ERPOs in action, WA - no details, no charges ...

Status
Not open for further replies.
Tis a shame that some folks on these boards shill for the "rights" of Hitler loving Nazis. You don't get to rule on what is Constitutional.

An American citizen who chooses to love Hitler has committed no crime by doing so, no matter how we may hate that they do so. Their constitutional rights are not to be infringed for doing nothing illegal.

It's pretty scary to see the thought police being given power even here.
 
Tis a shame that some folks on these boards shill for the "rights" of Hitler loving Nazis. You don't get to rule on what is Constitutional.

And neither do you. I am on the security response team for a large metropolitan synagogue with over 25,000 charter members. I have stood watch outside the doors as skinheads protested across the street. I have been marked for death by at least 3 neo-Nazi groups that I know of. Being a hateful little bigot is not illegal. And the Constitution dictates that you cannot just take rights away from people because their ideology conflicts with yours when no law has been broken. The second you start to say "Taking weapons away from Nazis is fine" starts the clock. A year later "Taking firearms away from Republicans is fine." That is the whole point of this thread.
 
A number of my family members were among the six million Jews and six million Poles killed by the Germans and Soviets because these monsters denied basic rights to my ancestors.
I refuse to lower myself to that level.
A man has the right to possess a weapon until he commits a crime or becomes so demented that he shows that he cannot be trusted with a weapon
 
DHS did a bit of apologizing, even to the American Legion and VFW, for mentioning veterans in the report.

After his weapons were seized Cole and his bud drove to Texas heavily armed and closely watched by federal agents. On 4 November they were stopped, After the traffic stop Cole's atomwaffen bud was charged with a federal weapons violation.

Yep, far out organizations like the Nazis do attempt to recruit veterans to their scummy cause, nothing new here. i'm retired military and work closely with veterans. No veterans i know condemned the DHS report.

The Nazis are attempting to recruit active duty military. This active duty Marine and atomwaffen member bragged on the web of beating up folks at Charlottesville. He as booted from the USMC:

https://www.stripes.com/news/us/mar...emacists-1.525485/vasillios-pistolis-1.525486

i love this let's just wait until the perp murders someone attitude. Not!!!
 
Last edited:
Tis a shame that some folks on these boards shill for the "rights" of Hitler loving Nazis. You don't get to rule on what is Constitutional.

And thank God, neither do you.

That's right. "Hitler loving Nazis" have Constitutional rights too.

I know this might be a heavy cross for you to bear, but the Constitution exists to protect the rights of everyone, not just the popular kids.

The First Amendment is not there to protect popular opinions - to protect ideas everyone agrees with. They don't need protection. It is there to protect UNPOPULAR opinions. To protect ideas that make people uncomfortable. And yes, even to protect hate.

And the Second Amendment is there to protect the right of EVERYONE to defend himself. Yes, even hateful bigots.

And the Fourth Amendment is there to protect EVERYONE against unlawful searches and seizures. Yes, even hateful bigots.

You see a pattern developing?

You see, what makes the US and our Constitution so great - what separates us and puts us so far above "Hitler loving Nazis" - is that we try to protect the rights of EVERYONE, minorities and unpopular people too. Even "Hitler loving Nazis."


People like you are the ones who allow tyranny to gain a foothold. Because you're willing to use the force of the government to crush people you don't like.
 
Last edited:
People like you are the ones who allow tyranny to gain a foothold. Because you're willing to use the force of the government to crush people you don't like.

You can call names and rail on about the "Constitutional rights" of Nazis until the cows come home and it won't matter one iota. The idiots guns are gone.

Yep, and folks like you make the old "slippery slope" argument. Millions of voters have not decided on gun control. Guys like yourself, shilling for the "rights" of Nazis turn them against gunowners.

Have you bothered to read the Washington law?

Ex Parte orders:

"(5) In accordance with RCW 7.94.040(1), the court shall schedule a hearing within fourteen days of the issuance of an ex parte extreme risk protection order to determine if a one-year extreme risk protection order should be issued under this chapter."

A hearing was held before a judge. The Nazi cared so much for his Second Amendment rights he refused to attend the hearing. Had the idiot cared enough to attend the hearing there's a good chance the judge would have ruled in his favor.
 
i love this let's just wait until the perp murders someone attitude. Not!!!

You are a trip. Wanting to take away rights from people you don't like. Or taking away rights for what someone might do. I don't know what version of the Constitution you swore to uphold, but it was not the same one in my oath of enlistment. By contrast I don't like the Black Panthers, CAIR, Muslim Brotherhood or any other violent ethnic group. Doesn't mean I want their rights taken away because of a personal opinion or what they might do.

One more thing to point out on how little you know about neo-Nazis. Very few of them are Hitler lovers. Groups like the Southern Brotherhood and the American Socialist Party consider Hitler was a frail, drugged out old man with no vision.
 
You are a trip

You repeatedly misquoted a document you are alleged to have read ten years ago. Here you are caring more about the Second Amendments rights of a Nazi than the Nazi himself, who refused to attend his court hearing.

Have fun, i'm done with this one.
 
:uhoh: Eeeek. Take a breath! The neonazi atomwaffen nut had his day in court. He missed it --- deliberatly. He should have attended it. Maybe if he had then his guns might have been confiscated and he'd have a case and MAYBE we'd have an excuse to caterwaul.
There is no NATIONAL redflag law. The devil is in the details. I think these laws could be written (like the one in question seems to be) well to include a hearing so the subject individual gets a say.
Personally I'd hire a lawyer to help me.

