Why red flag law didn’t
stop Fedex shooter Brandon
Hole from obtaining rifles
New York Post,
by
Gabrielle Fonrouge
Original Article
Posted By: Ribicon,
4/18/2021 10:59:25 PM
Public records suggest that the gunman behind the FedEx massacre was able to legally obtain two rifles—even after having another gun taken away last year—because he never had a competency hearing. Under Indiana’s so-called “red flag law,” authorities are supposed to seek court intervention when they confiscate guns and believe that returning them to a person would constitute a threat, in a bid to keep guns out of the wrong hands.(Snip)But Brandon Hole—the 19-year-old behind Thursday’s bloodbath at the FedEx facility he used to work at in Indianapolis—was apparently never the subject of such a hearing,
Reply 1 - Posted by:
Luandir 4/18/2021 11:21:20 PM (No. 759062)
Same old story: Ambitious new laws administered by incompetent government.
19 people like this.
Reply 2 - Posted by:
caljeepgirl 4/18/2021 11:34:58 PM (No. 759071)
Wow,if true, that was a VERY expensive administrative oversight....clueless bureaucrats!!!
8 people like this.
Reply 3 - Posted by:
TLCary 4/19/2021 12:10:20 AM (No. 759085)
Don’t enforce the laws,
After people die use their deaths as an excuse to pass more draconian laws,
...
Repeat
12 people like this.
Reply 4 - Posted by:
RuckusTom 4/19/2021 12:16:35 AM (No. 759087)
Do they have Constitutional Carry in Indiana? If not, why not? Think of how many people could have taken this guy out if they'd been armed.
5 people like this.
Reply 5 - Posted by:
bighambone 4/19/2021 12:56:02 AM (No. 759097)
It seems like most of the nut jobs who have been perpetrating these shootings have been known to law enforcement before the incidents occurred during which innocent people are murdered. If the State and Federal laws and procedures had been following there is a very high chance that Brandon Hole would not have been able to purchase the two rifles, one of which he used to murder those people, because he would not have been able to pass the Federal firearms background checks that were apparently done when he purchased the two rifles.
Also the media have hyping up 24/7 that such serial shooters have been using the very popular AR-15 rifle to commit their past crimes, chances are thereby giving intending nut jobs the idea to arm themselves with AR-15 rifles or variants of the AR-15, to use to carry out their murder and suicide by cop plans. Those rifles are very expensive and two new AR-15 rifles could have easily cost the perpetrator $3,000.00. If he was unemployed after being fired by FEDEX where did he get that amount of money? Don’t be surprised if he did not use his US Government stimulus check as part of his payment for the two rifles.
10 people like this.
Reply 6 - Posted by:
DVC 4/19/2021 1:03:34 AM (No. 759101)
They imagine that waving a 'magic law' somehow makes violence disappear. Gun laws, all sorts of stupid added laws, which ONLY impact the honest citizens, and never even inconvenience the criminal class in the slightest.
8 people like this.
Reply 7 - Posted by:
DVC 4/19/2021 3:33:32 AM (No. 759155)
#4, most people can't carry at work.
One report indicates one person tried to use a handgun from their car in the parking lot and was killed.
Handgun against a rifle is always a very poor odds situation. Rifles are far more powerful, and far more accurate at any distance at all unless one is a real expert. A hero in Missouri some years ago saw a guy going nuts shooting people with a rifle in the town square, from his upstairs window overlooking the square. He grabbed his handgun and went down to stop the carnage....and sadly was murdered by the rifleman.
Would I engage? Yes, almost certainly, but only from cover. And if I had a long gun, I'd use that way before engaging with a handgun.
8 people like this.
Reply 8 - Posted by:
Mizz Fixxit 4/19/2021 6:55:20 AM (No. 759220)
FTA: The chief said he was unsure whether the teen ever had a hearing or how his department maintained possession of his shotgun. “I don’t know how we held onto it,” Taylor told the outlet.
Everyone knows the chief is a liar. This tells us all we need know about the outcome of the investigation into the seizure of the shotgun and failure of the court to intervene in this “dangerous person” case.
5 people like this.
Reply 9 - Posted by:
NamVet70 4/19/2021 8:49:58 AM (No. 759316)
This episode is infuriating on three counts:
1. The confiscation of the shotgun.
This is denial of a constitutional right. The confiscation of any property should at least require a court order.
2. Releasing this dangerous person onto society where he ultimate murdered people.
This is absolute neglect of responsibility for public safety.
3. The killings again demonstration that the unsafest place for anyone to be is a gun-free zone. Police don't protect
people, they can only arrive later to document the body count.
3 people like this.
Reply 10 - Posted by:
bpl40 4/19/2021 9:18:49 AM (No. 759361)
Its quite simple. He was a white teenager. Any killings by him could be used by the FBI's paymasters for political gain. So why bother? Sounds far fetched? Truth is stranger.
4 people like this.
Reply 11 - Posted by:
MDConservative 4/19/2021 10:15:31 AM (No. 759433)
Government doesn't want to spend the money on "competency hearings." This wasn't about guns. So your local government goes to court and wins...and then it gains custody of the adult incompetent for housing and treatment, after it fights HIS lawyer through all this. Then there is his family, which wrung its hands and failed to bring this kid to proper treatment. Costs money and heartbreak. The shotgun was gone...no more threat. The problem is solved. And here is the other edge of those "Red Flag" laws...
1 person likes this.
Reply 12 - Posted by:
Mizz Fixxit 4/19/2021 10:40:48 AM (No. 759465)
Who is in possession of the confiscated shotgun?
3 people like this.
Reply 13 - Posted by:
dst4life 4/19/2021 11:14:46 AM (No. 759506)
"Red flag" laws are dangerous. Don't fall for this. Just as anyone can feign being "offended" to shut down a viewpoint with which they disagree, anyone can feign that they are "scared, very scared" of someone in an attempt to disarm that person. And unfortunately, many cops will kowtow to whoever screams the loudest in any situation.
Don't . . . . fall . . . for . . . this.
2 people like this.
Below, you will find ...
Most Recent Articles posted by "Ribicon"
and
Most Active Articles (last 48 hours)
Comments:
The feds and the state "dropped the ball," as they so often do, on a known ticking time bomb. The same people who disregard existing laws that could have stopped a crime say we need even more gun laws to keep us safe from dangerous people.