Like Countable?

Install the App
TRY NOW

house Bill H.R. 5717

Should the Federal Gov’t Give States Grants to Seize Firearms From Dangerous Individuals?

Argument in favor

There is ample evidence that both mass shooters and suicidal individuals will display warning signs prior to committing both acts. Giving families and local law enforcement a legal option to keep guns away from these individuals can save both their own and others’ lives.

Raquel 's Opinion
···
08/24/2018
I strongly believe that they best way to stop gun violence is to take guns out of the hands of violent people. I have heard that the practice of taking guns out of homes of persons who have just been called for domestic abuse for example is already in effect in some states with positive results. Lets put this in the states and local police officers hands who are close enough to access each situation and make the right call to save lives.
Like (99)
Follow
Share
burrkitty's Opinion
···
08/24/2018
Law enforcement need not be helpless in the face of the repeated warning signs that people are preparing for violence or are unstable and a danger to themselves and others. I support the states that have reasonable red line laws and the implementation of federal support and funding.
Like (52)
Follow
Share
Karen's Opinion
···
08/24/2018
It’s about time the Federal Government shows some interest in stopping dangerous people from killing innocent folks. This is a step in the right direction to tell Constituents that lawmakers have finally found the guts to stand up to the NRA.
Like (20)
Follow
Share

Argument opposed

States are already passing and enforcing red flag laws of their own accord — there is no need for the federal government to encourage these laws’ enactment or provide funding. Additionally, this bill may not provide adequate due process protections for firearms owners.

Vincent's Opinion
···
08/24/2018
No. I don't want the police to be able to do this kind of thing without due process. Bad precedent, slippery slope.
Like (124)
Follow
Share
mijackal9's Opinion
···
08/24/2018
This is a dangerous bill, don’t pass it! Due process is required, passing this helps to further erode our rights.
Like (58)
Follow
Share
samiam6's Opinion
···
08/24/2018
Due process please. This is a country ruled by laws,
Like (20)
Follow
Share

bill Progress


  • Not enacted
    The President has not signed this bill
  • The senate has not voted
  • The house has not voted
      house Committees
      Committee on the Judiciary
      Crime, Terrorism and Homeland Security
    IntroducedMay 9th, 2018
    I strongly believe that they best way to stop gun violence is to take guns out of the hands of violent people. I have heard that the practice of taking guns out of homes of persons who have just been called for domestic abuse for example is already in effect in some states with positive results. Lets put this in the states and local police officers hands who are close enough to access each situation and make the right call to save lives.
    Like (99)
    Follow
    Share
    No. I don't want the police to be able to do this kind of thing without due process. Bad precedent, slippery slope.
    Like (124)
    Follow
    Share
    This is a dangerous bill, don’t pass it! Due process is required, passing this helps to further erode our rights.
    Like (58)
    Follow
    Share
    Law enforcement need not be helpless in the face of the repeated warning signs that people are preparing for violence or are unstable and a danger to themselves and others. I support the states that have reasonable red line laws and the implementation of federal support and funding.
    Like (52)
    Follow
    Share
    Hell no! That couldn't be tailored MORE to encourage abuse. ANYBODY with a grudge could trigger a massive and traumatic invasion of some innocent person's life, with NO recouse, no means for due process and all of the burdens of proof of innocence AND the expenses placed squarely on the VICTIM...
    Like (20)
    Follow
    Share
    Due process please. This is a country ruled by laws,
    Like (20)
    Follow
    Share
    It’s about time the Federal Government shows some interest in stopping dangerous people from killing innocent folks. This is a step in the right direction to tell Constituents that lawmakers have finally found the guts to stand up to the NRA.
    Like (20)
    Follow
    Share
    This would set a bad precedent. No seizure of personal property unless a crime has been committed or a premeditated crime can be proven.
    Like (15)
    Follow
    Share
    Sounds like it's rife with opportunities for abuses. Who defines "dangerous"? How does someone appeal being put on the "dangerous" list? This has all the same Due Process violations as the No Fly List. Blatantly unconstitutional.
    Like (15)
    Follow
    Share
    How is this bill from a Republican a slippery slope when it outlines it really only is taking guns from the mentally ill who don’t take their medicine or have a history of self harm or violence. Jesus sometimes I feel the right doesn’t know how to read a bill. It’s not a repeal of the second amendment you idiots!!! It’s just protecting citizens!!!
    Like (14)
    Follow
    Share
    If there is probable cause to suggest that an individual is a danger to either themselves or others then they should not have access to guns! The safety of the public should always be a priority.
    Like (13)
    Follow
    Share
    That can’t be a serious question. Yes. Get any type of weapon away from dangerous individuals.
    Like (12)
    Follow
    Share
    What is the definition of a Dangerous Individual! A lot of you weird Leftie creeps want to ban all veterans from gun ownership! I would prefer that we ban ANTIFA and mist Dems from Gun Ownership! And since the left now is Anti Police are demanding that they give up Gun ownership as well? What is your definition of a dangerous individual as posed to a responsible individual! The Dumb Bell at Countable that came up with question has no idea about freedom and liberty and I recommend that they be terminated from their employment by you!
    Like (12)
    Follow
    Share
    Who deems a person dangerous? This is a slippery slope to remove all guns from law abiding citizens. Drunk drivers kill people everyday but we don’t want to ban vehicles or alcohol. They are not allowed to drive anymore. Why don’t most of you worry about banning straws or whatever your offended by this week. Instead of being a keyboard warrior go enlist in the military or do something productive for society and your country.
    Like (10)
    Follow
    Share
    Yes
    Like (10)
    Follow
    Share
    it's plain common sense
    Like (9)
    Follow
    Share
    This sounds logical but can be used as a weapon by the Federal government against an opponent whether political, religious, ethnic etc. It’s a slippery slope that should never be allowed. It could make the Federal government far more powerful than already; ie: DOJ, ATF, FBI , Federal Court system just to name a few. #MAGA
    Like (9)
    Follow
    Share
    Please review the US Constitution and the Bill of Rights, paying close attention to the 1st, 2nd, 4th and 6th amendments.
    Like (8)
    Follow
    Share
    When hell freezes over. Who defines “dangerous”? Maxine Waters?
    Like (7)
    Follow
    Share
    NO. At best a state problem however this bill will have astronomical cost when you get the courts involved. Federal law Federal Court.
    Like (7)
    Follow
    Share
    MORE