Indianapolis shooting FedEx--Red Flag Law failed

  • You are viewing Orangepower as a Guest. To start new threads, reply to posts, or participate in polls or contests - you must register. Registration is free and easy. Click Here to register.

CowboyJD

The Voice of Reason...occasionally......rarely
A/V Subscriber
Dec 10, 2004
18,506
20,519
1,743
#21
The argument that I've seen is that we shouldn't pass MORE laws until the existing laws are being enforced. Regardless of how you want to phrase this specific instance, the argument is valid.
I've seen your stated argument as well.

Your stated argument is valid, IMO. That's why I didn't bring it up.

There are, however, others that argue that red flag laws don't work even when used and enforced and the ones on the books should be revoked.

That is a different argument than they one you have stated, and the argument to which I was referring.
 

CowboyJD

The Voice of Reason...occasionally......rarely
A/V Subscriber
Dec 10, 2004
18,506
20,519
1,743
#22
I'm reminded of the Baltimore discussion a few weeks back about how DA's have discretion on how to enforce, or not enforce, the law. Ironic that we have such a glaring example of what can happen if they choose not to. It's up to the voters in Indianapolis to decide how they feel, just like it was with the voters in Baltimore, right?
ABSOLUTELY, with out a doubt, correct IMO.

It is up to the voters in Indianapolis to decide how they feel about the DA's failure to use existing red flag laws to protect them.
 

wrenhal

Federal Marshal
Aug 11, 2011
11,049
4,310
1,743
#23
I would call it a failure...but most call it a loophole... when there is a law that is supposed to prevent potential gun violence acts by restricting access to guns..and the entire thing can be circumvented by saying...ohh we don't want the original gun back

How is it of any protection or make any sense...in a law that basically says "hey, we are taking your gun away because you are a danger to yourself and others with it, but since you don't want it back.. We won't stop you from buying more"
I wouldn't call it a failure or a loophole of the statute, I would call it a failure by the prosecutor to protect the citizens of his jurisdiction by not using his authority.

It can't be circumvented by saying we don't want the original gun back if the prosecutor actually bothers to file the petition.

Furthermore, if the prosecutor actually files and wins the petition in that case, he would have been stopped from buying more.

Saying that "the law failed" when in fact the "prosecutor failed to use the law" plays right in to the next step of the specious argument of "therefore we shouldn't have any such laws because they don't work anyway".
If a petition was heard to remove the gun and a judge rules so and the ruling was acted on, then the paperwork should be automatic. That's a failure of the law. There should be no decision by the D.A.

Sent from my Moto Z (2) using Tapatalk
 

CowboyJD

The Voice of Reason...occasionally......rarely
A/V Subscriber
Dec 10, 2004
18,506
20,519
1,743
#24
If a petition was heard to remove the gun and a judge rules so and the ruling was acted on, then the paperwork should be automatic. That's a failure of the law. There should be no decision by the D.A.

Sent from my Moto Z (2) using Tapatalk
Okay, you don't understand the law.

Duly noted.

There was no petition heard to remove the gun because the law doesn't require it to remove the gun....but okay.
 

wrenhal

Federal Marshal
Aug 11, 2011
11,049
4,310
1,743
#25
If a petition was heard to remove the gun and a judge rules so and the ruling was acted on, then the paperwork should be automatic. That's a failure of the law. There should be no decision by the D.A.

Sent from my Moto Z (2) using Tapatalk
Okay, you don't understand the law.

Duly noted.

There was no petition heard to remove the gun because the law doesn't require it to remove the gun....but okay.
It didn't well I'm sorry but I guess Indiana doesn't have that feature? Because I was told that one of the reasons red flag laws wouldn't get abused was there was going to be judicial review of the petitions to remove the guns so that there was a stop gap to keep the abuse down.

Sent from my Moto Z (2) using Tapatalk
 

CowboyJD

The Voice of Reason...occasionally......rarely
A/V Subscriber
Dec 10, 2004
18,506
20,519
1,743
#26
It didn't well I'm sorry but I guess Indiana doesn't have that feature? Because I was told that one of the reasons red flag laws wouldn't get abused was there was going to be judicial review of the petitions to remove the guns so that there was a stop gap to keep the abuse down.

Sent from my Moto Z (2) using Tapatalk
Welcome back to being placed on ignore.

Have a good one.
 

wrenhal

Federal Marshal
Aug 11, 2011
11,049
4,310
1,743
#27
It didn't well I'm sorry but I guess Indiana doesn't have that feature? Because I was told that one of the reasons red flag laws wouldn't get abused was there was going to be judicial review of the petitions to remove the guns so that there was a stop gap to keep the abuse down.

Sent from my Moto Z (2) using Tapatalk
Welcome back to being placed on ignore.

Have a good one.
Ignore because I just stated that I was misinformed by people that said red flag laws wouldn't be abused because of reviews. Didn't say anything to you or about you or anything odd. Guess you don't want to discuss.

Sent from my Moto Z (2) using Tapatalk