Keep your eyes on your state lawmakers, and on the dweebs in D. C. You want a good law? Inform your kongresskritters!

In so far as government wanting to take our guns, I don't need redflags to know they do, I have only to listen to people like Eric Swalwell when he was running telling us he WILL take our AR-15s, and Joe Biden saying "bingo! If you have an assault rifle, it's GONE!" ..... or something like that. I know the "bingo" part is right.:p

We still have a say in what is going to happen, you know.
 
You can call names and rail on about the "Constitutional rights" of Nazis until the cows come home and it won't matter one iota. The idiots guns are gone.

If I was going to call you names, I would call you a bigot and a supporter of tyranny. Constitutional rights are for everyone. Even people you don't like.

Yep, and folks like you make the old "slippery slope" argument....

They taught me in philosophy class that the slippery slope argument is a logical fallacy. That's all well and good in the ivory towers of academia, but out here in the real world the slope is sometimes real, and sometimes it really is slippery.

What you miss is that some logicians are willing to accept that. They understand that while the SSA might not meet the standards for formal deductive reasoning, such an argument is not a formal proof but a practical argument about likely consequences.

Tyranny almost always begins with marginalizing and demonizing certain groups and progresses towards depriving them of their rights. It also inevitably involves disarming them first and then the population at large.

"Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it." - George Santayana.

....Guys like yourself, shilling for the "rights" of Nazis turn them against gunowners.

Oh, darn. You got me. Yep I am shilling for the rights (notice no quotation marks) of Nazis. Just like I'll shill for the rights of Jews, minorities, gays, gender dysphoric people, conservatives and liberals. I think the Black Panthers are disgusting too, but I'll even shill for their rights. Even though they hate me.

As long as the Nazi idiots are doing nothing more than having their little meetings, giving their little speeches and running around doing their stupid little "seig, heil" thing, why should I care? So far, ideas are not crimes. Yet.

Have you bothered to read the Washington law?

Ex Parte orders:

"(5) In accordance with RCW 7.94.040(1), the court shall schedule a hearing within fourteen days of the issuance of an ex parte extreme risk protection order to determine if a one-year extreme risk protection order should be issued under this chapter."

I don't live in Washington. I've never been to Washington and I didn't loose anything there. No offense to anyone, but I don't really give a flip about Washington law; it doesn't really affect me so why would I research it?

A hearing was held before a judge. The Nazi cared so much for his Second Amendment rights he refused to attend the hearing. Had the idiot cared enough to attend the hearing there's a good chance the judge would have ruled in his favor.

That just proves he's stupid. You'd have to be stupid to be a Nazi. But, and I know this is a heavy cross to bear, stupid bigots have rights too.
 
You can call names and rail on about the "Constitutional rights" of Nazis until the cows come home and it won't matter one iota. The idiots guns are gone.

“The idiots guns are gone” and just how hard will it be for the “idiot” to get more guns? Taking your argument to the logical conclusion the only way to prevent the “idiot” from carrying out his apparent plan to harm people is to lock him up in jail.

The fact that there isn’t enough evidence to charge him with a crime is just a minor inconvenience. The new standard is now the thought police arresting and putting people in jail. They will not be allowed to post bail as it will be a civil commitment. The accused or “idiot” according to you will not be able to hire a lawyer or prepare a defense since he is locked up in jail.

However to preserve the right of the accused to have a lawyer the Court will appoint one for him. The defense lawyer of course will be paid for by the Court so it will be a show trial.
 
You repeatedly misquoted a document you are alleged to have read ten years ago. Here you are caring more about the Second Amendments rights of a Nazi than the Nazi himself, who refused to attend his court hearing.

Imagine that. Some internet tough guy telling a converted Jew, who defends other Jews, INCLUDING a dozen Holocaust survivors, that I am defending the Second Amendment rights of a neo-Nazi. I'll take the high road, put you on the ignore list. And add something Christians like to say "Don't let the door hit you where the good Lord split you."
 
They taught me in philosophy class that the slippery slope argument is a logical fallacy. That's all well and good in the ivory towers of academia, but out here in the real world the slope is sometimes real, and sometimes it really is slippery.

What you miss is that some logicians are willing to accept that. They understand that while the SSA might not meet the standards for formal deductive reasoning, such an argument is not a formal proof but a practical argument about likely consequences.

Tyranny almost always begins with marginalizing and demonizing certain groups and progresses towards depriving them of their rights. It also inevitably involves disarming them first and then the population at large.

"Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it." - George Santayana.

I'm not sure that I see it so much as a slippery slope as the old boiling a frog example. Drop a frog on some hot water and he hops out. Put him in cold water and raise the temp by a degree a minute, won't take long and you'll have boiled frog because he won't notice the slow increase in temperature.
Also, the Grand Canyon wasn't created in anything short of geological time. Slow erosion over millennia gave us a tourist attraction. They are eroding our rights one at a time while claiming they were for rights all along. You have all the rights you want as long as they agree with those in charge, and right now, it doesn't look like they think there is such a thing as gun rights.
 
Last edited:
I'm not sure that I see it so much as a slippery slope as the old boiling a frog example. Drop a frog on some hot water and he hops out. Put him in cold water and raise the temp by a degree a minute, won't take long and you'll have boiled frog because he won't notice the slow increase in temperature.

Both can be apt. So what would that be? Slope boiled frog? Doesn't sound tasty. Right about now I would say the temperature is warm enough to have some bubbles going to the top.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top