Red-Flag Gun Laws- Public Safety or Abuse of the Innocent?



They are called Extreme-Risk Protection Orders. Some people call them Red-Flag Gun Confiscation. Whatever you call it, we’re supposed to call the cops and stop a bad man with a gun before he hurts someone. That sounds more like the script from a cop-drama on TV than what happens in real life. In practice, these laws are designed for abuse. We’ve already seen them fail to stop violent crime. We’ve also seen police kill gun owners during early morning Red-Flag raids. At best, innocent individuals have to spend tens of thousands of dollars to get their rights restored after they’ve been served with a red-flag order.

Is that the unavoidable price of freedom, or is that the bigoted abuse of a disfavored minority for political gain?

(A thousand more words at the link)


will they take cars if the neighbor says he is going to run over the kids blocking the street ? will they take computers if you post, I should beat that sex offenders ass ? Red Flag laws are about disarming Americans…


i would agree with the basic design is to disarm a person that is not 100% well-liked, respected or willing to be force fed the liberal agenda.


I agree. The lack of due process is unconstitutional and a recipe for abuse. I have a feeling that most of these Red Flag laws will not survive the inevitable Supreme Court challenges.


I’m curious what criteria has to be met. Ideally, there would need to be some history of mental illness or violent behavior. Where I live, I believe LE would require that before kicking in doors. However, if you’re in a liberal area… you’re at the mercy of whomever doesn’t like you. Definitely unconstitutional no matter how you look at it.


In practice, the criteria will probably be decided by those involved in issuing the order.

A domestic violence protection order should be issued only in cases where there is a danger to one of the parties involved. However, some divorce court judges will issue them as an automatic practice, any time the wife simply states she is afraid of what her husband might do.

Red-Flag gun laws could easily go the same way, with a ‘better safe than sorry’ approach being taken with any reported concerns.


Domestic is definitely going to be a problem. Police do tend to protect the wife/girlfriend regardless of the situation. I called the police once, on a crazy bitch, and they started giving me a hard time like I was the one causing problems. He didn’t even write a report. So, yeah…I can see that getting out of hand real quick.



I so hope you are right about the Supreme Court challenges. These red flag laws are by design, horrible socialistic abuses that should never have been passed anywhere.

It is clear that they are designed for speed (to confiscate), not accuracy (in whose guns get confiscated). Could you imagine all our laws so designed? One difference we would see is a presumption of guilt, not of innocence, for all possible crimes. Many more people would be sitting in jail waiting for their court dates than currently.




Rob’s article in Ammoland



If any of this passes a lot of guy’s will go to jail and lose rights when a wife or girlfriend gets pissed and makes a phone call…or an asshole neighbor or co-worker…this may be way more effective for the anti-gun left than any anti-gun law…


I was going to say the same.
Spot on brother!


I agree. Our current laws already allow the courts to require mental health evaluations, which can result in confiscation. However, that process requires time and accuracy (a.k.a. due process). These Red Flag laws are just a quick way to sidestep the Constitution.

I agree again. Unfortunately, that is already happening across our society. The Me Too movement is just one example. Don’t get me wrong, I’m glad that Me Too rightfully exposed some real creeps. However, some innocent people also got hurt and they will never have an opportunity to clear their names.