Jump to content

Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, DaveTN said:

If you have been arrested and are being held in jail; that’s fine, they can petition the court for the order and get it before you are released. But they aren’t going to leave you there with the guns if someone is complaining you are threatening them or you are threatening suicide. It’s just not going to happen.

Usually if its threats; this will be a non-issue anyway. Your guns are taken as evidence and you get them back, or you don’t, when the criminal case is settled. Suicide threats are generally where I have seen guns seized without someone going to jail. I’ve seen cases of the guns being taken and marked as “personal property” of the wife because she didn’t want them in the house at the time.

Do you have idea what would happen right now if your wife called the cops, said you threatened to shoot her, that you have a bunch of guns, she is in fear for her life and she doesn’t want you or the guns in the house?

If there is probable cause to arrest, then arrest and take the guns as evidence.  If somebody made threats to kill themselves, place them on a 72 hour hold, but they don't get to confiscate guns when doing that.

If you don't have PC for an arrest and there isn't enough evidence for a 72 hour hold, the cops are out of luck, the constitution protects one's right to property.  And that is how it should be.

I think if my wife (who would never do such a thing) called the police and made up a story about a threat...  They would show up and interview both of us...  if there was PC for an arrest I should be arrested, otherwise, I should be allowed to leave the house and take my property with me....  And under TN state law today, the police are required to not keep my firearms per 39-17-1351(t).  I can't stop them from breaking the law, but I have legal recourse should they break the law.

Police Officers don't need more authority than they have today, frankly we should be discussing limiting a number of police powers.  If they have PC for an arrest make an arrest...  Otherwise they should have to take it to a judge where you have a chance to cross examine witnesses and provide a defense before the government takes your property against you will, and violates your fundamental civil rights.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 78
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

What I see happening is a man making $15 a hour, going thru a divorce and his soon to be exwife wants to punish him so she throws the red flag. Where is he going to come up with the money to for a law

For a taste of the future Google SWATTING and read the latest that happened to the fortnite kid. It's clear all it takes nowadays is a "claim" to get authorities all hot bothered and knuckle deep

The death penalty is one of those things you have to get right every single time. If not, you are just another murderer and you will have some explaining to do if you have a hand in it. (I believe) It

4 hours ago, bersaguy said:

Now with all of that said, Red Flag laws would not have helped my ex because he didn't have any guns cause his favorite weapon was his fists to beat on women with.

It’s a shame your family had to go though that. The Domestic Violence laws of today are the Red Flag laws for a wife beater. The Domestic Violence laws of today might have helped her, but only if she wanted away from him. It’s tough to have to tell some of the people I dealt with “No, an order of protection will not stop him from beating or killing you; it only allows us to arrest him if he comes back.” Of course most of the time the cops will be able to arrest him anyway for what he’s going to do when he comes back.

I guess that’s why I have absolutely no tolerance for someone threatening someone with violence. I could see an oil painting of someone trying to have a conversation with me about their gun rights after they threatened to shoot a family member.

Are the laws abused? Sure. Anyone can accuse you of anything.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, DaveTN said:

It’s a shame your family had to go though that. The Domestic Violence laws of today are the Red Flag laws for a wife beater. The Domestic Violence laws of today might have helped her, but only if she wanted away from him. It’s tough to have to tell some of the people I dealt with “No, an order of protection will not stop him from beating or killing you; it only allows us to arrest him if he comes back.” Of course most of the time the cops will be able to arrest him anyway for what he’s going to do when he comes back.

I guess that’s why I have absolutely no tolerance for someone threatening someone with violence. I could see an oil painting of someone trying to have a conversation with me about their gun rights after they threatened to shoot a family member.

Are the laws abused? Sure. Anyone can accuse you of anything.

Thanks Dave and that seems like it was an eternity ago since that happened and my son Ronnie said he was going to talk to his mother about an Order of Protection and I told him not to because it would only make it worse. She is already getting beat on and refuses to call the police so he never mentioned it again. I have a feeling that is why many Murder / Suicides take place is from that piece of paper. When one of those get served it just make most guys 10 times as mad and it becomes a "If I can't have her mindset to a No one will her mindset!"and that is where many Murder/Suicides happen......JMHO 

When my wife of 18 years walked out on me I just said "BYE" cause I had a full book dealing with a son in a coma and another one at home and going to school.  I was very proud of him cause he had just turned 16 and got up every morning and went to school while I was at the hospital 24/7. One of the other kids in school would pick him up and after school they would come up to the hospital to see me and his brother and I would give him some money for supper all of the kids that came and he and his friends would stop and eat on the way home.

