Top 10 Reasons “Red Flag” Laws Are Bad for America

If you’re not familiar with “red flag” laws, then you had best get there quickly. This new attack on the Second Amendment is actually WAY WORSE than any previous one, and constitutes what may be the most cunning attack on the CORE values of America EVER. The more I have learned about these laws, and analyzed them beyond that, the more alarmed I have become.

Or try this:

ℕ𝔼𝕆ℕ ℝ𝔼𝕍𝕆𝕃𝕋Verified Account@NeonRevolt

This is the future @mitchellvii wants.

Blair CottrellVerified Account@RealBlairCottrell

FYI in Australia we have no right to firearms, need licenses, gun safes bolted to the floor and wall, ammo stored in seperate compartments, regular check-ups by state agencies etc and “red flag laws” have always been a thing here.

A colleague of mine had his firearms confiscated by the state after attending a rally against immigration policy. He took the state to court and after several months won his case and was able to recover his firearms, only to have the state then cancel his firearms license on a separate technicality, related to his “unsuitable character”.

Another colleague who was a regular attendee at political rallies has had his property raided by police at least three times in the past eighteen months, police claim to be “searching for illegal firearms”. They never find any and have no reason to believe they will, officers carrying out the raids have verbally apologised to him after each search, informing him that they’re just following orders.

Another man I know was gun pointed inside his own home by police after getting involved in a brief fist-fight with Antifa, after trying to attend the Milo event in Melbourne’s North. His wife and children watched their father cuffed at gun point inside his own house, before being taken to the police station to be questioned, then charged with “affray” –But the charge was later dropped.

This is what “red-flag laws” will get you in America. Regardless of the noble excuses the state and its pawns will make, this is how these laws are actually used in practice.

And then it got WORSE.

At first, I was only gathering and looking at OTHER PEOPLE’S concerns. But then I started thinking about things on my own. I started putting FACTS together. I started asking what the EFFECTS of red flag laws – already known in Australia – would be on America.

I suddenly realized what is going on.

El Paso and Dayton are not merely about this election. They are about REVERSING THE TRUMP PHENOMENON for good. They are about UNDOING the “Q” movement. They are about restoring the FAKE NEWS. They are about SAVING GLOBALISM and DESTROYING AMERICANISM. And AMERICA.

And yet, it almost seems like we’re sleepwalking right into these damn things.

So here you go. THIS is what these SICK laws are actually all about.

10. Red flag laws make SPEECH a RISK.

This was a profound realization – that RED FLAG LAWS CHILL FREE SPEECH FOR GUN OWNERS. Almost all of whom support TRUMP, by the way. Real “coincidence” there.

Gun owners CANNOT afford to “take chances” and “say the wrong thing”.

Think about what I just said. Think how ORWELLIAN that is.

What this means, then, is that Red Flag laws are in fact a profound attack on the FIRST Amendment, disguised as an attack on the SECOND Amendment.

They create an ARTIFICIAL CONTRADICTION between the FIRST and SECOND Amendments.

They conflate speech and violence on LEFTIST IDEOLOGICAL TERMS – using leftist minds as judges – just like Vysotsky’s Soviet ANTIFA does. Just like ANTIFA was DESIGNED to do.

ANTIFA, filled with boys who call themselves girls, and girls who call themselves boys, who says speech is violence, and violence is speech.

This is sneaky as hell. Frankly, I cannot imagine that even a cunning POS like Cryin’ Chuck, or a shifty old witch like CHI-FI, could think this stuff up.

Let me put it this way. If it wan’t CHINA that came up with red flag, it was probably ALIENS.

Pencil-necks. You know what I’m saying. THESE GUYS.


9. Red flag laws turn neighbor against neighbor.

Again, this is incredibly insidious. Of course, COMMUNISTS and NAZIS love to DIVIDE people, but Americans? HOLY MOLY. I want to get along with my liberal neighbors. All this is going to do is generate suspicions and recriminations.

Yes, the COMMUNISTS who have taken over the Democrat party probably want MORE DIVISION, but that is the OPPOSITE of what Trump wants.

So why should we do it? As TRUMP supporters, we don’t WANT more division and suspicion.

8. Anonymous reporting makes political abuse a certainty.

Being able to CONFRONT ONE’S ACCUSER is a CORNERSTONE of our Constitutional rights. This is the SIXTH Amendment. This is the heart of DUE PROCESS.

In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence.

Sixth Amendment

This ability to confront accusers, before FINAL ACTION is taken, serves to LIMIT the power of anonymous accusations or suspicions. People cannot “get what they want” by an accusation without DEFENDING IT FIRST in a courtroom.

At least, that was the way it was SUPPOSED to work.

SIDEBAR: Note that there is an opposite problem, when the media and FBI only work for one party, in that anonymous PUBLIC accusations are the only recourse – WHISTLE-BLOWING, basically.

Yes, we have something called “anonymous tips”. But in that case, police are required to investigate and THEN decide based upon their OWN investigation if there is REASONABLE CAUSE to take action. With “red flag” laws, police are compelled to act BEFORE there is even proof of a crime. Unproven accusations are usable to CONFISCATE ARMS – the FINAL ACTION of the process. THIS IS BACKWARDS LOGIC.


Once again, Communists are up to their FAVORITE TRICK – the politicization of processes. Just like the Communists now running the Democrat Party politicized the DOJ and FBI, now they want to politicize local policing. They did this with their “Promise Program” that destroyed due process in Parkland, and now they want to “go big” with destruction of due process, by taking the concept nationally, using “red flag”.

There is excellent reason to believe that POLITICAL OPERATIVES will use red flag laws to harass their enemies – meaning US. We have already seen incidents of this – the SWATTING of innocent people – in states and nations that have these laws. Australia is particularly bad.

I actually have personal experience with this. I had forgotten all about it, until today.

During the 2016 Trump campaign, I was falsely accused of illegal gun carry in a felony zone by anonymous Trump opponents. This was something of a mild “swatting”, and I was very fortunate, because the police didn’t believe the complaint (which I then proved was a lie). Since then, there have been TWO entrapment attempts on me, quite possibly orchestrated by federal agents of some kind.

Political harassment using law enforcement is REAL and very dangerous.

Wolf Moon

SO – do I personally believe that “red flag” laws will be abused? ABSOLUTELY. And I predict with CERTAINTY that they will be abused against ME, if passed in my state, or nationally.

I repeat – 100% certain that they will be used against me, because of this blog.

7. Solving rifle murders before illegal alien murders is illogical.

Just look at this graph.

This shows the power of the FAKE NEWS to distort the world in favor of DEMOCRAT GOALS.

The YUGE bar on the left is murders by illegal aliens.

The thin sliver on the right is murders by rifles. ALL of them.

Red flag laws will only solve a FRACTION of the deaths by rifles, on the right.

But now let’s consider theoretical “green flag” laws, which would treat illegal aliens like gun owners. We would deport the illegal aliens, based on anonymous tips, without THEIR due process rights. They would then be vetted like gun owners, and – if “safe”, they would be let back into the United States. Even as illegals, but safe ones, we would let them back in. ALL the safe ones. Who knows – maybe MOST of them would come back in. But no matter how many, let’s presume that we only let the safe ones back in. The murderers DON’T get back in.

This theoretically solves ALL of the murders on the left.


So why aren’t we pursuing GREEN FLAG LAWS FIRST?

Maybe because Democrat Communists don’t WANT us to solve the bigger problem. Maybe because THEIR biggest problem is actually TRUMP VOTERS – and not murders using rifles OR murders by illegals.

6. Red flag laws deprive us of the rights we are due upon arrest.

This is subtle, but it is YUGE. I mean it – this is a BIGGIE.

