N.J. seized this man’s gun because he glorified violence against Jews, cops say

I think what Bang said above has merit. I just wish the red flag laws weren't all about taking someone's guns, as if that is some magic talisman of protection from violence. I'd rather see in situations like this the police take the man in for further questioning, or take him in for a psych evaluation if the situation warrants it. If the guy seems truly criminal in what he says, or truly unhinged, then either arrest him or commit him. And then secure his guns should the situation warrant it.

If what he has said does not rise to the level of criminality, or suggest serious mental issues, then leave him, his beliefs and his guns alone. As unpalatable as it may be to most of us, it is not illegal for someone to dislike and advocate against any person or group of people. Also, should the guns be seized, the person should be able to get quick access to a fair hearing where his case can be presented and an impartial jury or panel can decide whether the state can keep his guns. If they do, he should be able to have them sold to his benefit, or stored in a manner in which when he eventually gets them back, they are not destroyed.

In this manner, really crazy people might be stopped from doing something stupid and receive the treatment or prison they deserve. And normal people have some remedy against false accusations by stupid neighbors or crazy ex-girlfriends so they are nor deprived of their rights. As it is now, it seems they take the guns and then just let the person free to figure out his next move. Seems like they are treating the cough but not the infection. In summary, if a person looks like a genuine threat, either arrest him, put him in the psych ward, make sure he knows the police will be watching him day in and day out, or leave him alone. The guns are somewhat of a side issue.

I would be pleased for this country if both Clintons (maybe 3 of them) were struck by the same bolt of lighting and stopped hurting America.

Doesn't mean that I'm going to do anything about it (although I seem to recall climate cultists in the book "Climate of Fear" doing something to target people for Zeus's weapon of choice.)

I'm not a fan of Abe Lincoln, either, and I've voiced my lack of admiration for a guy who elevated "preserving the Union" over "the inherent right of any free people to self-determination", which had been kind of an important principle less than a century before Abe invaded the South. But that's also a moot point, since Abe is dead and there's no act I'm planning to deal with him. Well, maybe "ass pennies".

Half the country hates Trump, the NRA, "the rich", white people in general, and Sean Spicer's dancing. Hate is protected by the 1st Amendment, so is expressing that opinion. Applying the current Red Flag standards to MSNBC's 24/7 anti-Trump hate rants, would have most of them disarmed and probably locked up.

The fact that many spree shooters and terrorists expressed hateful views before they went postal is not proof that most people who express hateful views will take up arms and hurt people. Most vegetarians in human history have died; most serial killers looked at porn; all mothers who killed their children started by getting pregnant. If I were a judge, I'd like to see some serious statistics showing that the subject of a requested Red Flag order was "much more likely than not" going to commit a violent act. Something like "he hired a PI to get him a list of the home addresses of local rabbis" or "he asked a buddy to help him blow up a mosque".

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Qtrborecrazy

Haven’t heard of 1 Muslim in NewJersey that’s had his/her guns takin away because of his/her hate speech.

---

That really wasn’t my question. My question was, would you be ok with what NJ did if it were a Muslim, making the same statements. A very simple yes or no would suffice.

What will the Puffy Ho do without all the threats against conservatives and the President if they all get red flagged. Oh wait, that's not included in the red flag laws that's allowed hate speech.

Why did they only take his gun and ammo? They don't think he could kill some Jews with a steak knife or hammer or car or poison, etc? These red flag laws seem more like gun confiscation than violence prevention. It'll be interesting to see what politicians do if a person who has his guns confiscated kills someone by another means.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Aggies Coach

That really wasn’t my question. My question was, would you be ok with what NJ did if it were a Muslim, making the same statements. A very simple yes or no would suffice.

---

No, the mans skin color or religion has nothing to do with my decision.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Aggies Coach

That really wasn’t my question. My question was, would you be ok with what NJ did if it were a Muslim, making the same statements. A very simple yes or no would suffice.

---

Well when they take the guns of one of these people I’ll let you know. Please don’t hold your breath because I like ya Coach.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Aggies Coach

Let me ask this.....If this was a Muslim saying that he wanted to, or spoke of the extermination of Christians, would you then be ok with what NJ did ???? This is just a question.