 When she finally decided to talk divorce she had to come to me and it messed with her mind that I was not mad because she was doing what she was doing after 18 years with me. I had my priorities and he decisions about her life was at the very bottom of the list. She couldn't afford a lawyer and I knew that so I said ok I will file all the papers and all you have to do is sign them and show up for court and she agreed. A lawyer buddy of mine drew up the papers and I just told him to write them how ever he wanted to and he did. My divorce cost me $15.00 filing fee + court costs and lawyer was a Freebee! That was when she learned what she had signed. She was giving up everything to be with her new guy and didn't even realize it till the Judge came down on her and it was to late then. Her guy did have the nerve to call me after the trial and threaten to beat the Hell out of me for not giving her anything and I ask him were he wanted to meet. Never heard from him again about that!! 

With that said I believe Orders of Protection get people killed and they should not exist!!..............JMHO 

Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, bersaguy said:

Thanks Dave and that seems like it was an eternity ago since that happened and my son Ronnie said he was going to talk to his mother about an Order of Protection and I told him not to because it would only make it worse. She is already getting beat on and refuses to call the police so he never mentioned it again. I have a feeling that is why many Murder / Suicides take place is from that piece of paper. When one of those get served it just make most guys 10 times as mad and it becomes a "If I can't have her mindset to a No one will her mindset!"and that is where many Murder/Suicides happen......JMHO 

When my wife of 18 years walked out on me I just said "BYE" cause I had a full book dealing with a son in a coma and another one at home and going to school.  I was very proud of him cause he had just turned 16 and got up every morning and went to school while I was at the hospital 24/7. One of the other kids in school would pick him up and after school they would come up to the hospital to see me and his brother and I would give him some money for supper all of the kids that came and he and his friends would stop and eat on the way home.

 When she finally decided to talk divorce she had to come to me and it messed with her mind that I was not mad because she was doing what she was doing after 18 years with me. I had my priorities and he decisions about her life was at the very bottom of the list. She couldn't afford a lawyer and I knew that so I said ok I will file all the papers and all you have to do is sign them and show up for court and she agreed. A lawyer buddy of mine drew up the papers and I just told him to write them how ever he wanted to and he did. My divorce cost me $15.00 filing fee + court costs and lawyer was a Freebee! That was when she learned what she had signed. She was giving up everything to be with her new guy and didn't even realize it till the Judge came down on her and it was to late then. Her guy did have the nerve to call me after the trial and threaten to beat the Hell out of me for not giving her anything and I ask him were he wanted to meet. Never heard from him again about that!! 

With that said I believe Orders of Protection get people killed and they should not exist!!..............JMHO 

Unfortunately Doug they have to exist. Most wife beaters are cowards, that’s why they are wife beaters. And most cowards are afraid of going to jail because they know there is a good chance they will get their azz beat there for what they did. So Protection Orders work a lot of the time. Do they work all the time? No, absolutely not. Are they abused to get someone out of a house? Yes, just like the Red Flag laws will be.

I mean lets face it, Texas is a race with Florida to see which state can murder the most people the fastest. Yet the El Paso shooter committed his murders in Texas. He isn’t afraid of dying, he had to know if he wasn’t killed in the attack he would be executed. No law will stop someone that has no fear. They don’t fear the law and they obviously don’t fear God.

Divorce is very emotional. People die and are killed it divorce disputes and family matters everyday.

But cops can’t turn their backs on people in need. The United States Constitution doesn’t require them to, and it’s silly that some think it does. Keep in mind I’m speaking about cops as a group. I’m sure someone can find an internet story somewhere or tell their story of something a cop did they thought was wrong.

So while I agree with you a lot of people will die when they file for an order of protection; I disagree it was the cause. The animal committing the murder is the cause.