This is why, if there is ever a national “red flag” law, I believe that it MUST have a “voluntary arrest option“, that GIVES ME MY FULL CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS *BEFORE* TAKING MY GUNS.

In fact, the ONLY red flag law that I believe will ultimately pass muster with SCOTUS, is one that allows the accused the option to say “You can detain ME, but you cannot take my guns. Not until I have seen a judge with my lawyer present.” At that point, the police enter the person into NORMAL processing, which brings the accused before a judge in a timely manner, and ALL NORMAL RIGHTS ARE GRANTED. This path is almost guaranteed to be fully Constitutional. And the DEMOCRATS are undoubtedly going to hate it, because it will turn the tables on these damnable laws, ending their abuse SWIFTLY in a flurry of expensive lawsuits against both accusers and the state.

Once your guns are taken, they are lost in the system. Once your guns are taken, the communists have control. Once you LET your guns be taken, you have WAIVED YOUR RIGHTS. We have to make these laws ACKNOWLEDGE that the SEIZURE OF ARMS is unconstitutional, but that the accused can ONLY FREELY WAIVE THEIR RIGHTS to let it happen.


And if we DON’T waive our rights, then we must be granted ALL THE RIGHTS TO WHICH WE ARE ENTITLED. Otherwise known as DUE PROCESS.

Are you with me?


When we walk away with a traffic ticket, instead of being arrested, we are WAIVING OUR RIGHTS. When we pay our ticket by phone or on the internet, we are WAIVING OUR RIGHTS. And when we allow unconstitutional confiscation as a CONVENIENCE to all parties, we are WAIVING OUR RIGHTS. Everybody needs to recognize this.

Arrest in America is NOTHING LIKE arrest in China. Arrest gives us STANDING.

“I want an arress!” – speaking of our OWN arrest – may be the single most important way to STOP DEAD the communist goals of red flag laws.

What I am saying is that we need to view this BACKWARDS from the unconstitutional reasoning of the communists. We need to add an ARREST OPTION, so that red flag laws – if these horrifying things ever pass – are just as Constitutional as a traffic ticket. We need to view the immediate collection of arms without arrest as WAIVING ONE’S RIGHTS TO BOTH KEEPING THE ARMS AND ASSUMING THE RIGHTS OF THE ARRESTED.


The right to CHOOSE to waive or not waive our rights is the ULTIMATE RIGHT. We cannot give this up, and yet most red flag laws STEAL THIS FROM US, by giving us NO OPTION to be peacefully arrested IN LIEU OF taking our guns.

The rights of the arrested – and particularly the FALSELY ARRESTED – are a GIANT HAMMER with which we can batter both RED FLAG and OUR ACCUSERS.

We must NEVER waive our rights to KEEP OUR GUNS, nor all the other rights which we are guaranteed by the Constitution.

EVER. Others may, but not this WOLF. “I WANT AN ARRESS!’

[NOTE: What I am really talking about is being “detained”, but same diff. Buckle up – it will feel every bit like an arrest. But if it’s a bad rap, you will be out QUICKLY and WITH YOUR GUNS.]

5. Red flag laws corrupt the role of the police.

This is very typical of communists. In the same way that Communists LOVE to change the ROLES and POWERS of the primary branches of the FEDERAL government, so too they love to change the roles and powers of STATE and LOCAL government.

In PORTLAND, they make the police STAND DOWN to “protect” the POLICE and not the PEOPLE.

In LOS ANGELES, they make the health department STAND DOWN to “protect” the “rights” of the homeless and not their health.

And in sanctuary cities around the nation, they make EVERYBODY stand down to protect non-citizen criminals, and not law-abiding citizens.

But conversely, communists may make police STAND UP in roles that are not actually theirs.

What communists are doing here, is making police act as “judge, jury, and executioner”, by confiscating arms before there is any proof to a DUE PROCESS that there is justification for doing so.

This is a corruption of the role of the police. This is JUST LIKE the way that communists under Obama corrupted the military and NASA, abusing their purposes instead of simply closing them down, which would be too obvious.

Worse still, this corruption leads to the NEXT problem with “red flag” laws.

4. Red flag drives a wedge between police and gun owners.

Red flag laws will not only drive a wedge between citizens and police – THEY ARE DESIGNED TO DO EXACTLY THAT.

Why? Because BOTH law enforcement AND gun owners support Trump. Because law enforcement AND gun owners typically RESPECT each other.

Red flag laws are designed to WEAKEN the bonds of respect between law enforcement and gun owners.

Red flag laws are designed to cause DIVISION between Trump supporters.

Sneaky, isn’t it?

3. Red flag laws drive a wedge between police and veterans.

Veterans will be particularly hard-hit by accusations of “unworthiness” due to the Democrat “false offering” of PTSD. Communists in the Democrat Party offered and promoted PTSD self-categorization to veterans PRECISELY so that they could eventually have their guns taken away. It was a long-term, patient plan, but it worked like crazy, and it is coming to fruition now.

I’m not saying PTSD isn’t real. Trust me. I know it’s real. But HOW that reality is integrated into society is what we are talking about. The PTSD category can be ABUSED.

MUCH propaganda has been deployed here. Watching it has been very educational.

The fact is, political leveraging of PTSD by gun-grabbing communists will create suspicions between veterans and police. Obama and Eric Holder could not be happier about this result.

And this leads to my next reason.

2. Red flag drives a wedge between doctors and patients.

Patients are already NOT being honest with their doctors about their medical status and gun ownership because of Obamacare and its sneaky socialist spying and judging. But you haven’t seen anything yet.

Under red flag laws, doctors will basically become “the enemy”. They, and their nurses and assistants, will be deprived of any information that could possibly result in a red flag complaint – once people realize that their information is not safe.

Trust me – HIPAA is BULLSHIT that is completely orthogonal to what Deep State needs to target patriots. Deep State can work around it in a heartbeat. How do I know this?


I caught my doctor being used in a test run of a deep state scam against gun owners. I believe that my doctor was INNOCENT in the process – I believe they were deceived and USED. But I had some WARNING on what would happen, and was completely ready for the various steps of the process. It all happened like clockwork, exactly as predicted. It was a very beautiful scam, and will work against almost any patriot.

The key step is something that is outside of the “fake science” we are allowed to know, but that I know because of my unique background and some basic theoretical reasoning. It’s nothing “woo-woo” – it’s just been suppressed by Fake News. It’s horrifyingly real, but we were allowed to be “Eloi” for the “Morlocks”.

And the WORST PART is that this scam will sync right up with red flag laws, as I expect they are supposed to work, if we allow them to pass.

I’m not ready to go public with the details, but – well – let’s just leave it at that. I have hinted about it before, and the White Hats “have it all”. Maybe somebody else will drop the full bomb. That might cause a wee bit of scrambling, so I leave that choice to higher powers.

Fun times.

And now, the most insidious of all.

1. Red flag is designed to push Trump’s voters off social media.

This is perhaps the most profound realization I’ve had so far.

This goes straight to interfering in the 2020 election. And every election after that.

It’s bad enough that free speech is going to be stifled in real life by red flag laws. But social media? Our ONE WAY of working around the Fake News? Gun owners will FLEE.

They know this. Our enemies know this. Trump’s enemies know this.

“CHYYYNNA” knows this. They know this will kill Trump’s support online.

Which brings me to the last, EXTRA, and final reason red flag laws are a bad idea.

0. Red flag is a key part of China’s conquest of the Pacific.

By neutralizing America in the same way that they neutralized New Zealand and Australia – taking away the speech of its enemies – China will become the dominant force in the Pacific first, and the World later. Censorship of opposing viewpoints through gun laws was a way to take down opposition without firing a shot. China leveraged GUNS against SPEECH and it worked.

