NO.

NO. Eff Australia.

Except he was discharged from military for mental issues.

If you can get 2/3 of the states to agree. Go ahead, give it a run. Not happening.

Gunny456 said:

---

This is well said and well spoken but, as already proven in other countries, people aren't going to call " the cops" or 911 to institutute a red flag. You can bet a " hot line" will be set up to a new governmental agency,
Governed by the DOJ or FBI or ATF or IRS that will then have a " judge" place the red flag on that person etc etc.
No chance for corruption at all. Cause we have no corruption at all now. Should work perfect.

---

It wasn't a judge that messed up with the Sutherland Springs shooter (who was red flagged), it was some Air Force goon who simply didn't get it put in the system. He purchased a gun. It was a judge (more or less) who said the Uvalde shooter's violent record couldn't be red flagged because he was underage. He purchased two guns.

With due process it is something I can support. How else do we keep guns out of the hands of certified crazies?

I agree. And fear sells lots of AR's.

Slicer97 said:

---

Probably for the same reason most people don't remember that the federal government's "solutions" to any problem either don't work or have unforeseen negative consequences.

Trust the gubmint at your own risk.

---

Great point. Is there a recent example these sheep could have learned from about the gubmint overstepping the intent in a short amount of time? Maybe mandatory vaccines or you lose your job even though it was very apparent what at risk people were being affected the most by some novel virus? No, the gubmint would NEVER push it too far, they should be completely trusted legislating gun control.

AR stands for asphalt rifle because it looks like asphalt.

Understand your point but do you honestly think it will not be corrupt and used as political bias to push a gun control agenda? Examples have already happened.
My solution would be to maybe lock up the crazys and get them some help. Then they can't attempt to buy the guns. And perhaps enforce maximum penalties when these people are caught breaking laws and remove them from society instead of turning them out one day after being caught.
Sadly the problem is just going to get worse......look at the cross section of the age and sex of the thousands of illegal immigrants lined up to cross the border this week alone. Really look at the videos. The majority of the illegals standing there are 18-25 year old males. What gangs will they be in next week?
I have family working our border with the DPS. They say what we are doing down there is a pure joke and the number of crazys and bads we are letting in every single day would scare most people, if they truly knew the truth, to death......and everybody in the US would be building forts around their homes.

B-1 83 said:

---

Gunny456 said:

---

This is well said and well spoken but, as already proven in other countries, people aren't going to call " the cops" or 911 to institutute a red flag. You can bet a " hot line" will be set up to a new governmental agency,
Governed by the DOJ or FBI or ATF or IRS that will then have a " judge" place the red flag on that person etc etc.
No chance for corruption at all. Cause we have no corruption at all now. Should work perfect.

---

It wasn't a judge that messed up with the Sutherland Springs shooter (who was red flagged), it was some Air Force goon who simply didn't get it put in the system. He purchased a gun. It was a judge (more or less) who said the Uvalde shooter's violent record couldn't be red flagged because he was underage. He purchased two guns.

With due process it is something I can support. How else do we keep guns out of the hands of certified crazies?

---

I think the first thing is to actually follow (what is the verb here?) due process.

1. Prosecute and punish actual violent/gun crimes. Felon in possession, prohibited persons attempting to purchase, assault, etc.

2. 2nd strike is an enhanced sentence. 3 strikes and you're out. Quit putting repeat criminals on the streets.

3. Mandate that juvenile records (especially violent/property crime) are visible after the age of 18. Exclude MIP, PI, if you want.

4. Lean on the music/video/film/entertainment industries to change the culture they project. Example was MLB prohibiting chewing tobacco from being videotaped. This one you can't mandate, but you can encourage and call them to task.

After that, we can watch the crime rate drop and make actual non-emotional decisions based on the results.

AggiePetro07 said:

---

B-1 83 said:

---

Gunny456 said:

---

This is well said and well spoken but, as already proven in other countries, people aren't going to call " the cops" or 911 to institutute a red flag. You can bet a " hot line" will be set up to a new governmental agency,
Governed by the DOJ or FBI or ATF or IRS that will then have a " judge" place the red flag on that person etc etc.
No chance for corruption at all. Cause we have no corruption at all now. Should work perfect.

---

It wasn't a judge that messed up with the Sutherland Springs shooter (who was red flagged), it was some Air Force goon who simply didn't get it put in the system. He purchased a gun. It was a judge (more or less) who said the Uvalde shooter's violent record couldn't be red flagged because he was underage. He purchased two guns.

With due process it is something I can support. How else do we keep guns out of the hands of certified crazies?

---

I think the first thing is to actually follow (what is the verb here?) due process.

1. Prosecute and punish actual violent/gun crimes. Felon in possession, prohibited persons attempting to purchase, assault, etc.

2. 2nd strike is an enhanced sentence. 3 strikes and you're out. Quit putting repeat criminals on the streets.

3. Mandate that juvenile records (especially violent/property crime) are visible after the age of 18. Exclude MIP, PI, if you want.

4. Lean on the music/video/film/entertainment industries to change the culture they project. Example was MLB prohibiting chewing tobacco from being videotaped. This one you can't mandate, but you can encourage and call them to task.

After that, we can watch the crime rate drop and make actual non-emotional decisions based on the results.

---

I don't necessarily agree with all of these, no. 3 in particular, but this is exactly how to attack the issue and actually make an impact. It's not difficult, but it takes a collective effort from the police all the way up through the incarceration.

It will never fly with the left though because they won't tell the BLM/ACLU crowd to kick the curb.

