Monday, April 19, 2021

Indianapolis Shooting A Demonstration of Red Flag Laws' Innate Flaw and Failure

The Indianapolis killer as far as we know to date was not driven by any white supremacy beliefs (much to the sadness of the progressives), but instead was apparently well known to be CCFCP*

Indeed, he was even "known to the FBI" which as Cindy at From the Caer has rightly commented, is about the most useless titles for a potential mass-killer. Apparently, "known to the FBI" means the FBI makes sure it will stay well out of your way until you commit a mass killing and then say "yep, we knew him".

Verily, this fellow and the action taken by police in response to his being CCFCP* and proclaiming he wanted to commit suicide by cop was indeed the very example of the glaring failure and obvious inherent flaw of Red Flag laws:

The Detroit News: Prosecutor: FedEx shooter didn’t have ‘red flag’ hearing

Authorities believed they had done what they needed to by seizing the pump-action shotgun from Brandon Scott Hole in March 2020, Marion County Prosecutor Ryan Mears said.

“Absolutely there needs to be some intervention and absolutely the firearm needs to be taken away. … But the risk is if we move forward with that (red flag) process and lose, we have to give that firearm back to that person,” Mears said. “That’s not something we were willing to do.”

The shotgun was never returned to Hole, police have said.

Read that one again.  He was reported to be likely to kill others and himself, the police responded by taking a firearm away and then not even holding a "Red Flag hearing" because they might have lost and had to return it.

So they did what everyone who has concerns about red flag laws has pointed out as to what can occur: They left him free to go out and purchase another firearm and commit murder, and he did.

But hey, at least they thought they did what they needed to do.

Yep, take the firearm away from the madman and leave the madman free and unsupervised to go forth and  commit mayhem - including going out and buying another gun, explosive, gasoline, what have you. 

A rather glaring and fundamental flaw in the whole process.

Now, had they taken him in under a psych hold it would have gone differently. If he was then involuntarily committed as a threat to himself or others - which sounds pretty darn likely - then after a hearing (with all that due process stuff the anti-gunners don't like, which is why they circumvent it to go with a red flag law), he would have been designated in  NICS and been unable to legally purchase a firearm. Even more importantly, he would have received treatment for his underlying psychosis of being CCFCP.* These involuntary commitment laws predate red flags and are a lot more effective.  But the police and other officials need to actually decide to use them.

But, that was too much work apparently, and the police apparently figured that just partially red flagging him instead of having him get treatment for his underlying mental instability would suffice.

It obviously did not.

Red Flag Laws don't prevent an act of mass murder, they just delay it a bit.

* CCFCP for those who don't know means Coo Coo For Cocoa Puffs.  Since we don't know the wackjob's actual diagnosis, that will have to suffice.


B said...

It would seem to me that if you a deemed dangerous enough to be denied a firearm (due to mental issues) then you should not be allowed to be out in public at all for the safety of the fellow citizens....You could use a knife, a car, a broken bottle, a baseball bat, etc...any number of things to damage or kill your fellow citizens. Just letting him go wasa disservice to the citizens the Police are supposed to protect....

Pigpen51 said...

My thoughts exactly. Either you are enough of a threat to have a 72 hour hold and a psyche eval. done, or you are not, in which case, there is no justification for the stasi, I mean, the police to take your own property away from you, without due process.
For anyone who owns very expensive and nice or sentimental guns, I might suggest storing them in an inaccessible place, so that if the police ever take your guns, if and when you try and get them back, they either have not been busted up, or plain ole' disappeared, never to be seen again, unless you go to the home of one of the few cops who are gun peoples home safes.
Because I am certain that more than one valuable firearm that was taken " off the street" made it's way home with a cop who likes nice guns.

Aaron said...

B: Exactly. Red Flag laws are an oversimplified response to a complex situation by going after a single tool - a firearm - and not the presenting problem which is the violent nutjob. It's because progressives blame guns and not criminals or nutjobs for crime and thus magically think if they can seize the nut-job's (or anyone else they don't like) gun he won't be able to hurt anyone. Reality doesn't work like that.

Pigpen51: You're exactly right as well. These red flag laws are a simplistic knee-jerk solution to a far more complex problem that suits progressive's outlook for blaming a tool rather than the responsible person and inaction by the authorities that allows the person to commit their unlawful acts.

BC said...

Doesn't the red flag law require a hearing within a short time to make sure the red flag taking was justified?

If that is the case, doesn't that mean the cops and prosecutor here didn't follow the law?

Violating the shooter's civil rights by denying him the access to the court; and leaving somebody dangerous out to do dangerous things by explicitly failing to follow the law.