Rep. Debbie Dingell (D-MI) used an April 2 Fox News Live appearance to announce that she is preparing to introduce legislation to create a federal law allowing firearm confiscation orders.
Such laws, generally referred to as Extreme Risk Protection Orders, are already in place in California, Indiana, Oregon, and other states, and Dingell believes the ability to seize firearms is crucial for pubic safety.
During live broadcast Dingell said, “Rep. Fred Upton (R) and I are looking at introducing … legislation … at the national level.” She added, “I grew up in a home where a man shouldn’t have had access to a gun, and I remember some very frightening moments, and there was ability to deal with it. A family who knows that someone in their family could be a danger to themselves or to others needs to have tool that they can take that gun away.”
Dingell stressed that seizure of firearms must occur in a way that protects due process, but she did not explain how such protection is possible. In California an order to take guns can be issued without the gun owner even knowing. And in Indiana, the state on which Dingell is basing her federal legislation, individuals who have their guns seized have approximately 14 days to go to court to “make a case” to get them back.
>Dingell stressed that seizure of firearms must occur in a way that protects due process >taking someone's gun when you get a complaint about them can respect due process Is this her getting payback for all the times she was called Dingell-Dork?
>they finally start to reveal their hand >Jow Forums makes dingle jokes I hope they seize them all
Gavin Wilson
Oh no, shitbags won't be able to have guns. How horrible.
Asher Ross
(You)
Nicholas Richardson
>how is protecting due process possible
Are we talking about siezing guns from people who become prohibited? IE you acquire guns, then get convicted of domestic assault which makes it illegal for you to posses a firearm? Because thats really more like a gap in enforcement of our current laws desu.
Connor Lewis
>introduces bill that violates due process >claims it must not be used to violate due process kek
It should be our right as the public to hold our elected officials accountable for this bullshit, yet we can't.
Parker Diaz
Hello, Debbie
Jose Brooks
>seize firearms is crucial for pubic safety
who defines what's "crucial for public safety"?
Grayson Hernandez
>Are we talking about siezing guns from people who become prohibited? No. This is "Person made me feel super uncomfortable :( please take his gun so I don't feel so uncomfortable." It happened recently in Washington where some dude's neighbors called the cops on him for literally making them feel nervous, not actually doing anything, and they detained him and confiscated his gun. Seattle, it was.
Landon Morris
Did he he get them back?
Carson Ross
The gubbmint of course, they would never misuse it.
Luke Baker
>Guns are bad and we will use violence and guns to take your guns, because they're bad.
Jose Powell
It doesn't fucking matter because it's not their job. The only person responsible for your safety is yourself. The cops exist to get convictions and bring criminals "to justice", not keep you safe (Bowers v. DeVito, Warren v. District of Columbia). Laws should exist only to allow punishment of those who infringe upon the rights of others, and more or less everything that needs to be on that list has been there since the nation began. All this "muh prevention" garbage is Minority Report bullshit and only serves to give government power over us in the name of our 'protection'. Here's something fun; if a Liberal friend, or any gun-grabber you know, tries to tell you "It's about risk prevention", remind them that the majority of violent crime is commited by blacks in America. Obviously, by their risk-prevention logic, we must ban all blacks from owning guns. Watch them try and weasel out of that.
Nathaniel Turner
Anything south of Saginaw county Indiana can have. Fuck you Ohio you aint getting shit, not even our niggers. The great migration was a mistake.
Camden Miller
Don't recall if he did, but the point is they will come and take your shit without due process if you hurt someone's feelings. It's not hard to see a scenario in which an average citizen that carries is on the job or doing work outside when all of a sudden someone dressed as a cop comes up to him telling him to hand over his weapon immediately. The law is about potentially dangerous persons, so the policeman might very well have their own gun drawn. Doesn't seem it would take too much for someone to end up shot.
Chase Morales
Got a sauce on that?
Charles Adams
>user was picked up by the fbi for his radical racist remarks. He obviously was a bigot and was disarmed before he could harm anyone he saw as 'inferior'; specifically citing in his online rants he believed black people to be the root of all crime and problems in America today. Nice work retard.
Jace Cook
Putting in a protection order against you right now, kiss your dog and guns goodbye.
Connor Jones
It's litterally a precursor to more confiscation. All a soccer mom does is drop a dime, says you are scary, cops bust down your door and shoot your dog and take your guns and ammo. Then, after being paraded into court and get publicly labeled as a psycho gun nut as part of your "due process", your name immediately gets added to the federal background check system and you may or may not get your property back depending on the judge's mood. Hopefully you have the money to pay far a good lawyer, don't get an activist judge. Luckily for your accuser, if it's found out to be unwarranted, there are no repercussions for the false accusations. Oh, and about your property, don't worry, the police will give you a receipt you can probably wipe your ass with come time to reclaim it. Cops have sticky fingers. Remeber they steal more than criminals do. Some states like New York have a policy of NEVER returning a confiscated gun, so there goes your grandfather's heirloom rifle. Good luck getting a job now. Every time an employer looks you up, you are flagged as a violent mental case. You are a pariah and might as well be a convicted felon. >pic of impartial legal system unrelated You give gun grabbers an inch, they will work every angle to take more.
>it should be our right as the public to hold our elected officials accountable for this bullshit, yet we can't. It's called elections. It's her right to represent the people that elected her
Oliver Anderson
The public
Aiden Moore
>You give gun grabbers an inch, they will work every angle to take more.
So politicians can sponsor and pass laws that are blatantly unConstitutional have only have to worry about being re-elected or not? No, unacceptable. As representatives they must be held to a higher standard.
Aaron Baker
Imagine back when if some politician got up and ran their mouth with this blatantly unconstitutional shit.
Not that we don't have many unconstitutional laws already in place.
We should have elected auditors, 1 for each 3 representatives and 1 per state in the senate, who do nothing but check bills for constitutional compatability and press charges if they find something wrong.
Unfortunately we're over 200 years too late for that.
Jacob Reed
>Idiots like you are the reason democracy fails.
Samuel Sanchez
Fuck off shill
Aaron Anderson
Yeah things were so much better back then, the politicians never did anything to infringe upon the rights of the citizenry.
Nice job entirely missing my point. The point is people pushed back.
Michael Cook
>whoosh Thats the point going right over your head, moron.
Chase Gutierrez
Like in 1934 when the NFA was pushed? That was the "Greatest Generation of Americans". They fought the Second World War, and they let it pass. They let everything the New Dealers did pass. They were complacent with literal Communism taking hold in their government.
You can hold them accountable you idiot. Fuck, you people are so dumb. There's a democratic process in place for a reason.
Easton Evans
>small group of people resist >president himself marches an army to their doorstep to force them into submission >no repercussions for the feds responsible >"That's not the point, user. You just don't get it."
Jeremiah Young
Fuck off
Adam King
So would deporting all people of color. If you really wanted throw out the Constitution to save lives, you probably should do whatever statistically would have the biggest impact I would think
Nolan Ramirez
Nuking the planet would stop literally ever murder, user. You're thinking small-time.
Ethan Evans
Americans went to shit post ww1. The "greatest generation" was the start of globalism.
Justin Campbell
Revenue Act of 1913 Federal Reserve Act Sedition Act of 1918
