National Gun Forum banner

1 - 19 of 19 Posts

·
Grand Imperial Poobah
Joined
·
21,963 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
https://www.foxnews.com/us/first-person-charged-under-florida-red-flag-law-found-guilty

The first person to have his guns confiscated under Florida’s 2018 “red flag” law has been found guilty over his refusal to voluntarily surrender the weapons.

Jerron Smith, 33, now faces up to five years in prison after a jury in Broward County rejected his argument that he did not fully understand the new law. The jury returned the verdict Friday after a short trial.

Smith, of Deerfield Beach, was the subject of a risk protection order soon after the law was enacted in response to the Parkland high school mass shooting in February 2018.


Jerron Smih, 31, of Deerfield Beach, Fla., had his AR-15 semiautomatic weapon confiscated, becoming the first person to have his guns seized under Florida's 2018 "red flag" law.. (Broward County Sheriff's Office)

Smith owned an AR-15 rifle and a .22-caliber rifle which Broward deputies seized after his arrest in March 2018 on charges of firing six shots at a vehicle being driven by his best friend, according to reports.

Smith is facing trial on an attempted murder charge in connection with that incident. He was accused of firing at his friend with a Glock handgun that deputies also took, according to reports.

Florida’s "red flag" law allows authorities to obtain a court order to confiscate weapons from people who pose a danger to themselves and others. Florida is one of 15 states with such laws.

At the time Smith's guns were seized, a local TV station, citing a neighbor, reported that Smith was an Army veteran.

“He spent a lot of money for his weaponry,” the neighbor, Lorenzo Brown, told WPLG-TV. “It’s crazy. You just got to live around here to know what’s going on.”

A sentencing date has not been set.

:mad5: These idiotic red flag laws needs to be brought before the SCOTUS, so they can be slapped down as unconstitutional.
 

·
Ancient Gaseous Emanation
Joined
·
53,782 Posts
Smith owned an AR-15 rifle and a .22-caliber rifle which Broward deputies seized after his arrest in March 2018 on charges of firing six shots at a vehicle being driven by his best friend, according to reports.

Smith is facing trial on an attempted murder charge in connection with that incident. He was accused of firing at his friend with a Glock handgun that deputies also took, according to reports.
Why is the 'Red Flag' law necessary in this case?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
13,464 Posts
My first reaction was panic. I'm in Florida, my sister hates me, the sheriff has gone by my place the last two days. But then I read where he shot into a vehicle. Play stupid games, win stupid prizes.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,213 Posts
The three day waiting period for any gun also needs to be struck down.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
701 Posts
Why is the 'Red Flag' law necessary in this case?
Smith is facing trial on an attempted murder charge in connection with that incident. He was accused of firing at his friend with a Glock handgun that deputies also took, according to reports.

Florida’s "red flag" law allows authorities to obtain a court order to confiscate weapons from people who pose a danger to themselves and others.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,213 Posts
the RFL were written to take guns BEFORE someone does something; this guy fired his gun, so this is attempted murder - RFL should not be applicable
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,422 Posts
This whole story doesn't make sense. Was the protection order in place before he started shooting at cars?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
18,450 Posts
"RFL". A law which stipulated enforcement of an existing law?

This reporting is badly written and serves to show how low journalism standards AND our societies laws have fallen. But then, today's "jernalists" were just yesterdays bloggers.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,353 Posts
As I have said several times in this blog, "Red Flag laws" are one of the most dangerous laws ever enacted, you can be accused and convicted before you even know that you are being accused.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Fitasc Shooter

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,213 Posts
So much for being Innocent Until PROVEN Guilty
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,353 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
15 Posts
I see absolutely nothing wrong with seizing every single gun a person owns if they have been arrested on charges of attempted murder with a gun. If the accused is acquitted their guns can then be immediately returned, with cops compensating at full MSRP if the guns are "lost." This is common sense and shouldn't require a red flag law to accomplish.

