Kentucky to becomes the latest state to debate "Red Flag" firearm legislation;

While walking into work on September 6, 2018 Whitney Austin was ambushed. Somehow, she survived being shot 12 times in the tragedy at Fifth Third Bank in downtown Cincinnati’s busy Fountain Square. The gunman injured one other person and killed three others before Cincinnati police shot and killed him.

Whitney Austin: Mass shooting survivor leaving Fifth Third Bank, fully commits to Whitney/Strong Organization

The mass shooting she survived was in Cincinnati. Kentucky doesn't have a Cincinnati. Indicating this happened in Cincinnati, OH.
The instigator survived an Ohio Mass Shooting


Why is this person any kind of advocate for Kentucky law when Ohio Law failed her?

Whitney Austin survived being shot 12 times at the Fifth Third Bank building in downtown Cincinnati. "What do you do when you can't make sense of the gift you've been given? For me, there was one answer - fight. Fight to protect others," Austin said. Austin believes a red flaw law potentially could have prevented her situation.

Kentucky lawmakers, gun violence survivors discuss red flag law issue


One has to wonder if Kentucky legislation could have prevented her predicament in Ohio...

As far as I know.... Kentucky is not Ohio

Imo...an XDM COMPACT in point45...like in the movie Ernest goes to Beverly Hills..." what I carry "

Red Flag Gun bans wont affect the actual criminals its meant to do what it is.
To take away guns from legal owners.

a reply to: ChefFox

Red Flag Gun bans wont affect the actual criminals its meant to do what it is.

There is no such thing as a Red Flag Gun ban. That doesn't even make sense.

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: ChefFox

Red Flag Gun bans wont affect the actual criminals its meant to do what it is.

There is no such thing as a Red Flag Gun ban. That doesn't even make sense.

Uh yes it does make sense. If they pass red flag gun laws, criminals and killers will still get guns. And pure speculation will be used to keep the law abiding from buying them.

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: ChefFox

Red Flag Gun bans wont affect the actual criminals its meant to do what it is.

There is no such thing as a Red Flag Gun ban. That doesn't even make sense.

It must be a red flag gun givaway?

As far as I know red flag laws allow for some people to be banned from having guns for some length of time and prevented from getting one even though the person isn't charged with a crime or otherwise encumbered by law.

So it's a red flag gun confiscation? Maybe a red flag preemptive 2nd Amendment break? Let's call it just a red flag gun time-out so that violating the US Constitution seems trivial.

a reply to: EternalSolace

Why is this person any kind of advocate for Kentucky law when Ohio Law failed her?

That doesn't make sense, since when do laws stop bullets

originally posted by: ChefFox
Red Flag Gun bans wont affect the actual criminals its meant to do what it is.
To take away guns from legal owners.

Red Flag laws actually target your Natural Rights to free speech. The gun part is a head-fake.

They're really trying to stop you from speaking the truth: "That mother-effer needs to have his damn fool head blown off. Problem solved!!"

Say something like that ... and they'll 'punish you' by attacking your next Natural Right (personal defense/opposition of tyranny).

I don't begrudge the person pushing for the law. Getting shot 3 times for no reason and I am sure anyone would look at things differently.

It doesn't make Red Flag laws right. I don't support them and think the very thing they are trying to prevent would push some people over the edge with righteous anger when the cops came to take away their rights. There must be due process when taking away someone's rights and red flag laws skip that.

a reply to: EternalSolace


Three people is a mass shooting?

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: ChefFox

Red Flag Gun bans wont affect the actual criminals its meant to do what it is.

There is no such thing as a Red Flag Gun ban. That doesn't even make sense.

Are you saying the red flag legislation doesnt ban certain people from having guns?

originally posted by: Grimpachi
the very thing they are trying to prevent would push some people over the edge with righteous anger when the cops came to take away their rights

Even my neighbors have no idea how safe their Natural Rights are, with me living next door to them.

Emergency risk protection orders are also known as red flag laws. The purpose of the law is to prevent someone who is considered to be a safety threat from buying or possessing firearms until their mental state can be assessed, or the issue can be resolved.

End run around due process.

If you say or do ANYTHING someone ELSE doesn't like.

No boom sticks for you.

Not only a violation of the second,fourth,14th amendments.

The ones in between.

Both the Gun Control Act of 1968 and the Brady Handgun Prevention Act of 1993 cover crazy people, and they say it verbatim.

So NO red flag laws.

a reply to: EternalSolace
FYI: Just sayin'....

Kentucky may as well BE Ohio at the river boarders where both states residences are the people in say Cincinnati Ohio/Covington Kentucky....whereas both sides of that bridge is different...yet laws affect both seriously and equally (kind of)...no matter if you're on the Ohio side or the Kentucky side.

Many Kentuckians work across in Ohio and many Ohioans work daily over in Kentucky...and reciprocal laws exist.*

* Resided once in London Kentucky, Rockcastle County

‘Red Flag” laws are simply a way to circumvent a citizens Constitutional rights and remove their right to any due process. I find them to be reprehensible and probably illegal.

a reply to: EternalSolace

Maybe she was shot in Ohio but lives in Kentucky? What's the big
deal there is my wonder?

Gun bans are actually pointless arguments

Due note that this was written in 2013. That particular is six years old now which is a mightily long time in Internet/technology years.

originally posted by: EternalSolace

The mass shooting she survived was in Cincinnati. Kentucky doesn't have a Cincinnati. Indicating this happened in Cincinnati, OH.
The instigator survived an Ohio Mass Shooting

Yes. Here's the news story of the shooting:
www.wave3.com...

Why is this person any kind of advocate for Kentucky law when Ohio Law failed her?

Possibly because she's a resident of Kentucky (but works just across the river in Ohio) and Kentucky is considering gun legislation? (see news story: www.wave3.com...)

One has to wonder if Kentucky legislation could have prevented her predicament in Ohio...

Yes, if the shooter had been (a common scenario) a violent ex who lived in Kentucky and was stalking their former spouse who worked in Ohio. The story you linked has testimony from several people where a law would have prevented such things.

a reply to: EternalSolace

Just as a point of fact, Covington KY, and Cincinnati, OH are the same metro area. pretty much like al lot ofctein cities on either side of a river.

Im against red flag laws of every kind...no due process equals BS

originally posted by: NoCorruptionAllowed
Uh yes it does make sense. If they pass red flag gun laws, criminals and killers will still get guns. And pure speculation will be used to keep the law abiding from buying them.

The killers that these laws are meant to stop are killers who haven't killed yet (because no one is born "a killer" and starts a career of murder at the age of 3 days old) They're meant to stop the many people who decide to get revenge (or commit suicide) and the authorities can't stop them from buying the guns that they will use to kill.

After they kill, of course, they're labeled as killers and can't have access to guns, either.

I knew two men (family members here in Texas) that we repeatedly tried to help and tried to intervene with, who both killed themselves because they could walk into a gun shop even after the guns were removed and buy a gun and ammunition. Red flag laws would have prevented that.