Well, almost.

Buckle up.


122 thoughts on “Top 10 Reasons “Red Flag” Laws Are Bad for America

  1. Red Flag Laws would also be used for Lawfare, Wolf.

    That’s why I’m with you, except for your idea about…”I want an arrest.”

    People would be victimized by bogus reports from anonymous witnesses…and then be faced with paying Attorney Fees.
    Plus having an ‘arrest’ on their record!

    I agree that the ‘anonymous reporting’ would be abused.
    The same person could call in several times, using different phones!

    Then, all of a sudden the police would see all those reports and think ‘This is serious, we better go do something’…and the innocent victim gets swarmed by the police.
    Even killed…if he made one wrong move.

    Lawfare gets Lethal — with Red Flag Laws.

    This is why I say: No Red Flag Laws.


    Full Stop. Not even a little bit of one.

    This is a hill to die on, Wolf.

    Liked by 12 people

    1. Firearms would also be seized as ‘evidence’…to get around the no-confiscation thing.

      Democrat Mayors would set the policy.
      The LEOs would have to follow it.

      We know how the Dems like to play with words.
      Their mission is to confiscate our guns and they would not let a little thing like words get in their way.

      It would go like this:
      “We didn’t confiscate anyone’s guns. Their firearms were taken in for safekeeping, as evidence…until the suspect’s trial is over.”

      Liked by 9 people

          1. I agree. If it goes to a hearing, I would think that the “eligible person” has to be identified, or would be obvious by context.


            If the Police are one of the people (they are), then they can take a report from a neighbor and then THEY can do a submission. SO…….

            We’re back to the potential for bullshit. HOWEVER, I would imagine that a lawyer could make the court divulge the person, since there is punishment for filing a false report, and one presumably has the right to sue if it turns out to be a false report.


            Not really sure what they’ll do.

            Liked by 5 people

            1. Throughout the entire process the accused is some mix of the following:
              – Without his guns,
              – In jail,
              – Lost time from work (jail, working with attorney, court time…),
              – If no longer working, hemorrhaging money,
              – Attorneys are expensive.


              “Accused”, not guilty of anything.

              = Red Flag Laws are evil.

              Liked by 7 people

      1. It would go like this:
        “We didn’t confiscate anyone’s guns. Their firearms were taken in for safekeeping, as evidence…until the suspect’s trial is over.”

        ^^^ Once guns are confiscated, they are difficult to impossible to get them back.

        Liked by 4 people

        1. Once they are in play as evidence, they will make sure to destroy any items that are deemed hazardous.

          They’ll be in the chipper for sure.

          Liked by 4 people

    2. Well, the people of Ohio are getting one (see below). That was the point of shooting up people in Ohio.

      What about Texas? Are they gonna get one? Hard to tell. If they do, they need to look at Ohio, I think, b/c it looks like Buckeye Firearms is OK with DeWine’s safeguards.

      But Texas is iffy. Weirdly ABBOTT is for one, but got push-back BEFORE El Paso.

      Liked by 8 people

      1. Just saying

        SATURDAY , 10 AUGUST 2019

        Illinois Gun Owners Rights

        Home » Blog » Gun Talk » 72 killed resisting gun confiscation by National Guard in Boston!

        72 killed resisting gun confiscation by National Guard in Boston!
        Brandon P April 20, 1775 Gun Talk 11 Comments

        Related Articles

        Double-Barrel AR-15 enters full production
        March 8, 2018

        Assault Weapon vs Assault Rifle: What’s the difference?
        March 7, 2018

        Pro-Gun Republican causes Democrat walkout with EPIC speech
        March 6, 2018

        Boston – National Guard units seeking to confiscate a cache of recently banned assault weapons were ambushed by elements of a Para-military extremist faction. Military and law enforcement sources estimate that 72 were killed and more than 200 injured before government forces were compelled to withdraw.

        Speaking after the clash, Massachusetts Governor Thomas Gage declared that the extremist faction, which was made up of local citizens, has links to the radical right-wing tax protest movement.

        Gage blamed the extremists for recent incidents of vandalism directed against internal revenue offices. The governor, who described the group’s organizers as “criminals,” issued an executive order authorizing the summary arrest of any individual who has interfered with the government’s efforts to secure law and order.

        The military raid on the extremist arsenal followed wide-spread refusal by the local citizenry to turn over recently outlawed assault weapons.

        Gage issued a ban on military-style assault weapons and ammunition earlier in the week. This decision followed a meeting in early this month between government and military leaders at which the governor authorized the forcible confiscation of illegal arms.

        One government official, speaking on condition of anonymity, pointed out that “none of these people would have been killed had the extremists obeyed the law and turned over their weapons voluntarily.”

        Government troops initially succeeded in confiscating a large supply of outlawed weapons and ammunition. However, troops attempting to seize arms and ammunition in Lexington met with resistance from heavily-armed extremists who had been tipped off regarding the government’s plans.

        During a tense standoff in the Lexington town park, National Guard Colonel Francis Smith, commander of the government operation, ordered the armed group to surrender and return to their homes. The impasse was broken by a single shot, which was reportedly fired by one of the right-wing extremists.

        Eight civilians were killed in the ensuing exchange.

        Ironically, the local citizenry blamed government forces rather than the extremists for the civilian deaths. Before order could be restored, armed citizens from surrounding areas had descended upon the guard units. Colonel Smith, finding his forces over matched by the armed mob, ordered a retreat.

        Governor Gage has called upon citizens to support the state/national joint task force in its effort to restore law and order. The governor also demanded the surrender of those responsible for planning and leading the attack against the government troops.

        Samuel Adams, Paul Revere, and John Hancock, who have been identified as “ringleaders” of the extremist faction, remain at large.

        And this fellow Americans, is how the American Revolution began, April 20, 1775.

        On July 4th, 1776 these same extremists signed the Declaration of Independence, pledging to each other and their countrymen their lives, fortunes, and sacred honor. Many of them lost everything, including their families and their lives over the course of the next few years.

        Lest we forget…

        Liked by 2 people

  2. “…This is a hill to die on, Wolf.”


    Either we die on this hill or we die in concentration camps the NEXT STEP after gun confiscation.

    “The most foolish mistake we could possibly make would be to allow the subject races to possess arms. History shows that all conquerors who have allowed their subject races to carry arms have prepared their own downfall by so doing.” — Adolf Hitler.

    “Political Power grows out of the barrel of a gun” – Mao Zedong

    ☠️ ☠️ ☠️ ☠️ ☠️ ☠️ ☠️ ☠️ ☠️ ☠️ ☠️ ☠️ ☠️ ☠️ ☠️ ☠️ ☠️
    1911 Turkey Gun control — from 1915 to 1917 – 1.5 million Arminans killed
    1935 China gun control — from 1948 to 1952 – 20 million killed
    1938 Germany Gun control — from 1935 to 1945 – 20,946,000 murdered.
    1956 Cambodia gun control — from 1975 to 1977 – 1 to 2 million educated people murdered.
    1964 Guatamala Gun Control — from 1964 to 1981 – 100,000 Mayan Indians killed.
    1970 Uganda gun control in — from 1971 to 1979 – 300,000 Christians killed, a total of 2 to 3 million murdered.
    ☠️ ☠️ ☠️ ☠️ ☠️ ☠️ ☠️ ☠️ ☠️ ☠️ ☠️ ☠️ ☠️ ☠️ ☠️ ☠️ ☠️

    FBI Data Shows Armed Citizens Have 94% Success Rate Stopping Would-Be Mass Shooters

    So if you REALLY want to stop mass shooters you have ARMED Citizens NOT UNARMED!

