U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Closed Thread Start New Thread
 
Old 01-04-2016, 07:51 PM
 
Location: Southeast Michigan
2,839 posts, read 1,686,479 times
Reputation: 4521

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by 2sleepy View Post
Huh? try to follow along here.
Ever heard of manners ?

Quote:
Originally Posted by 2sleepy View Post
If people living in the same household are so violent that they either call the Police, or someone else witnesses the activity and calls the Police they shouldn't have guns in the house until the situation calms down. As far as kids in a violent household, cops call CPS to investigate those homes all the time.
Again, if in your imaginary world they are so violent that police is being called over, the kids should be removed even before the guns are removed. If you believe the situation is so bad that there's a good reason for violence to escalate to murder, why would you remove the guns but leave the kids ? Do you also remove knives, hammers, bats, ropes, gasoline and matches ? There are so many different ways to murder someone. If you truly believe that the situation is so dangerous that the people can't be trusted with having guns in the house, how can you trust them with kids ? Your explanation makes no sense.

In the real world, however, the majority of time the police are being used as a tool to get at one's partner. Whether or not any threat of violence actually took place. It's practically the standard procedure in almost any divorce nowadays. Call the cops as often as you can, try to get a personal protection order, play it off in a court claiming your ex is a violent drunkard who can't be trusted with custody. Luckily my only divorce was semi-amicable (no kids and little property), but I've seen far too many divorces around me and the % of ones that didn't get nasty is unfortunately very low. Only in one instance it was the guy who was acting that way, every single other one the woman did it. There must be a rule book somewhere. A big part of the problem is that the woman always gets away with lying. The worst that can happen is that the divorce judge would use this against her (happened a couple times, every time it was a female judge). If the guy tried to call cops on his ex wife every other day, with no evidence of any wrongdoing on her part, he'd get warned and then likely arrested and charged.

Anyway, giving that you're one of the most prolific anti-gun posters on this forum, and have been twisting and bending the truth to support your assertions, obviously there's nothing I can say to make you change your mind. Not that I am trying to. Luckily the trend hasn't been going your way in the past decade.

Last edited by Ummagumma; 01-04-2016 at 08:04 PM..

 
Old 01-04-2016, 07:59 PM
 
Location: Living rent free in your head
30,893 posts, read 13,428,225 times
Reputation: 21991
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ummagumma View Post
Again, if in your imaginary world they are so violent that police is being called over, the kids should be removed even before the guns are removed. If you believe the situation is so bad that there's a good reason for violence to escalate to murder, why would you remove the guns but leave the kids ? Do you also remove knives, hammers, bats, ropes, gasoline and matches ? There are so many different ways to murder someone. If you truly believe that the situation is so dangerous that the people can't be trusted with having guns in the house, how can you trust them with kids ? Your explanation makes no sense. In the real world, however, the majority of time the police are being used as a tool to get at one's partner. Whether or not any threat of violence actually took place.
This is getting just plain silly. It is not my imaginary world but if you want to pursue this further take your complaints to the Governor because I'm not going to keep going over it time and time again.
 
Old 01-04-2016, 08:12 PM
 
16,990 posts, read 20,591,236 times
Reputation: 33956
Quote:
Originally Posted by 2sleepy View Post
Technically no it doesn't, I suppose it could be your mother-in-law living in another state who is threatening you, but I doubt much would come of that because there is no probable cause that would be able to box your ears from 1,500 miles away
That's not what I am talking about. The point is someone who has a vendetta against someone who lives close by can now call the police and say "this person seems off to me and they have a gun". I can see this being used by angry exes, angry teens, etc.


I gave the FL law as example, it is abused by people who report to the police that someone is acting strangely(and this has nothing to do with guns), well the police who are poorly trained to recognize someone who is actually mentally ill and find an irate person, they cart them off to the hospital, meanwhile the person who called them signs a document and the person they called on is held against their will for 72 hours.

There has been lots of abuse of this law.

My concern is will we see this in CA.

Imagine the police showing up at your home, you're told your cousin called them, you get upset which is interpreted by them as being a reason to take your gun, are they allowed to just come in and search your house for the gun without a warrant?
 
