Abuses of 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!
  • xwing

    Expert
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Apr 11, 2012
    1,127
    113
    Greene County
    They get abused all the time, and the government wants to make them even more abuse-prone. How about "innocent until proven guilty"? How about the ability to "face your accuser"? How about having to actually be guilty of a crime before being terribly punished? I watched the interview posted above with Alfredo Luna. Terribly scary that the government can do this! They are punishing people for political thought!
     

    DadSmith

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    1   0   0
    Oct 21, 2018
    22,203
    113
    Ripley County
    Does Indiana's red flag law require a warrant signed by a judge or not?

    According to the new SCOTUS ruling they must obtain a warrant to confiscate from the individuals home.

    The Supreme Court ruled Monday that warrantless gun confiscation from Americans’ homes is unconstitutional, voting unanimously on the side of a Rhode Island man whose firearms were taken by law enforcement without a warrant after his wife expressed concerns that he might hurt himself.
     

    jwamplerusa

    High drag, low speed...
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 100%
    2   0   0
    Feb 21, 2018
    4,211
    113
    Boone County
    See, a supreme court which is not packed with leftists and communist will actually do his job and rule based upon the Constitution. What a concept

    We've had nearly 90 years of a wing Court after FDR neutered it in the 30s as part of his new deal program push.

    It would be nice if things swung back the other direction hard for a while.
     

    yote hunter

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    19   0   0
    Dec 27, 2013
    6,811
    113
    Indiana
    Comments here could possibly get someone to be flagged “Red Flag” if some lefty visited here and seen something they feel like reporting. :dunno:
    And we have lefty’s here already. :nailbite:
     

    KittySlayer

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    4   0   0
    Jan 29, 2013
    6,473
    77
    Northeast IN
    I'm trying to carry on a 'conversation' about current, and proposed, Red Flag Laws with a friend and was asked to provide any instances of their abuse; where was law fraudulently was used to intimidate, accuse, someone.

    A search on the internet using words like, abuse, fraudulent, illegal, etc. turns up nothing but 'pro' articles about RFL.

    Has anyone heard of any cases where this has occurred? I'm sure they're out there, but how to find them.
    Well a “conversation” can deal with hypotheticals. Ask your friend what the punishment should be for false reporting “if” it happened.
     

    Denny347

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    21   0   0
    Mar 18, 2008
    13,417
    149
    Napganistan
    Does Indiana's red flag law require a warrant signed by a judge or not?

    According to the new SCOTUS ruling they must obtain a warrant to confiscate from the individuals home.

    The Supreme Court ruled Monday that warrantless gun confiscation from Americans’ homes is unconstitutional, voting unanimously on the side of a Rhode Island man whose firearms were taken by law enforcement without a warrant after his wife expressed concerns that he might hurt himself.
    Read the law and answer your own questions.
    IC 35-47-14
     

    Denny347

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    21   0   0
    Mar 18, 2008
    13,417
    149
    Napganistan
    Now that the SCOTUS has ruled red flag laws unconstitutional does Indiana's red flag law go bye bye? How can we continue to use our red flag law if it's now ruled unconstitutional?
    Judge Alito was clear in his concurring opinion, "Provisions of red flag laws may be challenged under the Fourth Amendment, and those cases may come before us. Our decision today does not address those issues."
    So, Indiana's law will have to be challenged.
     

    KLB

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    5   0   0
    Sep 12, 2011
    23,013
    77
    Porter County
    See, a supreme court which is not packed with leftists and communist will actually do his job and rule based upon the Constitution. What a concept

    We've had nearly 90 years of a wing Court after FDR neutered it in the 30s as part of his new deal program push.

    It would be nice if things swung back the other direction hard for a while.
    You are correct for some issues. There are many the "conservative" judges will favor big brother over the Constitution.
     