    Liked by 12 people

  3. I have already had a ‘taste’ of how these ‘red flag laws’ work.

    A woman I never even met accused the neighbor across the street and I of growing MJ. Since then we have been constantly buzzed by low flying helios. WHY? To get back at a friend of ours who has no land…. Oh and this woman? SHE put her husband in the hospital by stabbing him repeatedly…. 🙄 Yet her word was taken seriously.

    I am sure this gold plated bitch would have had our homes raided for guns if we had a red flag law, hoping the friend she was really targeting was there.

    Liked by 14 people

    1. IF, ” the gold plated bitch” had heard of Swatting, she’d have called one in on the neighbor across the street and you. (Guessing)

      Liked by 4 people

  4. And just like that these laws being pushed by Republicans will turn the Trump administration into the Nazi’s they have been accused of being by the left. Plays right into their hands.

    Agree wheatie. This is a hill to die on.

    Liked by 7 people

  5. Sadly, Trump cannot protect the people of Ohio from a red flag law. THEY will be getting one.

    BUT it does look like Mike DeWine LIMITED IT so that it actually respects due process. So it BYPASSES the need for arrest, by having a judge sign off on it BEFORE it comes to the person. And NOT ALL PEOPLE can go after the guns by asking for it.

    Check it out.

    However, there are still problems. It doesn’t look like the accused gets to fight back FOR SURE until 3 months later. There is a hearing within 14 days, but I can’t tell if the accused is allowed to contest things then.

    Red flag law

    Red flag laws allow family members or police to seek the removal of firearms from individuals whom they fear will cause harm to themselves or others. Seventeen states have enacted red flag laws. Of those, 12 were passed after the mass shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Florida, in February 2018.

    GOP lawmakers who control the Ohio House and Senate opposed former Gov. John Kasich’s attempt to pass a red flag law last year, saying his version would violate Ohioans’ rights.

    Here are the steps DeWine proposed:

    Relatives, police, teachers and other eligible people could file a petition in a court if they were concerned that a person with access to guns presents an “imminent” risk to themselves or others because of a mental health issue, alcoholism, drug dependency or criminal history.

    Within three days, a judge would decide if there was probable cause that the person was a threat. If so, the person’s guns would be removed.

    Within 14 days, a judge would have a second hearing. A prosecutor would then need to prove that the person was a threat by “clear and convincing evidence,” a higher legal bar.

    If they are deemed a threat, the person’s guns will remain confiscated for six months. The person would undergo a mental health screening and potentially mandatory mental health treatment.

    The person whose guns were removed could ask the court for his firearms back after three months.
    These orders can be extended every six months, indefinitely.

    Anyone who files a false report to remove someone’s guns could face a first-degree misdemeanor.

    DeWine’s “red flag” proposal is very similar to the one Kasich proposed in 2018. But DeWine has more political capital – both from gun-rights advocates and GOP lawmakers – to have the discussion.

    The National Rifle Association has supported emergency risk protection orders – if they protect gun owners’ due process rights not to have their property seized without a valid legal reason. President Donald Trump said Monday he backed the idea.

    Ohio gun-rights group Buckeye Firearms Association said it supports the process DeWine laid out Tuesday but wants to see the language.

    “They have gone to great lengths to protect our due process rights, and that is very critical,” said the association’s Larry Moore. “I don’t see us fighting this at all. Again, the devil is always in the details of what comes before the General Assembly. And bills being a sausage grinder, what comes out.”

    Liked by 6 people

    1. Here is the critical part of the Ohio law:

      Relatives, police, teachers and other eligible people could file a petition in a court if they were concerned that a person with access to guns presents an “imminent” risk to themselves or others because of a mental health issue, alcoholism, drug dependency or criminal history.

      OMG – I will bet that a person’s DOCTOR or PRIEST/PASTOR/RABBI is one of those special “other eligible people”. BOOM! This explains what went on with my doctor. TRICKY!!!

      Liked by 11 people

      1. With the number of scandals occurring in the churches and with medical doctors demonstrating a drift toward being big pharma reps, I have one question. Who vets the ones who do the vetting?!
        No dice. Red flags are at best feel good regulations that are way too vulnerable to abuse and will diminish everyone’s constitutional protections.

        Liked by 7 people

    2. wolfmoon1776
      This Ohio Red Flag law crap has so MANY HOLES in it!
      ** “other eligible people” = DOCTORS, THERAPISTS, NURSES, EMPLOYERS will be on the list.
      ** “MISSION CREEP” — the “reasons” for the Red Flag order gets expanded from “mental health issues” to “alcoholism” — “drug dependency” — “criminal history”. WHO/WHAT “proves” the alcoholism — a history of arrests for DUI?: the “drug dependency” — doctors’ records of prescriptions? CONFIDENTIAL notes taken by psychiatrists or licensed psychologists on the person?: “criminal history” — number of arrests and/or convictions and/or time in jail? What if the person has been “rehabilitated” and has their right to vote restored?
      ** A JUDGE decides in 3 DAYS? Doesn’t the accused have a right to mount a defense? Has the United States morphed into Napoleonic France?
      ** “potentially mandatory mental health treatment” — smells like Involuntary Commitment to me. Stays on the person’s record FOREVER.
      ** WHAT does the accused person have to “prove” in order to get their firearms back?
      ** “Anyone who makes a false report to remove someone’s guns COULD face a first-degree misdemeanor” — Why won’t a person who makes a false report face a FELONY RAP?

      This laundry list of LEFTWING WET DREAMS is just what the DemocratCommunistIslamists ordered! They’re thinking they’ll get their dreams put into law!

      Liked by 9 people

  6. Red Pill News on the first part of his U-tube brings up another point of view on the Red flag laws… That they are a TRAP for the deep state. (I am noy sure if this is just rosey thinking or not.)

    Liked by 5 people

  7. Just to add a bit of history…

    Remember that Janet Napolitano put RETIRED MILITARY, SECRET SERVICE and others on the ‘Terrorist’ watchlist while the government took the muslims OFF the terrorist watchlist.


    Washington (CNN) — “The terrorist threat to the U.S. homeland has continued to “evolve” and may now “be at its most heightened state” since the September 11, 2001, terror attacks, Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano told members of Congress on Wednesday.

    There is an increased reliance on recruiting Westerners into terrorist organizations, she told the House Homeland Security Committee. State and local law enforcement officers are increasingly needed to combat terror, and t[b]he focus must be on aiding law enforcement to help them secure communities,[/b] she said…. “

    Washington Times — “Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano said Wednesday that she was briefed before the release of a controversial intelligence assessment and that she stands by the report, which lists returning veterans among terrorist risks to the U.S…..”

    DHS Whistleblower Philip Haney: P.C. Killed Investigation That Might Have Stopped San Bernardino Attack
    “…Haney and his fellow investigators found links from the Tablighi Jamaat network to “Hamas, al-Qaeda, global terrorist funding…

    This complex included “a global network of schools, meaning madrassas, where people learn, study Koran, study Islamic law… they’re like colleges, and they’re all over the world,” Haney noted….. it’s a seven year program – and then they come back, and they become imams in the area where they grew up. It’s a whole process….

    … his initiative was deemed politically incorrect and shut down by the Department of Homeland Security’s Civil Rights and Civil Liberties division….”

    ‘Profiling’ by police (and the military) illegal: House Hearing Will Examine Illegal Profiling and Police Misconduct By Local Law Enforcement Acting As Federal Immigration Agents

    So it is ‘ILLEGAL’ to use profiling to catch illegals and Muslim Terrorists but Congress wants to take our guns based on HEAR=SAY???