Old 01-04-2016, 08:15 PM
 
1,373 posts, read 816,571 times
Reputation: 2198
just wondering out loud here..


whats to say that the Po Po don't just show up at your door and demand your guns saying that an "anonymous tip" was being continually called in that your gun owning butt is threatening people and shouldn't own a firearm?

even though there was never a tip from anywhere...and TPTB are just trying to see if they can randomly seize guns from the american sheeple?
 
Old 01-04-2016, 08:17 PM
 
Location: Southeast Michigan
2,839 posts, read 1,686,479 times
Reputation: 4521
Quote:
Originally Posted by 2sleepy View Post
This is getting just plain silly. It is not my imaginary world but if you want to pursue this further take your complaints to the Governor because I'm not going to keep going over it time and time again.
You're the one claiming that every time the threat of domestic violence is alleged the threat is real.

You're using it to justify removing people's guns based on no evidence other than a claim.

Continuing this logic, if an unsubstantiated claim is enough evidence to consider any given household a potential murder risk, how can this household be trusted with children ?

#1 Either you agree that an unsubstantiated claim by a vindictive spouse - or worse, an outsider (neighbor) - is not a reliable indicator of a potential domestic violence, and should not be used to take people's rights and property away.

#2 Or if you honestly believe that when there's a claim of a threat, there's a high enough probability of violence - shouldn't the children be removed until things "cool down" ? Certainly children deserve protection in a household where a potential murder spree is brewing ?


If you agree with #1 but not #2 - do you really not see the hypocrisy here ?
 
Old 01-04-2016, 08:23 PM
 
Location: Southeast Michigan
2,839 posts, read 1,686,479 times
Reputation: 4521
Quote:
Originally Posted by eqttrdr View Post
just wondering out loud here..


whats to say that the Po Po don't just show up at your door and demand your guns saying that an "anonymous tip" was being continually called in that your gun owning butt is threatening people and shouldn't own a firearm?

even though there was never a tip from anywhere...and TPTB are just trying to see if they can randomly seize guns from the american sheeple?
And the illegal seizures of lawfully owned firearms have already been happening.

Dan Bilzerian: Los Angeles cops took guns without warrant, returned without bullets - Washington Times

Police Unable to Return Gun to Legal Owner Due to Colorado’s Gun Laws | The Last Resistance

ACLU sues Cranston police for failing to return guns seized after check on man's wellbeing

http://www.jsonline.com/news/crime/p...133337318.html

https://www.nraila.org/articles/2015...iscated-anyway
 
Old 01-04-2016, 08:28 PM
 
Location: Living rent free in your head
30,893 posts, read 13,428,225 times
Reputation: 21991
Quote:
Originally Posted by seain dublin View Post
That's not what I am talking about. The point is someone who has a vendetta against someone who lives close by can now call the police and say "this person seems off to me and they have a gun". I can see this being used by angry exes, angry teens, etc.
I gave the FL law as example, it is abused by people who report to the police that someone is acting strangely(and this has nothing to do with guns), well the police who are poorly trained to recognize someone who is actually mentally ill and find an irate person, they cart them off to the hospital, meanwhile the person who called them signs a document and the person they called on is held against their will for 72 hours.
There has been lots of abuse of this law. My concern is will we see this in CA.
Imagine the police showing up at your home, you're told your cousin called them, you get upset which is interpreted by them as being a reason to take your gun, are they allowed to just come in and search your house for the gun without a warrant?
California has had a law for at least the last 3 decades that allows law enforcement to remove your guns from your home for 72 hours due to a domestic violence incident, no one has lobbied against that, not even the NRA. This allows the guns to be kept longer (21 days) if a judge is convinced that returning them sooner could put someone in danger. They can only be kept longer than that with a formal court hearing at which the gun owner is present and can speak on his own behalf or have an attorney present objecting to the action. The longest the guns can be kept under this law is one year. I can imagine all sorts of things but in reality most people have always gotten their guns back quickly. And honestly I can explain the law but I'm not much interested in defending it against every possible 'what if'.

Last edited by 2sleepy; 01-04-2016 at 08:59 PM..
 