    KellyinAvon

    Blue-ID Mafia Consigliere
    Staff member
    Moderator
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 100%
    6   0   0
    Dec 22, 2012
    24,797
    150
    Avon

    Bill of Rights

    Cogito, ergo porto.
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 100%
    7   0   0
    Apr 26, 2008
    18,096
    77
    Where's the bacon?
    I'll skip my screed about how utterly unconstitutional Red Flag laws are. I will point out how stupid they are in practice. If ol' Uncle Henry is a danger, per some random complaint, why wouldn't we impound ol' Uncle Henry? He is the 'danger'. Impounding one type of tool but leaving other tools for the 'danger' to use misses the entire point of the RF laws. Frankly, I suspect that the RF action might just **** off the 'danger' even more. Addressing OP, I haven't looked for RF abuses but I'm sure they exist and will only become all the more common once courts start rubber-stamping the process. And they will.
    This, exactly. RFL are nothing more than an attack on gun ownership.

    The danger, if one exists, is the person. A gun can be "confiscated" (read: stolen, when taken without the owner's permission) and held indefinitely. It requires only space in a property room, from which it can be stolen (I recall stories of things "turning up missing" from IMPD property room, if memory serves) A person cannot be held in this way. Laws define specific time frames, and people require feeding and housing and monitoring, when in custody. The person is or is not the danger, but they take objects instead. Why do you suppose that is?

    A few years ago, SCOTUS handed down a decision allowing for the use of eminent domain to take property from one citizen and give it to another, who would better use the property. The deciding vote, I believe, was Justice Souter, who shortly thereafter had someone file for his home property to be taken in this manner for public use. I don't think it succeeded, but perhaps this is the solution here: For those who passed the latest gun legislation on to Biden's desk, if anyone knows them and thinks they are in some way a threat to others or to themselves, perhaps they need to be "Red Flagged". Note that I very clearly stated that the person making such claim must know them and must feel that they are possibly a threat- I do not in any way condone the practice of false reporting, unlike our opponents.

    Blessings,
    Bill
     

    Bill of Rights

    Cogito, ergo porto.
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 100%
    7   0   0
    Apr 26, 2008
    18,096
    77
    Where's the bacon?
    You are correct for some issues. There are many the "conservative" judges will favor big brother over the Constitution.
    The problem we face here is that if the report to LE is made, alleging that someone thinks Big Hoss is a danger to himself or others, police have a quandary: Do they ignore the report and risk accusations of "THEY KNEW! THEY WERE TOLD HE WAS A THREAT!!!1!!!!!!one!!!!" or do they go to a judge who has to weigh the same question, who then orders them to take Big Hoss's guns from him and violate his rights?

    Which one will cause the bigger stir? If Big Hoss wants justice, he has to go before the judge and prove his innocence... And then take the case to each appellate court all the way to SCOTUS before it causes the PD or the original judge any indigestion. If Big Hoss is actually a threat, and they don't take his stuff, the indigestion comes sooner, and more certainly with a liberal leftist press.

    The incentive is to rule against the individual. We need to start fixing this at THAT point. The penalty for a false report needs to be staggeringly high. The penalty to a LE agency for violating a citizen's rights on the basis of what someone says they think needs to be equally high (not sure what that would be.) The penalty for a judge ruling against a citizen ex parte should include loss of position and loss of pension, possibly extending to being barred from future public positions, and the penalty to an officer executing such an order should be outside of his or her limited immunity.

    Make people really think about doing this: If someone is reporting a Charles Manson, there will be no question that their actions are justified and right. If someone is reporting the guy in the office that has opinions and also has guns, (i.e. Big Hoss) then Susie Soccermom and Lilly Liberal will have to consider that their actions may expose them to legal jeopardy.

    Note that Big Hoss, Susie Soccermom, and Lilly Liberal are not references to any specific people, living or deceased, only names I used for ease of reference in the above scenario.

    Blessings,
    Bill
     
    Last edited:

    KLB

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    5   0   0
    Sep 12, 2011
    23,013
    77
    Porter County
    The incentive is to rule against the individual. We need to start fixing this at THAT point. The penalty for a false report needs to be staggeringly high. The penalty to a LE agency for violating a citizen's rights on the basis of what someone says they think needs to be equally high (not sure what that would be.) The penalty for a judge ruling against a citizen ex parte should include loss of position and loss of pension, possibly extending to being barred from future public positions, and the penalty to an officer executing such an order should be outside of his or her limited immunity.
    Yep
    Note that Big Hoss, Susie Soccermom, and Lilly Liberal are not references to any specific people, living or deceased, only names I used for ease of reference in the above scenario.
    :rofl:
     
    Top Bottom