---

They do this all the time as it's in their belief system----their very core.... and get a pass---bad analogy. But hey, you asked. Oh and my answer is "no---" I would not be okay with it unless they are here illegally. However, I want to be able to defend myself from evil.

Quran (3:151) - "Soon shall We cast terror into the hearts of the Unbelievers, for that they joined companions with Allah, for which He had sent no authority". This speaks directly of polytheists, yet it also includes Christians, since they believe in the Trinity (ie. what Muhammad incorrectly believed to be 'joining companions to Allah')

Quran (4:74) - "Let those fight in the way of Allah who sell the life of this world for the other. Whoso fighteth in the way of Allah, be he slain or be he victorious, on him We shall bestow a vast reward." The martyrs of Islam are unlike the early Christians, who were led meekly to the slaughter. These Muslims are killed in battle as they attempt to inflict death and destruction for the cause of Allah. This is the theological basis for today's suicide bombers.


Quran (4:76) - "Those who believe fight in the cause of Allah, and those who disbelieve, fight in the cause of Taghut (Satan, etc.). So fight you against the friends of Shaitan (Satan)" The Arabic for the word "fight" is from qital, meaning physical combat.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mikelets456

https://www.nj.com/news/2019/11/nj-m...d-his-gun.html

N.J. seized this man’s gun because he glorified violence against Jews, cops say

By Joe Atmonavage | NJ Advance Media for NJ.com

Police had been watching David Greco for months, carefully monitoring his online activity.

They noted that he often “threatened, advocated and celebrated the killing of Jewish people."

He also was in communication with the man accused of walking into a Pittsburgh synagogue last year and killing 11 people, they alleged. (Greco has denied this.)

On Aug. 5, after months of observation, law enforcement officers paid a visit to Greco’s Camden County home.

At first, Greco, 51, refused to answer the door. He only spoke with officers after his parents came home and allowed them in the modest home.

As police questioned him about comments he made on a far-right social media platform, Greco was “extremely agitated and angry,” authorities said, but he did not talk about acting out on his disdain for Jewish people. However, they also noted that he said he “believes that Jews are raping our woman and children” and that “force or violence is necessary to realign society.

On Sept. 6, police once again visited Greco’s home, descending without warning, to seize his gun and ammunition.

Unknown to Greco, a Camden County Superior Court Judge Edward McBride had issued a temporary extreme risk protection order earlier that day based on an affidavit regarding Greco’s behavior. The order allowed police to execute a no-knock search warrant of his home and seize one semi-automatic rifle, ammunition and his firearms purchaser ID card.

Under a law that went into effect Sept.1, called the Extreme Risk Protection Order Act, a law enforcement officer, family or household member can now petition a state Superior Court judge to take away the guns of a person who they believe “poses an immediate and present danger” to themselves or others. Even if they have not committed a crime.

Two months after going into effect, the constitutionality of the law is being challenged in a proposed class action lawsuit that was filed in New Jersey federal court last month. Greco’s case is at the forefront of the suit. It is the latest lawsuit challenging strict gun control measures Gov. Phil Murphy has signed into law over the last year.

The lawsuit challenges whether there is legal authority to execute a search warrant after a temporary extreme risk protection order is issued.

The law deprives Greco, and other gun owners in New Jersey, of their due process rights, as they are not given a chance to be heard in court before a temporary order is issued and police take firearms, says Albert J. Rescinio, Greco’s attorney. And can a gun owner have their “constitutional rights abrogated” for things said “that the government or anyone else might not like?” the attorney asked.

---

That is the true purpose of these laws. To convict people of hate crimes for exercising the 1st Amendment. I have also always believed that the Red Flags were an evisceration of the 4th Amendment. Cops go in without evidence of any crime, no warrant, and then find things that they would otherwise never have the right to do. No Red Flag laws that I have read even try to tackle that subject. There is no bar to the police using a Red Flag order to searching for other "crimes". Now that we have Marcy's law here, you won't even be able to confront your Red Flag accuser and have him or her interviewed.