    TSA has cost about $60 billion since its inception. So a border length fence would cost HALF what we have already spent on ‘Grope-N-Fly’ and put people to work. (Note that TSA EMPLOYS Muslims that are terrorist risks!)

    Hezbollah Terrorists On Our Southern Border

    Thank you Janet Napolitano for letting all those terrorists in.

    Liked by 11 people

    1. ^^^THIS!!!^^^ 30 TRILLION LIKES.

      Ø abused and misused every power of the presidency.

      Ø politicized and weaponized every agency of the US government by targeting opponents starting day one of his shameful tenure.

      Ø illegally spied on everyone, congress, foreign allies, citizens, political opponents.

      List of Obama administration abuses of power and lawbreaking – LINK

      Liked by 10 people


        The Complete List of Barack Obama’s Scandals, Misdeeds, Crimes and Blunders –

        THERE’S EVEN A BOOK about Obama’s lies, corruption, cronyism, hypocrisy. (first of many, I’m sure)

        True, there was not a smidgen of scandal – there was enough to fill a fleet of container ships!

        Liked by 8 people

    1. Thanks! I will admit that I’m probably being “extra careful” about these things, but we know from experience – what the left CAN abuse, they WILL abuse – particularly if they think they can’t get caught! 😀

      Liked by 12 people

      1. In NYS the abuses started long ago. All sorts of games are played to trap gun owners.

        In addition to taking away gun ownership, IMO there is the powerful additional motivation of making otherwise law-abiding citizens into “criminals.”

        Liked by 9 people

  8. Oh my good Lord Wolf–You scared even more crap out of me–Wen to bed telling everyone to write their reps on Red Flag, & I wake up to Epstein dead…DAMN
    Then I look over your article Damn. Great Piece…Sharing it on FB & Tweeter
    You know there is another piece of this puzzle that you did not post stats on.
    568,410 Murders by abortion since Jan 1, 2019
    9,012 Murder by Gun Since Jan 1, 2019(Remember probably OVER 1/3 are by Illegals).

    Remember now that 29 States and D.C. Permit Abortions of Healthy, Full-Term Babies:

    Liked by 9 people

  9. Posted this before but they add to Wolf’s great post.
    Top 10 benefits of Red Flag Laws for your government controllers.
    1: No more need for a pesky warrant.
    2: No need for actual evidence.
    3: Anyone can make a false claim and have your rights removed for any reason.
    4: A great way to get back at people you don’t like.
    5: Guilty until proven innocent.
    6: Will prevent people with real problems from seeking help.
    7: Most efficient way to degrade the second and the fourth amendment at the same time.
    8: The fear will keep your ex in line.
    9: People with no mental health background can order lethal SWAT raids.
    10: Simply designate your political opponent’s rhetoric as “unstable hate-speech” and you may efficiently disarm and or harm them.
    By TiborasaurusRex
    From a poster ( Trenchbroom ) at Breitbart article )

    “rapid due process”.. By Anonymous Denunciation!
    Someone accuses you, but they refuse to tell you who!
    The various surveillance systems like stingray were designed
    specifically for this purpose.. To bring charges, with no accusers!

    No witnesses, But your guns will STILL BE GONE!
    And you will be MARKED FOR LIFE, without any Recourse!
    Convicted of NO CRIME, but your property is confiscated anyway!
    Places the burden on the Accused, to PROVE THEIR INNOCENCE!
    Turns the US Justice System, UPSIDE DOWN!

    If you can’t face your accuser??? That means, NO DUE PROCESS!
    This will be a Liberal Gun Grabbers JUBILEE!

    Treacherous FBI refuses to declare ANTIFA as terrorists, but they’ll
    gladly grab your guns, even tho you committed no crime!
    Might as well have Obama back!

    Gun owners should get ready, take precautions! Disperse your weapons
    and equipment.. No doubt, this will be used as a tool to disarm us!
    Count on it!

    Liked by 8 people

  10. I put this on the other “no RED FLAG laws” thread but I’ll repeat it here:

    RED FLAG laws and BACKGROUND CHECKS laws will BOTH be tied into the national EMR (Electronic Medical Records) database.
    Translation: RED FLAG laws and BACKGROUND CHECKS laws will access the EMR each time a person buys a firearm — gets a CCW — renews a CCW — and can be extended to the buying of ammo.
    EVERY TIME you see a doctor — ever wonder why they spend SO MUCH time at the computer, logging in things?
    They’re fulfilling the requirements of the EMR regulations.
    EVERYTHING goes on the EMR — the exam summary AND the doctor’s diagnosis; copies of prescriptions and the reasons for the prescriptions; referrals to other health professionals (including to psychiatrists, etc.); the doctor’s notes on what the patient told him/her about the reason for the exam; the doctor’s notes on the patient’s answers to questions.
    And this is the database that the Red Flag laws AND Background Check laws will access.

    So — what will this do?
    Reduce the amount of visits to the doctor unless it’s an urgent medical situation.
    Reduce or eliminate any private, confidential statements or conversation between doctor and patient.
    Reduce the TRUST that MUST exist between doctor and patient.
    And for people who need or are referred to for “going to see a shrink” — either the patient won’t go; or if they do, will make it their business NOT to tell the psychiatrist / licensed psychologist ANYTHING that negative that could show up on the EMR or the therapist’s session notes.

    Liked by 3 people

    1. “…Reduce the TRUST that MUST exist between doctor and patient…..”

      WHAT TRUST????

      I have not been to a doctor in fifteen years despite the fact I am ‘Entitled’ to a physical once a year for the last five.

      Liked by 1 person

  11. And because it is easy to dent someone’s reputation using red flag laws, unsavory people will be able to use the threat of them as leverage even in situations where their use is not justified.

    Liked by 4 people

  12. THIS THREAD NEEDS TO BE PINNED TO THE TOP OF THE TREE! It should remain there until this ridiculous talk of red flag laws ceases.

    The word “outstanding” doesn’t even begin to do it justice. I am deeply impressed and endorse every single word you wrote, Wolf. Well done!!

    I pray the President and his advisors see this. In fact, I want the entire country to see this, particularly the folks at the NRA.

    On a related note….

    MARICA made a VERY astute observation in the first Red Flag thread. Namely…

    THIS ISN’T ABOUT GUNS. This (mass shootings) is about mentally ill and unstable people.

    What’s next….red flag laws for drivers licenses??

    Liked by 5 people

    1. FGaC
      It’s COMPLETELY within the range of possibility that Driver’s Licenses could be “next” on the RED FLAG laws list.
      Some peoples’ Driver’s Licenses are pulled for, say, getting arrested for too many DUI’s, for going 80mph in a 35mph zone, for losing their vision, etc.
      But RED FLAG laws for taking a Driver’s License wouldn’t take any of the current reasons into account. A person could have their DL pulled or renewal denied under the RED FLAG laws coming if they, say, EVER “saw a shrink” and took Xanax to help get through a nasty divorce.
      I believe the coming RED FLAG laws and BACKGROUND CHECK laws will be permitted to access the national EMR (Electronic Medical Record) database and that these laws will be extended to Driver’s Licenses.

      It’s all about CONTROL. By any means possible.

      Liked by 5 people

      1. Do not forget ALLERGIES!!!! More than 50 million Americans suffer from allergies each year.

        Remember most antihistamines esp. Diphenhydramine (Benadryl) say: “be careful when driving a motor vehicle or operating machinery”

        Liked by 3 people


    They are CLASSIC EXAMPLES of Bills of Attainder (H/T to Hubby)

    Bill of Attainder

    Definition: A legislative act that singles out an individual or group for punishment without a trial.

    The Constitution of the United States, Article I, Section 9, paragraph 3 provides that: “No Bill of Attainder or ex post facto Law will be passed.”