Old 01-04-2016, 08:30 PM
 
Location: Living rent free in your head
30,893 posts, read 13,428,225 times
Reputation: 21991
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ummagumma View Post
You're the one claiming that every time the threat of domestic violence is alleged the threat is real. You're using it to justify removing people's guns based on no evidence other than a claim. Continuing this logic, if an unsubstantiated claim is enough evidence to consider any given household a potential murder risk, how can this household be trusted with children ?
#1 Either you agree that an unsubstantiated claim by a vindictive spouse - or worse, an outsider (neighbor) - is not a reliable indicator of a potential domestic violence, and should not be used to take people's rights and property away.
#2 Or if you honestly believe that when there's a claim of a threat, there's a high enough probability of violence - shouldn't the children be removed until things "cool down" ? Certainly children deserve protection in a household where a potential murder spree is brewing ?
If you agree with #1 but not #2 - do you really not see the hypocrisy here ?
For the last time, when there is a volatile home environment CPS is frequently called. In the case of a domestic violence one of the parents is ordered to temporarily leave the home which should mean the kids are safe. If it appears to a Police Officer that the kids are in immediate danger they can remove the kids immediately from the home.
 
Old 01-04-2016, 08:43 PM
 
Location: Southeast Michigan
2,839 posts, read 1,686,479 times
Reputation: 4521
Quote:
Originally Posted by 2sleepy View Post
For the last time, when there is a volatile home environment CPS is frequently called. In the case of a domestic violence one of the parents is ordered to temporarily leave the home which should mean the kids are safe. If it appears to a Police Officer that the kids are in immediate danger they can remove the kids immediately from the home.
But do they have the same low standards for evidence required to remove the kids ? Or are the standards more stringent ?

Surely, the safety of children should come first - wouldn't you agree ?

So how come that it takes so much evidence and procedural requirements to remove the kids from a potentially violent household, but so little to remove guns ?

If the law is written out of the genuine concern for the safety of people in a potentially violent household, the standard for evidence should be the same. Otherwise, it seems strange that there's enough concern to remove the guns, but not enough to put children in a safe place.

However, the discrepancy in the standards makes perfect sense if the law is being used to reduce the number of guns in homes across the state, and the "potential threat" claim is just a pretense.

I don't think too many people would object to that law if it required the government to provide the same level of evidence the CPS needs to remove the kids from a violent home.
 
Old 01-04-2016, 08:54 PM
 
16,990 posts, read 20,591,236 times
Reputation: 33956
Quote:
Originally Posted by eqttrdr View Post
just wondering out loud here..


whats to say that the Po Po don't just show up at your door and demand your guns saying that an "anonymous tip" was being continually called in that your gun owning butt is threatening people and shouldn't own a firearm?

even though there was never a tip from anywhere...and TPTB are just trying to see if they can randomly seize guns from the american sheeple?
Anything is possible in this country nowadays.

Quote:
Originally Posted by 2sleepy View Post
Californja has had a law for at least the last 3 decades that allows law enforcement to remove your guns from your home for 72 hours due to a domestic violence incident, no one has lobbied against that, not even the NRA. This allows the guns to be kept longer (21 days) if a judge is convinced that returning them sooner could put someone in danger. They can only be kept longer than that with a formal court hearing at which the gun owner is present and can speak on his own behalf or have an attorney present objecting to the action. The longest the guns can be kept under this law is one year. I can imagine all sorts of things but in reality most people have always gotten their guns back quickly. And honestly I can explain the law but I'm not much interested in defending it against every possible 'what if'.
This isn't just about domestic violence. It's about someone calling up the police and saying "my uncle seems off to me, he has a gun in his house". When they're angry at the uncle because he wouldn't loan them money.

You don't want to look at the "what ifs". When a law comes into existence(that wasn't even voted on) you have to look at the "what ifs" and the ramifications. God forbid we do any critical thinking or analyze anything huh?

The FL law I mentioned, no one looked at the "what ifs", and the law is now abused.

And if it's not a gun it can be a knife. You can go into your kitchen and find weapons.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Closed Thread

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 03:45 PM.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top