Oklahoma Anti Red Flag Law

The #1 community for Gun Owners in Indiana

Member Benefits:

  • Fewer Ads!
  • Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership
  • Discuss anti-gun legislation
  • Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section
  • Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses
  • Discover free outdoor shooting areas
  • View up to date on firearm-related events
  • Share photos & video with other members
  • ...and so much more!
  • 2A_Tom

    Crotchety old member!
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 100%
    3   0   0
    Sep 27, 2010
    25,978
    113
    NWI
    [h=1]COLUMN: An anti-red flag law[/h]
    https://www.tahlequahdailypress.com...cle_96f964d0-fbcf-5e04-9936-5d2131869aad.html


    Before the Oklahoma Legislature adjourned on Friday, May 15, they passed Senate Bill 1081, an anti "Red Flag" bill.
    Authored by Sen. Nathan Dahm, R-Tulsa, and Rep. Jay Steagall, R-Yukon, the bill was signed into law by Gov. Kevin Stitt on Saturday. It prevents Oklahoma cities and towns from enacting policies that would allow a court or other entity to restrict gun access to people they deem to be an imminent danger. The bill passed the House 77-14 and the Senate 34-9. “This bill would stop any action from the federal government or even from local or state authorities that would infringe on the Second Amendment rights of our citizens,” Steagall said. The bill is said to be the first of its type in the nation. Critics of the bill said it was unnecessary because Oklahoma municipalities are already prevented from engaging in gun control.

    Hopefully not the last.
     

    rugertoter

    Master
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Apr 9, 2011
    3,260
    63
    N.E. Corner
    Red Flag laws are totally unconstitutional, and it should not even be something up for discussion. These anti-gun types make stuff up, throw it against the wall, just to see if it sticks....Red Flag laws are one such idea. :xmad:
     

    WelchyV90

    Plinker
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Mar 4, 2020
    57
    6
    Indiana
    If only Indiana would do this and get rid of our red flag law. I don't see it happening any time soon with both Todd Hound and Mike Braun supporting red flag and "common sense" gun control.
     

    HoughMade

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Oct 24, 2012
    35,612
    149
    Valparaiso
    If only Indiana would do this and get rid of our red flag law. I don't see it happening any time soon with both Todd Hound and Mike Braun supporting red flag and "common sense" gun control.

    What do they have to do with Indiana law?

    I feel like if Schoolhouse Rock had just done a cartoon about the concepts of federalism, we could avoid some of these things.
     
    Last edited:

    WelchyV90

    Plinker
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Mar 4, 2020
    57
    6
    Indiana
    What do they have to do with Indiana law?

    I feel like if Schoolhouse Rock had just done a cartoon about the concepts of federalism, we could avoid some of these things.
    It was more of a quip about the mentality of Indiana law makers at large, and how spineless the Republicans are to the will of the democrats. My local rep is pretty good but in general these law makers are fine giving away our rights to appease the loudest crowds.
     

    dereedy

    Plinker
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Apr 11, 2013
    19
    3
    But some sheriffs say its a good law and has built in protections. :rolleyes:

    Yes, I'm not surprised that law enforcement likes to have the power to take guns from anyone they claim is "dangerous," without all the bother of proving that a crime has happened.

    What if someone supports lower police pensions or decreases in their qualified immunity? I wonder if they'll start looking through the social media history of that person to try to find them "dangerous." Maybe -- there's nothing in the law that says they can't do that.

    Overall I agree with those who think the laws are unconstitutional. I'd like to see the "Red Flag" law repealed in Indiana. I wish I knew about some groups that are working toward that goal.
     

    JettaKnight

    Я з Україною
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 100%
    6   0   0
    Oct 13, 2010
    26,517
    113
    Fort Wayne
    Yes, I'm not surprised that law enforcement likes to have the power to take guns from anyone they claim is "dangerous," without all the bother of proving that a crime has happened.

