Which is not supposed to be defined by cops. Seriously now, is the gun issue such a draw that you'd side with the cops?
I'm still waiting for a rally to protect our 21st amendment rights. I want to see thousands of patriots on the sidewalks in front of their state capitals with bottles of beer, bourbon, vodka, moonshine, gin or whatever and getting shitfaced. I'd totally be there.
Sure, anyone determined to be a "threat" to themselves or society has their guns (but not their knives, machetes, band saws or cutting torches) taken from them for safe keeping by the eager servants of law enforcement. Simple really. What's really great about it is who gets to say a threat exists, basically anyone with an ax to grind. Even the cops.
I feel the red flag laws equal guilty until proven innocent. I feel all responsible, law abiding adult citizens should enjoy their 2nd amendment rights. You make some large leaps in that last part about what I believe, so I'll say again, I feel all responsible, law abiding adult citizens should enjoy their 2nd amendment rights. Not one person described in the last part fits that description.
Yet, those people that don't fit your description can also buy guns legally... This is why there needs to be some kind of change with current gun laws.
The problem is we have many law abiding adult citizens who are mentally unfit and exhibit their unfitness, yet own guns, not all, but many. Some of these people obey the law yet exhibit violent tendencies without necessarily breaking a law or they break a law that doesn't require the removal of a firearm. I'll ask again, if a person beats their spouse and threatens to harm their neighbors, which may be against the law but doesn't require the removal of a firearm, and the spouse or neighbors fear for their lives, and they petition the court to determine if the person can be trusted to own, oh say an assault rifle, do you support allowing that person to have permanent possession of the assault weapon and would you disregard the documented warning signs that violence may occur? You would wait until someone is killed?
You should leave the "assault rifle" out of this argument. In that situation you describe they should not have access to any form of firearm.
Any sort of stalking or domestic violence should be immediate grounds for the removal of a firearm in my opinion
Is this another non event How many protesters had guns? Close up photos in the first post Seem to suggest a dozen people with guns......out of 6000 protesters Yawn
I personally would not consider anyone behaving as you've described to be responsible or law abiding. The red flag laws aren't needed to restrict people like that from possessing firearms.