- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Surprise, surprise. Police had prior contact with Robert Crimo.
Posted on 7/5/22 at 8:51 pm to GregMaddux
Posted on 7/5/22 at 8:51 pm to GregMaddux
quote:
Did he break any laws? Why’d they take his shite? What can they legally do if he didnt break laws?
It's almost as if these people are getting past the existing laws to justify the claim that the laws aren't enough; that the Dems need to pass stronger gun control measures.
Call me paranoid, but...
0
Posted on 7/5/22 at 8:53 pm to mmcgrath
quote:
Nope. The police did all they could. They couldn't put him on a no guns list because you 2A zealots think that someone who owns 16 knives, a sword, a dagger, who is suicidal and also expresses their desire to kill everyone shouldn't be denied access to semi-auto rifles. This is on YOU.
Leftists are so damn stupid. Damn near nobody would have had a problem with the police referring this guy to some mental health agency after threatening suicide
AND saying he was going to kill everyone.
That agency could then investigate and evaluate, and then take their findings to a judge for a ruling on whether this dipstick gets to keep his weapons, or buy more weapons, being given the opportunity to defend himself in the process.
That’s called due process, which is guaranteed in the Constitution. You marxist democrats should read it sometime. Pretty crazy stuff in there. I mean it actually says the government can’t take your shite without due process. Even more crazy is what it doesn’t say. Not a damn thing in there about killing unborn children.
Posted on 7/5/22 at 8:54 pm to L1C4
Like clock work
If only there were mental health clinics.
If only there were mental health clinics.
Posted on 7/5/22 at 8:58 pm to DisplacedBuckeye
quote:
Firearms Restraining Order. I think that's what they call it.
Basically a red flag law. I looked up some info on the Illinois law and it’s not a state action. The petition has to be filed by an individual with a relationship (blood relative, spouse, parent of shared child, ex, etc). So not a police option.
Posted on 7/5/22 at 9:02 pm to troyt37
quote:
Damn near nobody would have had a problem with the police referring this guy to some mental health agency after threatening suicide AND saying he was going to kill everyone.
So you want a law allowing the state to institutionalize people…under what standard? Who decides? Do you have a problem with red flag laws but not this?
Posted on 7/5/22 at 9:03 pm to cwill
quote:
Basically a red flag law. I looked up some info on the Illinois law and it’s not a state action. The petition has to be filed by an individual with a relationship (blood relative, spouse, parent of shared child, ex, etc). So not a police option.
Where did you find that?
This is what I'm looking at.
quote:
"Petitioner" means:
(1) a family member of the respondent as defined in this Act; or
(2) a law enforcement officer, who files a petition alleging that the respondent poses a danger of causing personal injury to himself, herself, or another by having in his or her custody or control, purchasing, possessing, or receiving a firearm.
Am I looking at the wrong information?
Posted on 7/5/22 at 9:06 pm to L1C4
quote:
Once in April 2019 for a suicide attempt.
What would we all have cops do in response to suicide attempts and how long should these things be done ? I don’t think we need to be training cops to keep tabs on suicidal people.
quote:
The 2nd time in Sept 2019 when he said he was going to "kill everyone."
If cops had a nickel for every time some fricker made this claim… Again, what’s the response we were expecting ? How did they drop the ball here?
Posted on 7/5/22 at 9:08 pm to cwill
quote:
So you want a law allowing the state to institutionalize people…under what standard? Who decides? Do you have a problem with red flag laws but not this?
You are the first person to mention institutionalizing him. I said investigate, evaluate, and take those findings to a judge for a hearing where he can defend himself. Don’t you read good?
And yes, red flag laws are an abomination. I’ll let you guess why.
Posted on 7/5/22 at 9:13 pm to troyt37
quote:
Damn near nobody would have had a problem with the police referring this guy to some mental health agency after threatening suicide AND saying he was going to kill everyone.
This is exactly what happens. Cops are not social workers, so if people do not follow up on response to a referral, do we want Big Brother to take on this role?
quote:
That agency could then investigate and evaluate, and then take their findings to a judge for a ruling on whether this dipstick gets to keep his weapons, or buy more weapons, being given the opportunity to defend himself in the process.
This seems a lot like what red flag laws look like.
Posted on 7/5/22 at 9:18 pm to DisplacedBuckeye
quote:
Am I looking at the wrong information?
No.
I read an article that didn’t cover law enforcement…so they have a full-on red flag law, which is a big red flag for 2A. Do we really want the state to have this broad power?
Posted on 7/5/22 at 9:19 pm to troyt37
quote:
You are the first person to mention institutionalizing him. I said investigate, evaluate, and take those findings to a judge for a hearing where he can defend himself. Don’t you read good?
That’s a state action and a red flag law.
Posted on 7/5/22 at 9:20 pm to cwill
quote:
Do we really want the state to have this broad power?
I don't. I don't want anyone to have that kind of power.
But, Illinois did and it didn't stop anything.
Posted on 7/5/22 at 9:22 pm to DisplacedBuckeye
So barring application of an overreaching state red flag law what, as a 2A advocate, could the state have done preemptively to stop this guy?
This post was edited on 7/5/22 at 9:23 pm
Posted on 7/5/22 at 9:27 pm to Willie Stroker
quote:
This seems a lot like what red flag laws look like.
Except for a pretty important part…. due process.
Posted on 7/5/22 at 9:28 pm to Willie Stroker
I heard in the afternoon media update, that he had been under psychiatric care. It will be interesting to hear more on this. A failure here, should prompt legislation in THIS direction.
Posted on 7/5/22 at 9:29 pm to troyt37
Looks like his mom is batshit crazy..here’s her response to the police needing some information from her:
Posted on 7/5/22 at 9:31 pm to cwill
quote:
That’s a state action and a red flag law.
No it isn’t. With red flag laws they invariably take your shite before you get to defend yourself in court. Big difference. Huge difference.
Posted on 7/5/22 at 9:32 pm to cwill
quote:
So barring application of an overreaching state red flag law what, as a 2A advocate, could the state have done preemptively to stop this guy?
Remove arbitrary gun free zones and elect a governor who isn't a moron. Stop pretending that guns are the problem. Recognize that you can't stop everyone.
Posted on 7/5/22 at 9:35 pm to troyt37
Is threatening to kill someone a crime?
Posted on 7/5/22 at 9:36 pm to L1C4
What do you have ant them to do?
Page 3 of 4
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News