    What if someone supports lower police pensions or decreases in their qualified immunity? I wonder if they'll start looking through the social media history of that person to try to find them "dangerous." Maybe -- there's nothing in the law that says they can't do that.

    Overall I agree with those who think the laws are unconstitutional. I'd like to see the "Red Flag" law repealed in Indiana. I wish I knew about some groups that are working toward that goal.

    tumblr_niw2bb31gm1tnxaowo1_500.gif



    PS - welcome to INGO. (or should I say back to INGO?)
     

    Bill of Rights

    Cogito, ergo porto.
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 100%
    7   0   0
    Apr 26, 2008
    18,096
    77
    Where's the bacon?
    Anyone that thinks these are good laws is illiterate to The Bill of Rights, at the very least

    Please correct me if I'm mistaken, as I very well might be. I think that the Red Flag law in IN is also called the Jake Laird law, and as I recall, it came about when someone shot and killed a police officer and while he had not committed any crimes before that point, he had shown a reason for concern. It's been a long time since I looked at this and I might be very mistaken on many or all of these points.

    I know all about the slippery slope, and I do not agree that it's a good thing for police (or anyone) to have the ability to lawfully take the property of a citizen, certainly not on the basis of a very low-set standard, "Well, we think he's dangerous" being an example. You're da*ned right some people are dangerous, many of them here on INGO, but under what circumstances? I can think of a few that come to mind in less time than the snap of my fingers that I would NOT want to stand against, but that are polite, civil, peaceable men, who would no more hurt someone unprovoked than they would put on tights and dance a ballet. These are the "rough men" of whom Orwell spoke in his famous quote. These are not men who need to have their guns taken away, but rather the ones that criminals, tyrants, and other evildoers provoke. Let's call them "Dangerous to threats" (DTT)

    Compare and contrast the men of whom I speak, the DTTs, with the average Antifa/BLM rioter, the one my examples refer to as a "tango".

    My DTT examples will do those people no harm until and unless the latter present a threat, but make no mistake, of the two, the former are far more dangerous to a presented threat.

    If I was the one writing the law, I would say that the law should not permit the taking of property on the determination that someone is "dangerous" i.e.: to civil society(by which I refer to the rioters, etc. and their ilk) but instead should provide for the taking into custody of the person determined to be a danger to society (DTS).

    Rationale:

    1. If a person is a DTS and needs to have his guns taken away, does that mean he cannot get more guns? (hint: if he's dangerous, he doesn't care that he can't get them "legally".)
    2. If a person is a DTS and somehow has no guns, does that mean that he cannot drive a car into a crowd or build an explosive or incendiary device?
    3. If a person is a DTS, does that mean that he cannot incite others to violence on his behalf?
    4. If a person is a DTT and is denied his guns, who is responsible when he or his family are attacked in his state of disarmament?
    5. If a person is a DTT (but accused of being DTS) why should his wife or other housemate (brother/sister/whatever, in the case of someone not married but sharing a home) be denied his/her rights and/or property?

    Corollary:

    1. If an object, a gun, for example, is taken into police property rooms, is it kept from harm? That is, if I have a collector's edition 1911 in pristine condition, will it still be so if I ever get it back?
    2. Will my gun be "accidentally destroyed", by which I mean listed as such and actually taken into someone else's personal collection, to be resold at a later date?
    3. Will my gun be accidentally destroyed, meaning sent to a furnace to be melted down for scrap, when it was not supposed to be?
    4. How many years will my property be kept locked in a police property room, presuming none of the above happen to it?
    5. To the contrary, if the PERSON is taken into custody must be released when he is determined to not be a DTS.
    6. There are incentives in place, namely, that a person has rights and must be housed and fed and such while in the custody of the gov't, to release that person back to his life.

    The concept of the Red Flag law is not wrong.... remove threats to society..... The execution of it is where it goes wrong, in that it focuses on the tool, not the actual threat.

    My $0.21, which is :twocents:, adjusted for inflation.

    Blessings,
    Bill
     
    Top Bottom