    “The Bill of Attainder Clause was intended not as a narrow, technical (and therefore soon to be outmoded) prohibition, but rather as an implementation of the separation of powers, a general safeguard against legislative exercise of the judicial function or more simply – trial by legislature.” U.S. v. Brown, 381 U.S. 437, 440 (1965).

    “These clauses of the Constitution are not of the broad, general nature of the Due Process Clause, but refer to rather precise legal terms which had a meaning under English law at the time the Constitution was adopted. A bill of attainder was a legislative act that singled out one or more persons and imposed punishment on them, without benefit of trial. Such actions were regarded as odious by the framers of the Constitution because it was the traditional role of a court, judging an individual case, to impose punishment.” William H. Rehnquist, The Supreme Court, page 166.

    “Bills of attainder, ex post facto laws, and laws impairing the obligations of contracts, are contrary to the first principles of the social compact, and to every principle of sound legislation. … The sober people of America are weary of the fluctuating policy which has directed the public councils. They have seen with regret and indignation that sudden changes and legislative interferences, in cases affecting personal rights, become jobs in the hands of enterprising and influential speculators, and snares to the more-industrious and less-informed part of the community.” James Madison, Federalist Number 44, 1788….

    Bill of Attainder – US Constitution – FindLaw

    ”Bills of attainder . . . are such special acts of the legislature, as inflict capital punishments upon persons supposed to be guilty of high offences, such as treason and felony, without any conviction in the ordinary course of judicial proceedings. If an act inflicts a milder degree of punishment than death, it is called a bill of pains and penalties. . . . In such cases, the legislature assumes judicial magistracy, pronouncing upon the guilt of the party without any of the common forms and guards of trial, and satisfying itself with proofs, when such proofs are within its reach, whether they are conformable to the rules of evidence, or not. In short, in all such cases, the legislature exercises the highest power of sovereignty, and what may be properly deemed an irresponsible despotic discretion, being governed solely by what it deems political necessity or expediency, and too often under the influence of unreasonable fears, or unfounded suspicions.” 1701

    The phrase ”bill of attainder,” as used in this clause and in clause 1 of Sec. 10, applies to bills of pains and penalties as well as to the traditional bills of attainder. 1702  

    The prohibition embodied in this clause is not to be strictly and narrowly construed in the context of traditional forms but is to be interpreted in accordance with the designs of the framers so as to preclude trial by legislature, a violation of the separation of powers concept. 1703

    The clause thus prohibits all legislative acts, ”no matter what their form, that apply either to named individuals or to easily ascertainable members of a group in such a way as to inflict punishment on them without a judicial trial. . . .”

    1704 That the Court has applied the clause dynamically is revealed by a consideration of the three cases in which acts of Congress have been struck down as violating it. 1705 In Ex parte Garland, 1706 the Court struck down a statute that required attorneys to take an oath that they had taken no part in the Confederate rebellion against the United States before they could practice in federal courts. The statute, and a state constitutional amendment requiring a similar oath of per sons before they could practice certain professions, 1707 were struck down as legislative acts inflicting punishment on a specific group the members of which had taken part in the rebellion and therefore could not truthfully take the oath. The clause then lay unused until 1946 when the Court utilized it to strike down a rider to an appropriations bill forbidding the use of money appropriated therein to pay the salaries of three named persons whom the House of Representatives wished discharged because they were deemed to be ”subversive.” 1708  
    Then, in United States v. Brown, 1709 a sharply divided Court held void as a bill of attainder a statute making it a crime for a member of the Communist Party to serve as an officer or as an employee of a labor union. Congress could, Chief Justice Warren wrote for the majority, under its commerce power, protect the economy from harm by enacting a prohibition generally applicable to any person who commits certain acts or possesses certain characteristics making him likely in Congress’ view to initiate political strikes or other harmful deeds and leaving it to the courts to determine whether a particular person committed the specified acts or possessed the specified characteristics; it was impermissible, however, for Congress to designate a class of persons–members of the Communist Party–as being forbidden to hold union office. 1710….

    FOOTNOTES: [for the above excerpt]

    [Footnote 1701] 3 J. Story, Commentaries on the Constitution of the United States (Boston: 1833), 1338.
    [Footnote 1702] Cummings v. Missouri, 71 U.S. (4 Wall.) 277, 323 (1867); cf. United States v. Brown, 381 U.S. 437, 441 -442, (1965).

    [Footnote 1703] United States v. Brown, 381 U.S. 437, 442 -446 (1965). Four dissenting Justices, however, denied that any separation of powers concept underlay the clause. Id., 472-473.

    [Footnote 1704] United States v. Lovett, 328 U.S. 303, 315 (1946).

    [Footnote 1705] For a rejection of the Court’s approach and a plea to adhere to the traditional concept, see id., 318 (Justice Frankfurter concurring).

    [Footnote 1706]   71 U.S. (4 Wall.) 333 (1867).

    [Footnote 1707] Cummings v. Missouri, 71 U.S. (4 Wall.) 277 (1867).

    [Footnote 1708] United States v. Lovett, 328 U.S. 303 (1946).

    [Footnote 1709]   381 U.S. 437 (1965).

    [Footnote 1710] The Court of Appeals had voided the statute as an infringement of First Amendment expression and association rights, but the Court majority did not choose to utilize this ground. 334 F. 2d 488 (9th Cir., 1964). However, in United States v. Robel, 389 U.S. 258 (1967), a very similar statute making it unlawful for any member of a ”Communist-action organization” to be employed in a defense facility was struck down on First Amendment grounds and the bill of attainder argument was ignored.

    This just a short part of the five pages at FindLaw. There is a lot more plus more footnotes.

    AGAIN this is why JUDGES are so VERY IMPORTANT!

    Liked by 3 people

  14. There is NOTHING, Legislators can insert into a Red Flag law that will have me support a Red Flag Law.

    Guns are not the problem.

    Take guns out of the equation.

    IF the person is dangerous, deal with the person, without invoking, “guns”. The person is dangerous, not the gun.

    100% against Red Flag Laws.
    100% against gun control.
    100% against gun free zones.

    Liked by 5 people

    1. kalbokalbs do you realize how easy it would be for liberals to come in to someplace like this forum and Red Flag us all for our gun talk. Red Flag us saying that our gun talk is dangerous to society.
      Just maybe if we had the money for lawyers, those of us who had guns & they were confiscated might get them back.

      Liked by 4 people

        1. Scray aint it…had 3 people follow me to my FB page from news posts and call me all types of names
          Guess they could just call authorities and get my guns instead.

          Liked by 4 people

  15. This is probably only the tip of he ice berg of people saved by guns

    Guns Saved These Americans From Assault and Robbery in July

    Liked by 5 people

  16. Wow I hope that Trump is reading and listening to the people that truly understand Red Flag Laws
    Warning: How the VA ‘Red Flags’ Patriots

    Liked by 6 people

      1. Huge can of worms, especially if we get too many people reading an article like that last one and mis interpreting it.
        Even someone who has just one or two guns just for protection in the big city would probably have one or two boxes of amo.
        But I still don’t know why hunters, or people who like guns can’t live in the city too.

        Liked by 4 people

        1. I think the OHIO law (and they are going to have one – let’s not kid ourselves) needs to be really ROBUST. There HAS to be some way for the owner to contend with DOPES, because in my opinion the Ohio law is not “double-dope-proof”.

          What this means is that a stupid snowflake neighbor contacts the police or another responsible party, happens to get a really stupid or naive n00bie, and there is a really stupid petition that could be cleared up RIGHT AWAY. Instead, the gun owner is FORCED to give up their guns until a hearing which is likely a ways off.

