and not willing to pay to watch TV, I usually watch the channel that has the best reception.
Living in the country, and not willing to pay to watch TV, I usually watch the channel that has the best reception.
Not many people do pay for TV anymore.
If you have an internet connection
That’s all you need.
We have so many free channels it’s overwhelming.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
We get about 40 channels usually. Some times the signal is weak from some of the distant channels. We do pay for Net-fliks, like $14 a month for the movies my wife watches. (I watch the tow truck videos rescuing big rigs in Canada).
Of course some of those channels are redundant.
Of course some of those channels are redundant.
CaveCreekRay
Well-known member
Lifetime Member
Equipment
L3800 HST, KingKutter box scraper, KingKutter 66" rake, County Pride Subsoiler
After 20 years, we ditched DISH because I was tired of paying for CNN and ESPN.
We stream on HULU and have plenty to watch for something like $35 a month, vs the old $159 a mo. Add to that the Amazon Prime offerings for free, with a few $3.99 movies, and I have everything I want, including the Science Channel (favorite). I am asleep by 6 PM anyway so my wife takes over and finds whatever she wants.
Never goin' back.
We stream on HULU and have plenty to watch for something like $35 a month, vs the old $159 a mo. Add to that the Amazon Prime offerings for free, with a few $3.99 movies, and I have everything I want, including the Science Channel (favorite). I am asleep by 6 PM anyway so my wife takes over and finds whatever she wants.
Never goin' back.
Daren Todd
Well-known member
Lifetime Member
Equipment
Massey Ferguson 1825E, Kubota Z121S, Box blade, Rotary Cutter
I do over the air for local news, Netflix, and prime. I got fed up with the "Creative" billing from the satellite and phone companies. That's also why my wife and I use pay as you go plans with unlimited talk, text, and data for our phones. We are saving over $300 per month.After 20 years, we ditched DISH because I was tired of paying for CNN and ESPN.
We stream on HULU and have plenty to watch for something like $35 a month, vs the old $159 a mo. Add to that the Amazon Prime offerings for free, with a few $3.99 movies, and I have everything I want, including the Science Channel (favorite). I am asleep by 6 PM anyway so my wife takes over and finds whatever she wants.
Never goin' back.
Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk