Independent media, news reporting, analysis, opinion, forensic historical research presentations. From a Libertarian to Anarcho-Libertarian Anti-Federalist perspective.
It would seem that a lot of people in America have collectively lost their minds. This school is a government run institution. When government violates the rights of an individual harsh consequences should follow. Schools allowed to violate the Supreme Law of the Land and allowed to get away with it show exactly how they are being used as social change agent facilitators.
Justine [Myers] woke up to a voicemail from Thompson Valley School District where Nate is a junior at Loveland High School in Loveland, CO. The voicemail informed Justine that a report had come in claiming Nate was a threat to the school and he was not allowed to return until further notice. The report presumably came through Safe 2 Tell.
There are reports that a school wide email was also sent to parents about the “threat”. Justine immediately contacted the school assuming she could easily clear things up, especially since the police had already assessed the situation and realized no one had done anything wrong or made any threats. She was wrong.
The school not only refused to provide her with more information about the “threat”, but they refused to provide Nate with schoolwork so he doesn’t get behind. A “threat assessment hearing” has been scheduled for Thursday morning at 10am at the school admin building where Justine will be allowed to defend her son against SEVEN school officials who will be in attendance to, as she was told, “make their case”.
Make their case of what? That Nate’s outing with his mother to train with her firearms somehow makes him a danger to the school?
TSD Superintendent Marc Schaffer notified the parents of Nathan Myers that he could not return to school until the district completed a full investigation after Nathan posted a Snapchat video on Tuesday of several handguns and an AR-15 belonging to his mother.
The guns were being packed for a family shooting trip to the mountains, the boy’s mother, Justine Myers, said. Nathan posted the video with the caption “Finna be lit,” which is slang for “gonna be exciting.”
Someone called the anonymous line “Safe2Tell,” and reported they feared Nathan was threatening the school. “Safe2Tell” is designed for youth to be able to give tips to their school and police about threatening situations. However, Weld County Sheriff Steve Reams said the line has been dubbed “Safe2Swat,” by kids who use the line for both practical jokes and to get even with other students they may have a conflict with.
Swatting is a term that is used when someone deceptively sends police and other emergency services to another person’s address through false reporting of an emergency or criminal action.
Nathan’s father had left several messages for Justine about police officers at his home questioning Nathan’s intentions while they were out of cell phone coverage.
“His father told them (Tuesday evening that) he was out shooting with me. I am an avid shooter,” Justine said. “So, the officers said he wasn’t in trouble and left.”
Despite being glad the situation is resolved, Justine said she is still frustrated at how it was handled. She said it felt like they were downplaying the severity of the situation, including failing to allow the boy access to his homework. The school district told Justine they did not get clearance from the police until sometime Wednesday,
“You expect me to believe they had a threat on a school and the school waited more than 15 hours to contact the police to find out if it was credible,” Justine said.
Nathan and his parents met with school district officials for what she said amounted to 5 minutes before they gave Nathan permission to return to class and promised him there would be no consequences surrounding the issue.
“We walked in, they gave him a big envelope with his homework in it and immediately apologized,” Justine said. “They told him he was a good kid, they liked him, and they never believed he was making a threat against the school, but that ‘you know we have to do this.’ ”
As I said in this column last week, Republicans Donald Trump, Mitch McConnell, Lindsey Graham and Marco Rubio are joining forces with liberal Democrats to soon enact “red flag” gun confiscation laws. I also reported on the push for the enactment of other gun control measures such as universal background checks being promoted on Capitol Hill and by the White House here.
I urge readers to watch my 8-minute video exposing Donald Trump’s betrayal of his promise to protect the 2nd Amendment and share it with as many of your friends as you can. If we don’t convince our U.S. senators to reject these egregious gun control measures, THEY WILL BE PASSED, AND TRUMP WILL SIGN THEM INTO LAW. We have about two or three weeks to convince our senators to reject these new gun control laws. That’s it.
If law-abiding gun owners don’t call their U.S. senators en masse, and I mean posthaste, you are very likely to wake up one morning around 4am to the sound of a SWAT team breaking down your door to confiscate your guns, prepared to kill you or any member of your family who resists. Why? Perhaps because a gun-hating neighbor hates you having guns or a relative doesn’t like you and is looking for any way to “teach you a lesson” or your ex-spouse is looking for any way to “get even” with you or an anti-gun cop with a grudge wants to send a political message or a family doctor or school teacher overheard one of your children talk about how many guns daddy has and became alarmed, etc., ad infinitum.
Plus, the FBI has just recently stated that if you believe in “conspiracy theories,” you are a “domestic terrorist threat.” That statement is from an FBI intelligence bulletin from the bureau’s Phoenix field office, dated May 30, 2019. That FBI designation alone could very easily precipitate a “red flag” gun confiscation order being rendered against you.
And Donald Trump himself recently demonstrated how dangerous “red flag” laws are. In a tweet on August 13, President Trump said,
Would Chris Cuomo be given a Red Flag for his recent rant? Filthy language and a total loss of control. He shouldn’t be allowed to have any weapon. He’s nuts!
Are you paying attention? Donald Trump was threatening to use a “red flag” law to authorize police agencies to take away an American citizen’s Natural God-given right of self-defense simply because Trump didn’t like what the citizen said—about him.
Folks, don’t you see? Those in authority can use “red flag” gun confiscation laws against ANYONE they want and for ANY REASON they want.
In other words, there doesn’t have to be a reason. Under “red flag” laws, all it takes for police to come and seize your guns is for someone to make a “red flag” accusation against you. That’s it. And, yes, it really IS that easy.
“Red flag” laws not only eviscerate the 2nd Amendment, but the 1st Amendment, 4th Amendment, 5th Amendment, 6th Amendment, 7th Amendment and 8th Amendment.
The enforcement of “red flag” laws is actually much worse than you think, so says Donald Kilmer, an attorney who has litigated and defended against many state and federal gun charges.
Everyone is debating “red flag” laws like they’re some new thing, but California has had variations of them for decades. We call them domestic violence restraining orders, civil harassment restraining orders, workplace restraining orders, elder abuse restraining orders, mental health seizures and prohibition orders, and, more recently, gun violence restraining orders.
They’re all meant to disarm dangerous people — but they’re all fundamentally flawed.
None of these red flag laws would have prevented recent mass shootings. And in my 23 years practicing law in the heart of Silicon Valley, I have litigated dozens of these cases. I’ve seen firsthand the practical enforcement problems that emerge in real-life cases.
These kinds of court orders are usually obtained from a judge ex parte. That’s fancy Latin for: The judge only hears one side of the story, it is not your side, and you may not even know about it until after the fact. Then they immediately strip you of fundamental constitutional rights for the duration of the orders. You’ll get your “full due process” hearing, but not until later.
And any violation of these orders is separately punishable as a crime. So even if you are innocent of the underlying conduct that inspired the “red flag” order, if you violate the order pending your hearing, you can still face criminal charges.
That kind of situation is ripe for danger. In one situation in Baltimore, police ended up shooting [and killing] a man when they came to collect his guns under a “red flag” law.
In one case in Southern California, a client had to pay a $1,000 ransom, that was reduced from an initial “offer” of $4,000, to get his 50-gun collection back.
Experienced counsel to defend you in a “due process” hearing will run about $15,000 in fees. If you lose and want to appeal, expect to spend another $25,000 to $100,000 in fees and costs. And even with all of that, you might still lose.
To win these hearings, you have to refute an allegation that you pose a danger to yourself or others where a judge already issued a temporary ex parte order that concluded you were already a danger. Many judges will likely err on the side of caution, and against your rights.
As a practical matter, if the government’s interest is in separating a potentially-dangerous person from guns, it makes no sense to leave other guns that belong to family members in the home. So, if you live with someone that gets a red flag order issued against them, then you and others living in the same home risk losing your guns, too.
Even if you win, the judge isn’t going to just hand your guns back to you at the end of the hearing. It’s probably a good idea to “lawyer up” just to go through the process of recovering your guns, so you don’t go to jail or prison for accidentally breaking an obscure firearm law or regulation. You wouldn’t want to set off a red flag.
Law-abiding gun owners better get a big whiff of reality SOON and realize that if they are going to maintain the right to keep and bear arms much longer, THEY must step up to the plate and defend that right—and I mean RIGHT NOW.
The NRA is compromised and is in complete disarray and is offering NO HELP. Donald Trump has already proven he has ZERO fidelity to the 2nd Amendment (or to the rest of the Constitution and Bill of Rights, for that matter). Most Christians and conservatives are in a state of deep denial and hibernation, believing that their yellow-haired savior would never betray them, in spite of the fact that he has already betrayed them—repeatedly.
It is up to individual freedomists and gun owners who are willing to fight for their right to keep and bear arms to fend off this assault against our 2nd Amendment liberties. Reinforcements are not coming; it is up to YOU AND ME.
How much does the 2nd Amendment mean to you? Each of us will determine the answer to that question by what we do or do not do RIGHT NOW.
P.S. I, again, URGE readers to watch my 8-minute video regarding Trump’s betrayal of the 2nd Amendment and the push for the enactment of “red flag” gun confiscation laws and share it with everyone you can. In the video, I also include the phone numbers for both the White House and U.S. Senate, where you can call and voice your opposition.
P.P.S. Here is my video Open Letter To Our Legislator, Judges And Lawmen regarding “red flag” gun confiscation laws. Please watch it and share.
*If you appreciate this column and want to help me distribute these editorial opinions to an ever-growing audience, donations may be made by credit card, check, or Money Order. Use this link:
Copyright Disclaimer Under Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, allowance is made for "fair use" for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, and research. Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statute that might otherwise be infringing. Non-profit, educational or personal use tips the balance in favor of fair use.
At least ten bills are working their way through the California state legislature that would expand the state’s “red flag” law, according to the Los Angeles Times. The bills would, among other things, expand the list of people who could request gun confiscation orders and extend the duration of the orders from one to five years. We have truly entered dangerous waters. American states are one by one becoming little Communitarian / Bolshevik strongholds.
California Gov. Gavin Newsom is ready and willing to sign whatever gun confiscation schemes the legislature cooks up.
The governor signaled his support at a press conference touting the new ammunition background check law set to take effect July 1. He said he hoped a number of legislative efforts “to expand the scope of the red flag laws” would get to his desk. “I expect they will be supported overwhelmingly upstairs,” he added, referring to the legislature.
Of the ten bills that would expand and/or modify the state’s red flag law, two have the most serious potential to affect California gun owners. AB-61, introduced by Assembly Members Philip Ting, Al Muratsuchi, and Eloise Gómez Reyez, would expand the list of people authorized to ask a judge for a gun confiscation order.
Under current state law, an immediate family member or a law enforcement officer can request a judge to confiscate a person’s firearms if there is a “substantial likelihood” that the person poses an immediate danger to self or others. AB-61 would further allow an employer or a coworker who has “substantial and regular interactions with the person and approval of their employer” to request the order. It would also permit an employee or teacher of a secondary or postsecondary school, with approval of the school administration staff, to request a student’s firearms be removed, provided the student has been attending the school for at least six months. This is reminiscent of the Soviet Union. In Bolshevik Russia the citizens were used as weapons of the state in a similar campaign as if you “see something say something” style. Citizens in Bolshevik Russia would also use the state as a weapon against people who they had issues with or did not like. They would use this process to get even. And the government did not mind this as it kept everyone divided, controlled and in fear of government. In other words misuse of the process still served government interests.
The second bill, AB-12, would expand the maximum length of a gun confiscation order from one year to five years. In determining the duration of the order, the court would consider how long a person is “likely to continue” to be a danger to self or others. The bill allows the person under the order to request every year that the order be lifted, but they must prove that there is “no longer clear and convincing evidence” that they present a danger.
Other bills affecting red flag laws would require police departments to standardize their gun confiscation procedures and allow gun owners to voluntarily surrender their firearms to a court.
News of the expanded red flag laws comes the same week that California gun owners will be required to pass a background check for ammunition purchases.
America - we have been trying to warn you. What we were told about what they would never do 15 years ago by gun control advocates they are not only doing, but going way beyond.
It would seem that a lot of people in America have collectively lost their minds. This school is a government run institution. When government violates the rights of an individual harsh consequences should follow. Schools allowed to violate the Supreme Law of the Land and allowed to get away with it show exactly how they are being used as social change agent facilitators.
