Trump tweet illustrates the dangers of Red Coat gun confiscations.

Trump Suggests 'Red Flag' Laws Be Used to Take CNN Anchor Chris Cuomo's Guns Away After Viral 'Fredo' Outburst.

As Reason's Jacob Sullum has argued, these laws often deprive lawful gun owners of meaningful due process rights.

Depending on the state, a wide number of people are able to petition to take someone's guns away. These petitions can often be decided in ex parte hearings where the person whose weapons might be seized isn't present. Even if they are present at one of these hearings, most states do not guarantee them legal representation.

In addition, the lack of truly objective standards for who might be a risk to themselves or others will lead judges to confiscate too many guns, writes Sullum, saying that "when standards are amorphous, judges are especially likely to err on the side of issuing orders, because they imagine that failing to do so could lead to terrible consequences."

Meanwhile, Trump's tweet highlights a different risk of red flag laws: that politicians or law enforcement will let their own petty feuds and emotions influence who they decide to disarm. Invoking red flag laws to disarm one's critics, as Trump has suggested, borders on tyrannical.

For the gun grabbers, Red Flag aka Red Coat Gun Confiscations represent another step towards the abolishment of the Second Amendment.

Arbitrarily having a person stripped of their 2A rights with little or no due process.

"No one wants to confiscate your guns":

The gun confiscation redux: law makers caught on hot mic.

And we know where Trump stands on due process: The article above also touches on yet another very important point with regards to Red Coat Gun Confiscations: political retribution.

Vindictive politicians who want to use the force of government to silence or punish the opposition.

We've seen this throughout our government's history whether they use an attack dog like the IRS or a considerably more secretive and dangerous agency...

a reply to: gladtobehere

Please, would you try and find ANY quote of ANY elected official in American history proposing banning guns and confiscating them???


Ps. The one from navy pelosi is her talking about not allowing a grandfather clause for full auto back when they passed it..

Countless conspiracy videos will cut out the question, and only show you the answer and pretend the question was “should we ban and confiscate guns??”


It wasn’t..


The truth is that it has been political suicide for all of American history to even suggest it..

I bet not .01% of random nobodies in America think a ban and confiscation is a good idea....



BUT MOST IMPORTANTLY!!!


IT IS NOT PROFITABLE!!!

It would cost trillions to do with no return on investment that even remotely touches the cost..


And every conservative conspiracy theory is that way.. everyone requires all of these Uber rich and powerful people, who have spent their whole lives focusing on profit, which is how they became/stayed rich and powerful lol.

All the sudden decide “screw profit!! I want to spend my fortune attempting to push principles!”


Lmao...


George W Bush faking the war in Iraq to give Halliburton the rebuild contract is profitable..


Oil Companies paying off scientists to pretend climate change is fake , is profitable..

Police pretending an unarmed police shooting victim was the victims fault is profitable..




Faking climate change is not profitable... someone would be spending billions to fake it, that they will never get back with some profit..


Rightwing conspiracies theories cost money , with no obvious or immediate return on investment..


Left wing conspiracy theories makes oodles of money for the people accused of perpetrating it..

a reply to: gladtobehere

Trump was WRONG and I'm totally against what Trump said in this instance!

You heard it here first, folks!

a reply to: JustJohnny

I think misunderstand the meaning of profitable in confiscation of weapons.

Taxpayer billions mean nothing to politicians, their goals are always motivated by power and setting up the availability of more power. They will undoubtedly take bribes and kickbacks from those private companies you mentioned but only because they have the power to do so.

Let me give you an example. Let's say you own a large piece of property which you decide to divide up into small lots and people move in. At first everyone just does whatever they want because it's only a few people and everyone gets along. But eventually a lot of people move there and start acting a way you don't like by having a trashy yard. You tell them to clean up the place or they are gone, they in turn tell you that what they are doing is not against the rules and you are abusing your power. This makes you angry because they really aren't breaking any rules so you decide change rules to make them do what you want, they then tell you that the way you changed the rules was not fair and will resist you because it is private property and they will defend their property of you trespass on it. So again you change the rules to not allow them to protect themselves from you. They either move away or are taken by force, this has cost you money and time but now you have a place that you get to dictate what happens and what rules are made with almost no resistance.

