No. Punished is seizing them with the threat or use of force by armed agents of the state.
Not punished would be asking nicely. They aren’t asking.
San Diego alone has had hundreds.
If I go to the police in a state with no red flag laws and tell them a relative of mine said he’s going to go shoot his former workplace up, what can they do, assuming it is a credible threat?
Start your own thread if you want to discuss other laws. This thread is specific to Red Flag Laws.
It was a perfectly appropriate comment. In the form of a question yes, but it made my point that I don’t think that was any legitimate argument against red flag laws.
The police? They can go talk to him, if he’s willing. Until he commits a crime, he’s not a criminal.
No it doesn’t. They’re ordered in less than 24 hours. How much investigation is done during that time frame?
Why isn’t the number of orders requested versus the number granted published? It’s automatic granting of these orders. There’s no recourse.
They need an attorney to get them back, by petition.
1 Like
More mass shootings have consequences.
Then you don’t support this law.
Upon expiration of any order, any firearms or ammunition shall be returned to the restrained person in accordance with the provisions of Chapter 2 (commencing with Section 33850) of Division 11 of Title 4. Firearms or ammunition that are not claimed are subject to the requirements of Section 34000.
People have to claim them to have them returned. They are not returned by default.
That involves submitting another application and needs to be reviewed and approved by judges and the department of justice. It had more oversight than the application for a red flag order.
Look at how long it takes and what they have to do to claim it.
You just make ■■■■ up. Automatic? Where’s that from? Show it.
Where are the stats showing the number requested versus those granted? I can’t find them. Wonder why?
For people that had nothing to do with them. Baa! Baa!
As I said, it should be automatic return and I don’t support anything short of that
It’s not. And the police play games with it.
Here’s section 33850:
33850.
(a) Any person who claims title to any firearm that is in the custody or control of a court or law enforcement agency and who wishes to have the firearm returned shall make application for a determination by the Department of Justice as to whether the applicant is eligible to possess a firearm. The application shall be submitted electronically via the California Firearms Application Reporting System (CFARS) and shall include the following:
(1) The applicant’s name, date and place of birth, gender, telephone number, and complete address.
(2) Whether the applicant is a United States citizen. If the applicant is not a United States citizen, the application shall also include the applicant’s country of citizenship and the applicant’s alien registration or I-94 number.
(3) If the seized property is a firearm, the firearm’s make, model, caliber, barrel length, type, country of origin, and serial number, provided, however, that if the firearm is not a handgun and does not have a serial number, identification number, or identification mark assigned to it, there shall be a place on the application to note that fact.
(4) For residents of California, the applicant’s valid California driver’s license number or valid California identification card number issued by the Department of Motor Vehicles. For nonresidents of California, a copy of the applicant’s military identification with orders indicating that the individual is stationed in California, or a copy of the applicant’s valid driver’s license from the applicant’s state of residence, or a copy of the applicant’s state identification card from the applicant’s state of residence. Copies of the documents provided by non-California residents shall be notarized.
(5) The name of the court or law enforcement agency holding the firearm.
(6) The signature of the applicant and the date of signature.
(7) Any person furnishing a fictitious name or address or knowingly furnishing any incorrect information or knowingly omitting any information required to be provided for the application, including any notarized information pursuant to paragraph (4), shall be guilty of a misdemeanor.
(b) A person who owns a firearm that is in the custody of a court or law enforcement agency and who does not wish to obtain possession of the firearm, and the firearm is an otherwise legal firearm, and the person otherwise has right to title of the firearm, shall be entitled to sell or transfer title of the firearm to a licensed dealer or a third party that is not prohibited from possessing that firearm. Any sale or transfer to a third party pursuant to this subdivision shall be conducted pursuant to Section 27545.
© A person who owns any ammunition that is in the custody of a court or a law enforcement agency and who does not wish to obtain possession of the ammunition, and the ammunition is otherwise legal, shall be entitled to sell or otherwise transfer the ammunition to a licensed firearms dealer or ammunition vendor or a third party that is not prohibited from possessing that ammunition. Any sale or other transfer of ammunition to a third party pursuant to subdivision (b) shall be conducted through an ammunition vendor in accordance with the procedures set forth in Article 4 (commencing with Section 30370) of Chapter 1 of Division 10.
(d) Any person furnishing a fictitious name or address, or knowingly furnishing any incorrect information or knowingly omitting any information required to be provided for the application, including any notarized information pursuant to paragraph (4) of subdivision (a), is punishable as a misdemeanor.
(e) This section shall remain in effect only unti
Says right in the first paragraph the person must make application to be reviewed and a determination made by the department of justice.
1 Like
So you just assume they are automatically granted?
And no I can’t support this version of such laws. Typical California I guess.
“Applicant”
1 Like