96ags said:

---

AggiePetro07 said:

---

B-1 83 said:

---

Gunny456 said:

---

This is well said and well spoken but, as already proven in other countries, people aren't going to call " the cops" or 911 to institutute a red flag. You can bet a " hot line" will be set up to a new governmental agency,
Governed by the DOJ or FBI or ATF or IRS that will then have a " judge" place the red flag on that person etc etc.
No chance for corruption at all. Cause we have no corruption at all now. Should work perfect.

---

It wasn't a judge that messed up with the Sutherland Springs shooter (who was red flagged), it was some Air Force goon who simply didn't get it put in the system. He purchased a gun. It was a judge (more or less) who said the Uvalde shooter's violent record couldn't be red flagged because he was underage. He purchased two guns.

With due process it is something I can support. How else do we keep guns out of the hands of certified crazies?

---

I think the first thing is to actually follow (what is the verb here?) due process.

1. Prosecute and punish actual violent/gun crimes. Felon in possession, prohibited persons attempting to purchase, assault, etc.

2. 2nd strike is an enhanced sentence. 3 strikes and you're out. Quit putting repeat criminals on the streets.

3. Mandate that juvenile records (especially violent/property crime) are visible after the age of 18. Exclude MIP, PI, if you want.

4. Lean on the music/video/film/entertainment industries to change the culture they project. Example was MLB prohibiting chewing tobacco from being videotaped. This one you can't mandate, but you can encourage and call them to task.

After that, we can watch the crime rate drop and make actual non-emotional decisions based on the results.

---

I don't necessarily agree with all of these, no. 3 in particular, but this is exactly how to attack the issue and actually make an impact. It's not difficult, but it takes a collective effort from the police all the way up through the incarceration.

It will never fly with the left though because they won't tell the BLM/ACLU crowd to kick the curb.

---

Not to be argumentative, but want to hear your reasoning for #3?

Gunny456 said:

---

Understand your point but do you honestly think it will not be corrupt and used as political bias to push a gun control agenda? Examples have already happened.
My solution would be to maybe lock up the crazys and get them some help. Then they can't attempt to buy the guns. And perhaps enforce maximum penalties when these people are caught breaking laws and remove them from society instead of turning them out one day after being caught.
Sadly the problem is just going to get worse......look at the cross section of the age and sex of the thousands of illegal immigrants lined up to cross the border this week alone. Really look at the videos. The majority of the illegals standing there are 18-25 year old males. What gangs will they be in next week?
I have family working our border with the DPS. They say what we are doing down there is a pure joke and the number of crazys and bads we are letting in every single day would scare most people, if they truly knew the truth, to death......and everybody in the US would be building forts around their homes.

---

Yes, 100 percent.

The American left is also facilitating greater violence very intentionally, while denigrating half the country as backward ignorant racist insurrectionists. They just also acted yet again in a highly duplicitous manner to try to criminalize a large number of legal gun owners with rule interpretations/changes as to definitions (SBR/braces).

There is zero reason, at all, to trust the leftists to deal with gun owners/laws fairly or in good faith.

AggiePetro07 said:

---

96ags said:

---

AggiePetro07 said:

---

B-1 83 said:

---

Gunny456 said:

---

This is well said and well spoken but, as already proven in other countries, people aren't going to call " the cops" or 911 to institutute a red flag. You can bet a " hot line" will be set up to a new governmental agency,
Governed by the DOJ or FBI or ATF or IRS that will then have a " judge" place the red flag on that person etc etc.
No chance for corruption at all. Cause we have no corruption at all now. Should work perfect.

---

It wasn't a judge that messed up with the Sutherland Springs shooter (who was red flagged), it was some Air Force goon who simply didn't get it put in the system. He purchased a gun. It was a judge (more or less) who said the Uvalde shooter's violent record couldn't be red flagged because he was underage. He purchased two guns.

With due process it is something I can support. How else do we keep guns out of the hands of certified crazies?

---

I think the first thing is to actually follow (what is the verb here?) due process.

1. Prosecute and punish actual violent/gun crimes. Felon in possession, prohibited persons attempting to purchase, assault, etc.

2. 2nd strike is an enhanced sentence. 3 strikes and you're out. Quit putting repeat criminals on the streets.

3. Mandate that juvenile records (especially violent/property crime) are visible after the age of 18. Exclude MIP, PI, if you want.

4. Lean on the music/video/film/entertainment industries to change the culture they project. Example was MLB prohibiting chewing tobacco from being videotaped. This one you can't mandate, but you can encourage and call them to task.

After that, we can watch the crime rate drop and make actual non-emotional decisions based on the results.

---

I don't necessarily agree with all of these, no. 3 in particular, but this is exactly how to attack the issue and actually make an impact. It's not difficult, but it takes a collective effort from the police all the way up through the incarceration.

It will never fly with the left though because they won't tell the BLM/ACLU crowd to kick the curb.

---

Not to be argumentative, but want to hear your reasoning for #3?

---

I don't take it as argumentative at all. For me, the list of exclusions would make or break the deal. It just seems that it would open the door for abuse from enforcement agencies. If the information that was allowed to be available was very narrow in scope and access, then I can see some value.

Gotcha.

I think violent crime convictions should follow people.

Other stuff not so much.

Just because someone was young doesn't mean they didn't understand it was wrong, or that they will be rehabilitated.

I think this would chip away at the undesirables obtaining weapons "legally".

AggiePetro07 said:

---

Gotcha.

I think violent crime convictions should follow people.

Other stuff not so much.

Just because someone was young doesn't mean they didn't understand it was wrong, or that they will be rehabilitated.

I think this would chip away at the undesirables obtaining weapons "legally".

---

I can absolutely get on board with the violent crime description.

I know.