That's the return on your investment.

originally posted by: Flyingclaydisk
a reply to: gladtobehere

Trump was WRONG and I'm totally against what Trump said in this instance!

You heard it here first, folks!

I’m a Trump supporter and that statement is going to cost the President dearly in the election. He may be trying to make a point the hard way, but I don’t like it.

a reply to: Nickn3

I doubt it. Most may disagree with this, but it's not gonna take away his votes. Who else are we gonna vote for? The ones that call us terrorists and white supremacists all day on TV?

How do you sell more guns? Talk about confiscating them!

originally posted by: Middleoftheroad
a reply to: Nickn3

I doubt it. Most may disagree with this, but it's not gonna take away his votes. Who else are we gonna vote for? The ones that call us terrorists and white supremacists all day on TV?

And that's the key right there.

You will follow him to your own doom. FFS, he has a Rothschild right on his cabinet. The play he was given is chaos, division, civil unrest and eventually disarmament.

And you were made to think you have no choice and you have to follow all that. Herded by design.

a reply to: gladtobehere

Red Coat. . . *chuckles*

Red "laws" will hopefully be ruled as unconstitutional because they presume guilt before even being tried.

originally posted by: Duderino

originally posted by: Middleoftheroad
a reply to: Nickn3

I doubt it. Most may disagree with this, but it's not gonna take away his votes. Who else are we gonna vote for? The ones that call us terrorists and white supremacists all day on TV?

And that's the key right there.

You will follow him to your own doom. FFS, he has a Rothschild right on his cabinet. The play he was given is chaos, division, civil unrest and eventually disarmament.

And you were made to think you have no choice and you have to follow all that. Herded by design.

You just missed his point, not surprised though as you have an extreme TDS resulting from so much fake news.

originally posted by: Nickn3

originally posted by: Flyingclaydisk
a reply to: gladtobehere

Trump was WRONG and I'm totally against what Trump said in this instance!

You heard it here first, folks!

I’m a Trump supporter and that statement is going to cost the President dearly in the election. He may be trying to make a point the hard way, but I don’t like it.

I'm not a trump supporter, but I figured he had the next election in the bag until this.
As far as I can tell, the silent majority of working folks that got him elected in the first place are mostly strong supporters of the second amendment.

Maybe I should run. I've got no political experience, and I'm a total ass- but I wouldn't rant on twitter and I would not support any form of increased gun "control"... because I don't want the government in control of the guns.

"Take the guns first, due process later."

-President Donald J. Trump, February 28, 2018

a reply to: JustJohnny

Having anticipated this response, I actually included it in my OP.

In the future, you may want to try reading the actual post but here it is again incase anyone else missed it as well:

originally posted by: links234
"Take the guns first, due process later."

-President Donald J. Trump, February 28, 2018

Yeah, pretty much a dick thing to say.

So we might be at a crossroads where we have a choice between Trump who says stupid things sometimes and might take our guns, and a far leftist who already stated that they'll take our guns, our freedoms, our rights.

Looks a lot like a powder keg.

You gotta match, brah?

a reply to: DBCowboy

lol, 'might.'

When did you ever think Trump wouldn't come for guns? The man's a fascist. I'm sure it was all fun and games when he was implementing the muslim ban, then ICE started rounding up illegals, now prepping to go after legal immigrants. We're just a few steps away from full-on totalitarianism and you're too blind to see it because 'lol, orange man bad!'

originally posted by: links234
a reply to: DBCowboy

lol, 'might.'

When did you ever think Trump wouldn't come for guns?

Probably always.

The man's a fascist.

So you're anti-fascist but are for a larger, more authoritarian style of government. You just made this fat man laugh.

I'm sure it was all fun and games when he was implementing the muslim ban, then ICE started rounding up illegals, now prepping to go after legal immigrants.

Now you're just making stuff up. Well, so can I. I have super powers. And I'm invisible. Right now.

We're just a few steps away from full-on totalitarianism and you're too blind to see it because 'lol, orange man bad!'

Prove it, you commie.