          This is stupid, and I would prefer an ARREST. DETAIN me until I can talk to the judge. Don’t take the guns. NO confiscation if this can be cleared up immediately, and I think THAT will solve most of the really stupid calls.


          1. All one has to do is look at all the animosity between liberals & Trump people now.
            One can’t even go out in a Trump hat or shirt anymore even.
            Look at all the threats & name calling on FB, Tweeter and other social media that is mostly from liberals(i just usually block or ignore).
            Like I said elsewhere I have had several people hit my FB page because I dared to comment on a media site. One I did complain to his employer–(the dude called me a B …. . Did not bother me until I realized that it was a two year old post that was like 60, 70 or 80 posts deep. So I brought it to his employers attention.
            FYI my reply to him was “God Bless You”.

            Liked by 1 person

            1. I took my wife to dinner tonight at an Elmer’s Restaurant and I wore my red MAGA t-shirt and red Trump 2020 hat. Nobody said a word about them and the waitress was very friendly, so she got a healthy tip.
              Now, I wouldn’t wear those items to a restaurant in downtown Portland, but then again I never go there to eat.

              Liked by 2 people

              1. My first time wearing my hat out in real public was Portland, but that was prior to Trump winning. LOL.


  17. Read the article all the way through—In my opinion the most that should have been done is a slap on the wrist for carrying without a permit. It was a pit bull and than a 6 ft plus tall teen that owned the pit…
    Damn I would be pulling my gun too, but I have a license to carry in most states.
    And they let the San Francisco Illegal after killing a innocent girl.

    Local law enforcement acts to confiscate guns and ammo from man they deem to be at risk

    Liked by 3 people

    1. Don’t kill the messenger, now – IMO, this man SHOULDN’T have a weapon! Good grief! He went to the police station with a damned armory in the trunk of his car! At least, to a normal, average gun-owner any way – an AR-15 w/high capacity magazines, a 9 MM handgun and dozens of rounds of ammo. What idiot does that??!!??

      Liked by 1 person

      1. He was hiding them from the police, IMO. He was assuming (correctly) that the CA cops were planning to break into his house to take his arms, so what he was doing was keeping them with him at all times (legally) in the trunk of his car, or in the car parked in the garage. This is also good if he wants to quickly move out of state.

        However, all of that was stupid, IMO. And not only because taking them onto PD property is PROBABLY illegal.

        He should have left CA long ago. This is like staying in Nazi Germany.

        GET OUT!!!

        Liked by 5 people

          1. Threatening or was he complaining about his dog being killed by a pit bull with the owner preventing him from stopping the fight.
            Used to have a small dog and if I had to watch a pit bull tear it to shreds, I ‘d be pissed too, especially if the city was doing nothing about the dog and its owner. Hate to tell you but often the police will do nothing about these incidents, even when its a human that gets mauled.

            Liked by 3 people

              1. Twice —I read it twice…
                If you read another of my comments
                I had an incident with my city and it was not fun…
                Guess they could say I was threatening…Nothing like finding out the dog that bit you had no shots and the officer failed to do its job, nor did they even do anything to fix their mistake..

                Liked by 1 person

          2. As long as he wasn’t threatening violence, I have no problems.

            People have forgotten what REAL MEN are like. Well, they’re coming back. 😉

            TESTOSTERONE is IN THE HOUSE and I’m lovin’ it!

            Threat to sue? I have no problem if that person has a STACK of guns. I’ll go to the range with him.

            Threat to expose information? Not a problem. I totally respect that.

            THREAT – LOUDLY – to send people to JAIL for their EVIL and their CRIMES?

            Good. He’s my man! Maybe even a real man.

            The DEMS conflate ANGER and HATE with VIOLENCE. They are NOT the same to those of us who know how to control our emotions.

            That’s an OLD skill from BEFORE COMMUNISM.

            I HATE all sorts of bad things, openly, because this world has been deceived into loving and sympathizing with EVIL, and needs to be taught their error.

            FAKE JESUS.

            That is the problem with too many churches.

            I show ANGER spontaneously, and my ANGER is not violence. It is demonstrative of a GOD who has ANGER and that ANGER is perfect and JUST. it is not always there, but it is not always absent, as the communist-ruined churches try to proclaim as a means of CONTROLLING those who truly believe.

            Those who have been taught to conflate these things have been DECEIVED. They have been made to think and behave like poorly disciplined children.

            We’re fixing this shit, and it may be a rough ride! I love that Trump will not be the SNOWFLAKE that the wicked media wants him to be!

            SNOWFLAKES ain’t just gonna melt – it’s time for them to EVAPORATE! 😀

            Liked by 2 people

        1. TY wolf—I didn’t see your response until I posted mine.
          Was trying not to disrespect NebraskaFilly with my answer.
          I do believe that article was a bit tainted. if one is not a gun owner or been around gun owners, one would probably read the article quite differently. I know prior to owning and being around hunters and gun owners I might have read it differently. The one part that says “dozens of rounds of ammunition” is quite misleading to any non-gun owner, for they probably don’t realize that just one box of shells is dozens of rounds..
          Monthly I do practice with my guns. About every 3 months or so I go with some friends to the club range to watch the competitions that I talked about in my post.
          Hey I am not an expert! I just know that where I live help can be more than just a few minutes away. Average time for a 911 call is supposed to be 5 to 10 mins, which really doesn’t apply where I live.
          My constant prayer is that I will never have to use them except for practice & cleaning. If I do have to use one of my guns, I pray my shot/s are good, especially if there are other lives in danger.

          Liked by 2 people

      2. No, I respect your opinion.
        I do have a feeling you are not a gun owner, been around gun owners &/or hunters. Bakersfield actually considered country not really city.
        Maybe a hunter or another gun owner can help you to digest the information better.
        Here how I looked at it.

        He showed up with the guns because he was told to turn over his guns…which was 5 guns total & dozens of rounds of ammunition. 3 hand guns & 2 rifles. If he is a member of a gun club for amateur contests or a hunter that is not that many guns.

        Did you know that bullets/cartridges are bought in boxes of 50? (One round of ammunition is one bullet/ cartridge). Their wording was “dozens of rounds of ammunition” Sounds like he might have had a box or maybe two, which really is not that much for 5 different types of guns.

        Currently I own 3 hand guns. One in front of house, one in bedroom & one is my carry gun. Each gun has a box of shells nearby, so guess you can say I have more like 10s of dozens of shells.
        When I go to the indoor range every month to practice, I buy another box, since I use a whole box in practice.
        Since I don’t hunt, or do competition with the local gun club, I don’t own any rifles. But the ones who participate in the competitions have 3 or 4 rifles of some sort (Most are hunters too). At the competitions, and practices, literally thousands of rounds of ammunition are used.

        Any hunters or people more knowledgeable in guns want to get it a better try.

        Liked by 2 people

        1. Guns should be considered like golf clubs. You will never be any good without a full bag. Two bags means you’re kinda serious. multiple bags, you’re likely a pro. More, you’re a collector.

          Another point – serious gun owners are taught to have 1000 rounds on hand for any caliber they shoot – MORE if they have more guns in that caliber, or if we’re talking .22LR, etc.

          I look at most of these “arsenals” that police pose for the cameras and I laugh. I can tell exactly what kind of shooter they are – it’s like a fingerprint. The fact that people in LE PR and political LE brass lie and pose the guns as “arsenals” is frankly disturbing, and makes me facepalm.

          Liked by 2 people

        2. Um…..I served in the Army and qualified with the M-16, was born and raised in Nebraska, where you will find some of THE finest pheasant hunting, I had a bb-gun when I was 10 and would sit on my dog’s house and shoot at the nasty blackbirds, and yes, I am a gun owner. I have a REALLY sweet S&W 380 Bodyguard w/laser. Fits my small hand beautifully.

