TexasCHLforum.com

jb2012 wrote:

TexasJohnBoy wrote:

FloridaViaMissouri wrote:

TexasJohnBoy wrote:Yes - if you're blocked, then the govt has 72 hours to prove its case in front of a court, with the same level of proof as they would show for a warrant.
72 hours is the delay that's already in place for NICS checks that are kicked back. I think this is reasonable, and puts the burden of proof on the govt to get a warrant, not on the citizen wrongly added to the list to prove their innocence.

...If I understand the bill correctly...

So other words if the court decides to block the sale then YOU will have to pay big lawyer fees and spend years tied up in court in order to purchase a firearm?

Then what happens of the Dept on INjustice under Hillary or Bernie decide to label you a terrorist because of your "views"? Remember what the IRS did to "right wingers" with the audits?

How about adding an amendment that if you're cleared in the end, a civil judgment is levied against whatever jurisdiction blocked the sale in the first place to cover your costs? Not perfect, but nothing is.

Labeling someone something because of their views is far from having evidence to get an arrest warrant too, and I believe that's the point.

I like your idea. If it absolutely has to go like this, the entity responsible for negligently/ignorantly/purposefully placing you on a no-buy list should be held responsible in civil and criminal court.

TexasJohnBoy wrote:Yes - if you're blocked, then the govt has 72 hours to prove its case in front of a court, with the same level of proof as they would show for a warrant.
72 hours is the delay that's already in place for NICS checks that are kicked back. I think this is reasonable, and puts the burden of proof on the govt to get a warrant, not on the citizen wrongly added to the list to prove their innocence.

...If I understand the bill correctly...