As I have said before, when the Police show up at someone’s house; it’s generally because the adults in the house are no longer capable of handling their own families business. So their business is no longer private; it is in the hands of the local Police. Those Police are armed with the tools they need to end the problem. The laws; including the Domestic Violence laws and any Red Flag laws are tools in their toolbox to deal with adults that can no longer handle either their personal or family obligations. For someone to suggest those tools are a violation of someone’s rights; is ridiculous. However, that issue will be addressed by the courts; not debated by the responding Officers.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, DaveTN said:

You really don’t understand the problem, or you simply don’t agree with what is going to happen?

Both I suppose. If a person is deemed not worthy of having a firearm as the second amendment explicitly calls for, I don't feel that person is worthy of being in public. Why would we turn a guy loose if we thought he'd probably just go back home and beat or kill his wife?

I'm not arguing with law enforcement here. They simply have a job to do. I do believe our justice system is due a major overhaul.

The guy who the are executing tonight. He committed those murders in 1986 if I'm not mistaken. He should have assumed room temperature in about a week. I see the court system as it stands today to be little more than a revenue generating device.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/13/2019 at 11:07 AM, DaveTN said:

When LE has identified someone as a credible threat for violence to themselves or others, do you think the cops should have to wait until they start shooting to take their guns?

 

Doesn't current law cover this already?

Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, gregintenn said:

Both I suppose. If a person is deemed not worthy of having a firearm as the second amendment explicitly calls for, I don't feel that person is worthy of being in public. Why would we turn a guy loose if we thought he'd probably just go back home and beat or kill his wife?

I'm not arguing with law enforcement here. They simply have a job to do. I do believe our justice system is due a major overhaul.

The guy who the are executing tonight. He committed those murders in 1986 if I'm not mistaken. He should have assumed room temperature in about a week. I see the court system as it stands today to be little more than a revenue generating device.

Innocent until proven guilty. As I have said before, I have to smile when I see that because anyone that has ever been cuffed and stuffed, and held in county jail because they can’t make bond or are deemed a threat knows; that’s a joke, it’s a feel good phrase to make us think our legal system works.

 If you…Greg, have threatened to kill your wife, and I, Dave…as a Police Officer believe her; I am taking you to jail. My responsibility to her is to try to help her stay alive in any way I can. If she tells me that you have a bunch of guns and she is afraid you will kill her when you get out; I will seize every gun you have; not under Red Flag laws, but as evidence for a criminal case. If you have 200 guns and I need a truck to load them into; so be it. A truck or Police Van will come and they will be hauled off. You will get them back when a Judge in your criminal case says you can have them back, or unless the DA drops your case and gives them back. (Good luck with that, any plea bargain to drop your case will not include you getting guns back.) I will do that, not to be an azz to you, but because I am the person standing in front of your wife while she begs for someone to help keep her alive. I’m not violating your rights and am not concerned about them at that point. If you think something I did was a violation of your rights; hire an attorney and start firing off law suits. I couldn’t care less, not because I don’t care about your rights, but because you aren’t thinking rationally if you think a cop taking guns from someone that just threatened to kill someone is a rights violation.

In your question about turning the guy loose “We” would be the Police and you would go nuts if that were the case. Judges don’t see violent offenders the way the cops see them. So they tend to turn them loose. Especially if they have the right attorney standing beside them at the hearing.

Of course our justice system needs overhauling. But we also need more prisons and longer sentences. This non-sense that the public is being fed by nut cases like Cory Booker and Kim Fox that non-violent minorities are being imprisoned at rates that are too high is a lie. Violent criminals aren’t being imprisoned enough; especially if they are minorities in Chicago. Of course anyone that knows what’s going on there and speaks up is simply labeled a racist.

Link to post
Share on other sites
49 minutes ago, gregintenn said:

The guy who the are executing tonight. He committed those murders in 1986 if I'm not mistaken. He should have assumed room temperature in about a week. I see the court system as it stands today to be little more than a revenue generating device.

I used to feel the same way...until DNA starting proving people on death row innocent and more reports of prosecutorial misconduct became prevalent.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, beebee233 said:

Doesn't current law cover this already?

In this state I don't know. And no one "in the know" has answered that yet. I suspect, yes, they can take your guns. I also suspect there is not documented due process addressing getting them back. But that's just a WAG.

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, E4 No More said:

I used to feel the same way...until DNA starting proving people on death row innocent and more reports of prosecutorial misconduct became prevalent.