          But I do appreciate your good intentions.

          Liked by 2 people

          1. Thank you for your service…
            That was one of the reasons I said to read through totally. I’m not looking back at my original post right now, but it was here or another place that I said I had to read it twice to come to the understanding I did.
            Do believe the article was written to try and shock the typical non-gun owner, for dozens of rounds of ammunition would sound daunting to a non- gun owner.

            Liked by 2 people

              1. Most people at the range and competition bring hundreds of rounds of amo…
                Hey I looked at the box I had just to make sure…Damn I must be a gun nut since I have 3 guns and 150 rounds.

                Liked by 3 people

              2. The idea of a “gun nut” is a liberal, anti-gun invention. The more REAL gun owners one knows, the more “diversity” one sees, and the more LOGIC of their individual choices. I respect them all, from the 0-gun NRA supporters to the 250-gun collectors. Even the people who choose NOT to own guns (or support the NRA) I can respect, if they too hold respectful positions.

                I’ve talked a LOT of people out of owning guns. Surprising for an NRA life member? Not really. Gun ownership is not just a responsibility, it is a burden and a moral risk. For many folks, it’s just not a good choice. I can tell that people have been enlightened to make the right choice by their SENSE OF RELIEF, freed from some hidden burden of “I should get a gun.” or “I shouldn’t get a gun.”, a burden which is clearly wrong and conflicts with their basic nature.

                Trust me – you are so far from a “gun nut” by anybody’s definition, you would never get there if you started hoarding now! 😀

                Liked by 2 people

              3. Took me a long time to finally buy my first gun.
                Took several classes including the CW class in my area. It was actually over a year after I got my CW that I finally brought a gun..
                About 6 months after getting my CW license I was stopped my an officer. (yea I was probably speeding a bit). He comes up to the car & taps on my passenger side window. I roll it down. He is mostly standing by my back door as he barely leans over and says “where is it” I go “where is what” he says my gun. I told him I didn’t own one. We talked a bit about how I had a CW but had not purchased a gun yet. He then proceeds to tell me I was 7 miles over the speed limit, but he let me off. Guess my CW had tagged me somehow.
                I still laugh about this, but it did make me really realize my responsibility now that I own & if I get stopped with my gun in the car.

                Liked by 2 people

              4. If I am stopped it will be both hands on wheel while I explain that I have a gun where the needed information is.
                My carry gun is either in my purse(DL needed) or in the middle panel(registration & insurance).
                Actually practiced it in my mind many times.

                Liked by 2 people

            1. I think if I lived somewhere that was so dangerous I had to have 3 weapons close at hand at all times, I would move – pronto! That’s just crazy to me unless one is living in the wilderness and has to worry about wild animals.

              I am not “into” weapons nor am I scared of them. They are simply a tool for me if needed. I don’t go to the range to practice, I don’t go to gun shows nor do I have any need for more than one. Unless things so south and we face another civil war, I seriously doubt that I will ever need to fire my weapon – unless a rabid groundhog happens to pay me a visit!


              1. Filly–I did not diminish what you had said or your opinion.
                Now it is time for you to STFU
                Get off your holier than thou soapbox and go pester someone else
                God Bless And May You Have A Blessed Sunday


              2. Well, excuse me! Where the hell did THAT come from???? I am not being “holier than thou.” I am simply speaking to the fact that the vast majority of Americans do NOT live in places that require such constant vigilance. Maybe you should visit flyover country some time? Sheesh!


              3. And, oh my, the hypocrisy in your “blessing” after telling me to STFU??? Seriously? I guess it is best that you and I do not converse in the future.


              4. Have it mean whatever you want..
                Acronym Definition
                STFU Shut the Freak Up (polite form)


              5. Have it mean whatever you want..
                Acronym Definition
                STFU Shut the Freak Up (polite form)

                Just out of curiosity have you badgered Wolf on his comments as you have on mine. I read through the comments & it seems that all of your comments have been directed at me and no one else.


              6. Seriously? I guess it is best that you and I do not converse in the future. ”

                THANK YOU & I hope you keep to what you stick to what you just said.
                badging someone else as you did me, would probably net the same results.


          1. Bakersfield is considered country in California. It does have a population of 365,000, with a good percentage of them actually being rural people.
            Heck, a slew of the old country singers and actors come from Bakersfield.

            Liked by 1 person

      1. at first I was with the police on it.
        Then realized it was a 15 year old 6 ft male who was not letting the man separate the dogs.
        To me that was give me a break..

        Liked by 3 people

        1. Yeah, that “kid” was an idiot. Very typical “can’t control the dog” owner. And then they act like something is WRONG if their killer dog which has just killed an animal or injured a person is pushed back, restrained, or even yelled at to get it to BTFO.

          Their 120-pound animal with blood dripping form its mouth, crazed, yanking on the end of the leash….

          “You’re scaring my dog, man!”

          You can’t reason with socialist idiots. You can only get away.

          Liked by 4 people

          1. I almost put it in the other post…But I had personal experience with my own city due to a dog bite. Unknown to me one night the neighbor’s dog busted through a rail of our communal fence and was scaring my cat on my patio. (far side away from fence.). As I picked up my cat not knowing what was up, I got it twice in the rear.

            Did the police handle it the right way-NO
            Turned out the year-old dog had no shots, but it was not even quarantined.
            Did the city handle it the right way-NO. After I bitched and moaned for several weeks’ the city apologized.
            I had to go to a hearing, where at the urging of the city manager the couple finally apologized at the end of the hearing. Oh, get this they tried saying their dog was protecting my cat from me. OK my rant over.


            Liked by 4 people

              1. Oh I did everything in my power to stifle myself. Manger did ask why that conclusion ins a kind of stern tone.
                They just went in circles…Not a hearing I ever want to go through again. They eventually moved & I’m glad.

                Liked by 3 people

  18. I’m interested in which states have any of the following:

    – NO red flag laws

    – NO chance a red flag law will pass

    – HAS a red flag law which is PROVEN to be resistant to abuse (no problems)

    Liked by 2 people

    1. You won’t hear about the abuse unless someone is brave and rich enough to challenge the law. And then that person has to be willing to go to media to tell his side of things.
      I predict most of these Red Flag laws will be found to be unconstitutional in their first forms. It may take a few tries until the courts uphold one but it will take a long time to go through the judicial system and be appealed.
      Someone who has a good job or a business probably won’t be willing to go public with a challenge. It could ruin his life.
      But again, we won’t hear about the abuses. They will remain closely guarded secrets until someone is willing to stick his neck out and challenge them. And then the promoters of those laws will simply claim just because one person was wronged by the law, it doesn’t mean they aren’t “good” laws.
      Here’s hoping the NRA will come to the rescue of the worst of these abuses.


    1. Trying to figure out what is wrong with an alert for Illegals trying to buy guns and they fail.
      Oh that might hurt the Democrats new voting base I guess
      Would like to know why the H3LL an Illegal should buy a gun in a country they should not be anyway.
      As it stands currently, Illegals are responsible for over 1/3 of America’s yearly homicides.

      Democrats reject push to alert ICE when illegal immigrants fail firearm background checks

      Liked by 2 people

  19. Note to all U.S. gun owners:

    Never, ever brag or otherwise divulge what kind and how many guns you have at home. These Red Flag laws could get your guns removed from your possession if just one person decides for whatever reason they don’t like you.

    It’s also a good idea to not discuss your guns with anyone simply due to the potential for theft of the guns. And your teenager might be totally trustworthy, but you never know about the friends he brings over to your house.

    Liked by 2 people

  20. Anecdotal evidence of red flag law abuse:


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s