Need to look into it but from what I have heard it will outlaw private sales of firearms between individuals. It will not get around the HIPA medical privacy laws so the mentally ill will still be cloaked to the background check.

If criminals followed the law, they wouldn’t be criminals.

That's not what I have read or heard. If that's the case it will not pass IMO.

I've never understood the logic of the red flag law. If a person is considered a danger to themselves and others sufficient to warrant a red flag action, why aren't the considered a sufficient danger to themselves and others to warrant a temporary commitment?

"Mr. Jones, we think you are going to kill people, so we're going to take your guns but it's ok, you can still wander around and stab as many as you like."

Because if they actually committed them it would solve the problem, but that isn't what they are trying to do here. Confiscating guns is the only goal. I can't imagine what kind of burden you would go through to get any gun back that was taken in one of these incidents.

A bigger concern for a red flag law for me is false reporting. If they pass something like this it needs to be a felony to falsely report someone and attach automatic civil liability. Just imagine, you get into an argument with your neighbor and he calls and says you are going to shoot up a school and he heard you say it. What happens then?

Like any new law that is proposed if it passes and is implemented it will have limited effectiveness if any. All it will take is for another tragedy to happen and there will be calls for more laws because the first ones that were passed were useless except to inconvenience law abiding citizens. Then that law won't work so it will be time to pass another and the cycle repeats itself.

So the govt. should lock people up for crimes they might commit? If that's the case I'm moving to N. Korea, much less hostile environment there.

When did I say that? The discussion was about people that are crazy enough that they are deemed a threat to themselves or others and need their guns confiscated. In what scenario would that person not need mental help as well?

You are saying the mentally ill need to committed if they pose a danger. Who will make this decision? Is it black and white or do we have some grey area in there that the days mood might help make the decision? I just can't support incarcerating US citizens because some shrink thinks it's the best thing for society.

Let's take a few steps back. I don't support red flag laws, I don't think they will work and will only be abused. To answer your question about being committed for treatment, a judge should be the only one making that determination. The same person who should be the one making a determination if guns should be taken from an individual because they are crazy. Currently, someone can be committed if they pose a danger to themselves or someone else, so there is no need to make a change to that system.

Ever heard of the Baker Act?

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Florida_Mental_Health_Act

That’s why we don’t need “red flag laws”, there is already a way to get crazy people committed.

This is a gun registration plan in disguise. If someone wants to trade, sell or give a gun to another private individual it would have to go through a FFL. Of course that won't be free of charge & serial numbers & names will go into a database. Even if you die & leave guns to your family members, forced through a FFL.

It isn't even in disguise, people are just too ignorant to recognize it. Everything you said is true but it would be taken a step further, otherwise there would be no way to enforce this as law. There would have to be a registration up front or how else would you know who owned what to begin with? It would be nearly impossible to prove that a private sale occurred unless it was witnessed without some sort of registration.

This thread was about the expanded background check. Not red flag laws.

From what I understand, the point is to force individual sales to go through an FFL background check. SUPPOSEDLY, there is no database of gun owners, and SUPPOSEDLY the FFL paperwork that you complete when you purchase a firearm is destroyed once it is completed and kept by the selling FFL for a certian amount of time. Can anyone with an FFL confirm or deny?

I didn't know that, I don't know that, and won't know that when they come for me.

ATF requires your transfer paperwork to be kept for a minimum of 20 years, then it can be destroyed.

Let me just say that if a health professional, in ANY capacity (i.e. doctor, nurse, counselor, etc), determines a person is a real risk to someone or themselves, the health care professional is OBLIGATED to report this person and get them help. IF a person is killed and it can be proven the perp told someone their plan to kill said victim, that health care professional WILL be prosecuted.

SO, if we create red flag laws that allow the govt to take away guns because of some threat made or the real existence of risk to harm others, I would imagine the same person would then be referred for at least a 72 hour mandatory stay in a mental health facility. These are done all the time and a quick hearing overseen by a judge is made to facilitate these folks where evidence is given to state why they need to be committed and most of the time the person is sent to the facility. Sometimes not.

However, let me be very clear here, most mentally unstable people have enough wherewithal to figure out very quickly the words that need to be said in order to get released and stay out of these facilities. They may be sick, but they aren't stupid. That's an important distinction, because the folks making these laws think all mentally unstable people are also intellectually unstable and that is not the case at all. Many are quite bright, and just a little unhinged.

I worked at Terrel State Hospital for 6 years. Many patients actually fought their way into that system. It's not as easy to be committed as you might think.

The problem with mental instability used as a red flag to prohibit individuals from owning firearms is that it's not the conmitted people we are talking about. It's soldiers with PTSD, nedical marijuana users, etc. it's just an excuse to take away your rights.