Same here. When the Governor of Illinois was faced with 13 death row inmates that had been proven they were innocent; he had a choice to make.

I also don’t believe in it for religious reasons, the crazy defense costs involved, and the fact that I believe a murderer should have to suffer. If I knew I was going to spend the rest of my life in prison, I would rather be executed; it’s the easy way out.

Link to post
Share on other sites
56 minutes ago, E4 No More said:

I used to feel the same way...until DNA starting proving people on death row innocent and more reports of prosecutorial misconduct became prevalent.

This is already happening. There are innocent people on death row as I type this. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

 

DNA has changed the way a lot of cases are handled these days. Now they can also prove at the scene of a crime if the bad guy left DNA behind there is no defense for the bad guy cause they have his DNA proving he is guilty so DNA can prove innocence but it can also prove guilt.........JMHO The only down side to DNA testing is the backlog of tests that have not be done to prove guilt or innocense is years behind!!!

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, bersaguy said:

The only down side to DNA testing is the backlog of tests that have not be done to prove guilt or innocense is years behind!!!

Once again...it depends on who you are, and who your attorneys are.

Link to post
Share on other sites

There is a series on Netflix I find fascinating, called “Making a Murderer”, that will cause anyone to re evaluate their stance on the death penalty. In the case, however, where there is no doubt, put the offender down.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I was still living in Illinois as a kid when Richard Speck slaughterd 6 student nurses and the one that hid under a bed saw him clearly testified in his trial and he was found guilty of the 8 murders in 1966 and sentenced to death. He died of a heart attack in 1991 after his sentence was commuted to life in prison without the chance of parole by the Illinois Governor. If anyone ever deserved to be executed it was him. When he was asked why he did it his reply was "It just wasn't their night" 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I find it repulsive that any government thinks it’s okay for them to kill someone that is locked in a cell, and is a danger to no one while in that cell, but they want to require you, I, and Police Officers to wait to shoot someone that has a gun in their hand and is and immediate threat. I personally would like to see it returned to the way it used to be where you could kill a forcible felon or a fleeing forcible felon if they refuse to stop.

Heck…I’ll even take that one step farther. I would like to see it where once it is proven you had intent to commit a forcible felony; your Constitutional Rights are gone. Of course that would never cut it with the SCOTUS, them being the interpreters of the Constitution and all. :)

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, DaveTN said:

I find it repulsive that any government thinks it’s okay for them to kill someone that is locked in a cell, and is a danger to no one while in that cell, but they want to require you, I, and Police Officers to wait to shoot someone that has a gun in their hand and is and immediate threat. I personally would like to see it returned to the way it used to be where you could kill a forcible felon or a fleeing forcible felon if they refuse to stop.

Heck…I’ll even take that one step farther. I would like to see it where once it is proven you had intent to commit a forcible felony; your Constitutional Rights are gone. Of course that would never cut it with the SCOTUS, them being the interpreters of the Constitution and all. :)

The only reason I could see why people want to put someone to death is politics. Governors and the President do have the power to release people from Prison with Pardons before leaving office. That almost happened back years ago here in Tennessee and there was some really bad guys on a list that the Governor was set to pardon when he was leaving office but it got stopped 3 days before he left office and the Governor elect Lamar Alexander was sworn in and the former Governor Ray Blanton was arrested along with several other people that were involved in a  Pardons and Parole scandal where prisoners had bought and paid for them to be released. That could be a scary situation. I don't think you were living here back then Dave. I can specially remember two names on the list were serving life sentences for the murder for hire of a doctors wife in Chattanooga and the doctor got scared of the 2 guys and turned them in and admitted he paid them to kill his wife and they let the doctor go for admitting what he did but they got 2 cold blooded murderers that were being hunted for years for several other murders. That is why I think some people are still in favor of the death penalty but I could be wrong!! 

 https://www.tennessean.com/story/news/politics/2019/01/17/lamar-alexander-ray-blanton-tennessee-governor-fbi-clemency/2575822002/

Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, bersaguy said:

The only reason I could see why people want to put someone to death is politics. Governors and the President do have the power to release people from Prison with Pardons before leaving office. That almost happened back years ago here in Tennessee and there was some really bad guys on a list that the Governor was set to pardon when he was leaving office but it got stopped 3 days before he left office and the Governor elect Lamar Alexander was sworn in and the former Governor Ray Blanton was arrested along with several other people that were involved in a  Pardons and Parole scandal where prisoners had bought and paid for them to be released. That could be a scary situation. I don't think you were living here back then Dave. I can specially remember two names on the list were serving life sentences for the murder for hire of a doctors wife in Chattanooga and the doctor got scared of the 2 guys and turned them in and admitted he paid them to kill his wife and they let the doctor go for admitting what he did but they got 2 cold blooded murderers that were being hunted for years for several other murders. That is why I think some people are still in favor of the death penalty but I could be wrong!! 

 https://www.tennessean.com/story/news/politics/2019/01/17/lamar-alexander-ray-blanton-tennessee-governor-fbi-clemency/2575822002/

Google the Christian-Newsome murders in Knoxville from 2007.  You might get an idea of why some deserve death as a penalty.  The family of those two kids just finished the latest trial of an entire series of trials that has been going on for 12 years.

Edited by Garufa
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, DaveTN said:

In this state I don't know. And no one "in the know" has answered that yet. I suspect, yes, they can take your guns. I also suspect there is not documented due process addressing getting them back. But that's just a WAG.

You said:

When LE has identified someone as a credible threat for violence to themselves or others, do you think the cops should have to wait until they start shooting to take their guns?

What I mean by my statement is that, under your stated scenario above, LE has identified a credible threat for violence to themselves or another, at that point, LE has the authority and responsibility to eliminate the threat.

I'm assuming your scenario involves the person brandishing a gun. Otherwise, why would LE take it/them?

My solution for neutralizing the threat would be to take the person into custody, not take his guns and let him go free. What if he kills his wife with a knife 5 minutes after LE leaves?

What you are saying is illogical to me.

Why is LE taking the person's guns so important?

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, beebee233 said:

You said:

When LE has identified someone as a credible threat for violence to themselves or others, do you think the cops should have to wait until they start shooting to take their guns?

What I mean by my statement is that, under your stated scenario above, LE has identified a credible threat for violence to themselves or another, at that point, LE has the authority and responsibility to eliminate the threat.

I'm assuming your scenario involves the person brandishing a gun. Otherwise, why would LE take it/them?

My solution for neutralizing the threat would be to take the person into custody, not take his guns and let him go free. What if he kills his wife with a knife 5 minutes after LE leaves?

What you are saying is illogical to me.

Why is LE taking the person's guns so important?

That sounds illogical to me also. I’m not suggesting taking anyone’s guns and setting them free.   

Taking guns wouldn’t be important to me. Saving someone’s life who has asked me for help would be.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Garufa said:

Google the Christian-Newsome murders in Knoxville from 2007.  You might get an idea of why some deserve death as a penalty.  The family of those two kids just finished the latest trial of an entire series of trials that has been going on for 12 years.

There are some cases that challenge my opposition to the death penalty. This is one of them. Those monsters deserve to be put down like the rabid animals they are, no doubt. The problem is all of the other times the government gets it all wrong. There are way too many cases of innocent people getting cleared from death row (and at least one fairly recent one I can think of off the top of my head Linky ) where an innocent man was likely put to death. Sometimes justice isn’t best served by giving a person what they deserve. 

Edited by Chucktshoes
Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Chucktshoes said:

There are some cases that challenge my opposition to the death penalty. This is one of them. Those monsters deserve to be put down like the rabid animals they are, no doubt. The problem is all of the other times the government gets it all wrong. There are way too many cases of innocent people getting cleared from death row (and at least one fairly recent one I can think of off the top of my head Linky ) where an innocent man was likely put to death. Sometimes justice isn’t best served by giving a person what they deserve. 

The death penalty is one of those things you have to get right every single time. If not, you are just another murderer and you will have some explaining to do if you have a hand in it. (I believe) It’s one of those things where you don’t get to say “I was just following orders” (orders, being the law).

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, DaveTN said:

That sounds illogical to me also. I’m not suggesting taking anyone’s guns and setting them free.   

Taking guns wouldn’t be important to me. Saving someone’s life who has asked me for help would be.

If taking guns is not important, what do you want red flag laws for?

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to the following.
Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Guidelines