Indiana man has weapons seized under red flag law

[2A_Tom]

IBTL

CM please do not shooter me, I do not think I am violating your warning.

My only comment on this is that I do not trust the word of a socialist worker from the socialist workers party to assess anything.

My friends that fostered three inner city kids and were attempting to adopt them, were told by their socialist worker that he would never allow them to adopt, because they were Christian.

Their kids were taken away and they have been fighting for a year to get them back.

 

[Cameramonkey]

I heard the first report and know this user. I was floored when I heard his name. I like him and have been praying for him.

I dont disagree with the actions taken. I lean toward “empty threat based on extreme pain and frustration” Over a legit threat. But given the world we live in today, you just can’t say that kind of thing anymore even if you don’t mean it literally.

I hope everything works out for him.

 

[churchmouse]

IBTL

CM please do not shooter me, I do not think I am violating your warning.

My only comment on this is that I do not trust the word of a socialist worker from the socialist workers party to assess anything.

My friends that fostered three inner city kids and were attempting to adopt them, were told by their socialist worker that he would never allow them to adopt, because they were Christian.

Their kids were taken away and they have been fighting for a year to get them back.

These comments are well inside the discussion at hand. My only concern is a fellow member gets a fair shake from the public beat down. When he is released and or charged with an actual crime that will be a different issue.

My son is struggling with the same crap as your friends from the same agency. We empower these people and they do not always wield it properly.

 

[Route 45]

My friends that fostered three inner city kids and were attempting to adopt them, were told by their socialist worker that he would never allow them to adopt, because they were Christian.

If this is true (and I'm not saying that it isn't), somebody needs a hidden tape recorder and the phone number for Call 6 For Help.

 

[2A_Tom]

They are in Illinois, so...

It has been brought out in court by their lawyer.

These people of modest means have depleted all of their assets, in order to get three at risk kids out of the system, off the taxpayers dime and keep them out of the south Chicago gangs.

The Socialist State stands with the socialist worker.

 

[shotgun0311]

I wonder how many of us will get letters about seized firearms that we use to have?

 

[HoughMade]

Not it.

 

[Cameramonkey]

Oh, and the "explosives" the article referenced? I'm 99.999% sure its just Tannerite. He is fond of that stuff. Given the report says the "explosives" were legal, thats the only thing I can think of that it would be.

 

[printcraft]

I DO NOT like the lack of due process of this law.

 

[churchmouse]

I wonder how many of us will get letters about seized firearms that we use to have?

Did I not already put up a pretty clear in thread warning about this. I was not at all playing. I am not now. Discuss the law.

I know this man as does many others here on the forum. I seriously doubt he would ever knowingly buy anything questionable.

This will be the very last time. Ban hammer is next to the desk at the ready. This will not become a dog pile. Period.

 

[Route 45]

They are in Illinois, so...

That sheds some light on the situation. Not much I'd put past a state agency in Illinois.

 

[ArcadiaGP]

I DO NOT like the lack of due process of this law.

Yeah that's where it gets dicey... one person's opinion about what constitutes a "red flag" can differ from someone else... especially when agendas get involved.

 

[mom45]

No comments will be forthcoming until this man has his day. Period.
PM among yourselves but keep his name "OFF" the open forum until such a time as is fair to him. . If not I will take action.

Bumping this one for any who may join in the discussion and not read back.

I fully agree that the person's name is not relevant to the discussion.

I know many who collect firearms as an investment as well as for personal protection/home defense. Does that make them a criminal? I dare say many of INGO's members could come under scrutiny if a law enforcement agency were to discover their stash of ammo/firearms. Stories can be twisted to fit an agenda pretty easily, and I distrust any media report when it comes to their definition of what may be too many firearms for an individual to own.

Do I really NEED more than one pistol? Nope...I normally only carry one (or maybe two) at any given time, but I still like having more than one to choose from.

None of us were in that person's house to see for ourselves what was found.

 

[jamil]

If this is true (and I'm not saying that it isn't), somebody needs a hidden tape recorder and the phone number for Call 6 For Help.

Yep. They need to be caught red-handed.

 

[historian]

Yeah that's where it gets dicey... one person's opinion about what constitutes a "red flag" can differ from someone else... especially when agendas get involved.

I think (and correct me if I am wrong), this is just a quick situation until it can get sorted out. For instance, if a credible threat is made, then the weapons can go away while it is determined if the threat is real and legit, then, if there are no charges/nothing to it, weapons go back to the owner. I believe it is a stopgap between threat and charge/no charge.

 

[ArcadiaGP]

I think (and correct me if I am wrong), this is just a quick situation until it can get sorted out. For instance, if a credible threat is made, then the weapons can go away while it is determined if the threat is real and legit, then, if there are no charges/nothing to it, weapons go back to the owner. I believe it is a stopgap between threat and charge/no charge.

Obviously the "explosives" cited in the article weren't serious enough to make this worse. Perhaps memorabilia being called something it isn't to get a catchier headline.

Yeah, hope it works out.

 

[d.kaufman]

I DO NOT like the lack of due process of this law.

I agree. He said, she said. Thats the biggest problem with these "red flag laws" one person can totally turn someones life upside down just by saying he/she threatened me. Give me audio or visual proof, then you've got a more valid reason to move forward with this law.
This social worker could just be completely anti gun.
And if someone is found lying about something like this they need to be charged to the fullest extent of the law and made to pay for any damages/legal fees that were brought about due to the allegations

 

[HoughMade]

Obviously the "explosives" cited in the article weren't serious enough to make this worse. Perhaps memorabilia being called something it isn't to get a catchier headline.

Yeah, hope it works out.

They mentioned tannerite above, I also saw a report that there was 100# of black powder (also legal).

 

[ArcadiaGP]

I agree. He said, she said. Thats the biggest problem with these "red flag laws" one person can totally turn someones life upside down just by saying he/she threatened me. Give me audio or visual proof, then you've got a more valid reason to move forward with this law.
This social worker could just be completely anti gun.
And if someone is found lying about something like this they need to be charged to the fullest extent of the law and made to pay for any damages/legal fees that were brought about due to the allegations

So when we apply this to a different situation... school shootings... where's the middle ground? Is there any?

Someone could say a student was making threats... but is there a due process for that? Would the law be wrong to take guns from their home while they look into it? It's still he said/she said.

They mentioned tannerite above, I also saw a report that there was 100# of black powder (also legal).

Ahhh gotcha. Normal stuff for gun owners.

 

[BigBoxaJunk]

So when we apply this to a different situation... school shootings... where's the middle ground? Is there any?

Someone could say a student was making threats... but is there a due process for that?

We all know that with 20/20 hind-sight, the number of threats "they should have taken seriously" roughly equals the number of crazy things that crazy people do.

But every time it comes up, I wonder how many man hours we're talking about if everyone who ever sees something says something, and if someone then investigates all of those somethings.

Add to that, how many guns would need to be taken away from how many people, how many people would need to be "held" somewhere, or "kept an eye on"?

Not saying it shouldn't be done, but like I said, I always wonder about the numbers.