Obviously red flag laws can be used as an unconstitutional end-run around due process and the 2A, but with proper judicial oversight there is nothing wrong with taking guns away from individuals who are in crisis, involved in criminal proceedings or otherwise unsafe to have them. But the burden of proof MUST be on the court to prove the person criminally unsafe to have a gun, not on the lawful gun owner to prove their innocence. There also needs to be extremely harsh penalties for maliciously filing a red flag request, courts okaying an unwarranted request, or law enforcement dragging their feet on returning seized guns to the rightful owner.

But the gentleman in this particular story is NOT someone we should be defending the gun rights of.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
126 Posts
if you have a gun, and havent broken any other laws,use it to protect your RIGHTS.they are more important than some law
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
15 Posts
if you have a gun, and havent broken any other laws,use it to protect your RIGHTS.they are more important than some law
I don't know why we can't have gun rights for the lawful AND at least temporarily disarm those in crisis, arrested for violent crimes or who are otherwise unsafe to have them at the same time.

I feel so strongly that criminals shouldn't have guns that I carry one to protect myself from them. Why would we ever defend the gun rights of a criminal? And why would you think we have to in order to protect our gun rights as as lawful citizens???

If a court decides there is sufficient evidence to hold someone over for criminal trial, I feel that is sufficient reason to at least temporally remove the accused's guns. We often lock people up while awaiting trial for the public safety, don't we? How is taking away their guns temporally any different? The guns can be returned if they are acquitted. But we MUST ensure there are safeguards, checks and HEFTY penalties in place so that the process is not abused as an end-run around the 2A and due process.

Lastly, it's dangerous to allow every individual to decide for themselves if they have broken the law or not. This is a democratic society, not an anarchy. I fully support protecting constitutional rights, with force if necessary, but not when that concept is perverted to protect criminals.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,213 Posts
I don't know why we can't have gun rights for the lawful AND at least temporarily disarm those in crisis, arrested for violent crimes or who are otherwise unsafe to have them at the same time.

I feel so strongly that criminals shouldn't have guns that I carry one to protect myself from them. Why would we ever defend the gun rights of a criminal? And why would you think we have to in order to protect our gun rights as as lawful citizens???

If a court decides there is sufficient evidence to hold someone over for criminal trial, I feel that is sufficient reason to at least temporally remove the accused's guns. We often lock people up while awaiting trial for the public safety, don't we? How is taking away their guns temporally any different? The guns can be returned if they are acquitted. But we MUST ensure there are safeguards, checks and HEFTY penalties in place so that the process is not abused as an end-run around the 2A and due process.

Lastly, it's dangerous to allow every individual to decide for themselves if they have broken the law or not. This is a democratic society, not an anarchy. I fully support protecting constitutional rights, with force if necessary, but not when that concept is perverted to protect criminals.

In THIS country, one is presumed innocent UNTIL PROVEN guilty, not merely accused or arrested.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Wag and Popeye

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,422 Posts
Ya see there is this phrase in 2a that says " Shall not be infringed" meaning that the first part " the right of the people to keep and bear arms" should not be messed with. Most everyone on this forum agrees with this. The guy in the OP's story was an idiot and belongs in jail. He shot at his friends car and I use the word friend loosely. If they had applied the law as it should have been, he would have been in jail, but this is Miami/Dade one of the commie strongholds in Florida so they let the idiot out on bail so they had to use the Red flag law. They needs to stop making stupid laws to try to fix the other stupid law that didn't work. Go back to the basics, they worked fine before.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
126 Posts
if there havent been any laws vroken then that person is INNOCENT.red flag laws are a socialist way around the 2nd,it only takes 1 person to sey you are a danger and they can come and take your guns away
IF he had a history of commiting crimes thats a different thing.
would you like it if your neighbor said your were to unstable to own a gun?
its just one step away from being a socialist to being a communist country.
WE HAVE TO PROTECT OUR FREEDOMS OR THEY WILL BE LOST.mabey the next one they go after will be the 1st .after all they already have the media to spread their propaganda.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
629 Posts
Sounds to me that they used the red-flag law just to get the conviction on the books. Precedence for future violations.
 
1 - 19 of 19 Posts
Top