Federal Red Flag Legislation Moves in Congress

0
972

Jack Shepherd 

Red Flag legislation is one of the most controversial gun control proposals in modern American politics. These proposals are more controversial than the blanket gun bans for one simple reason, these proposals are actually feasible.

House Resolution 2377 or the Federal Extreme Risk Protection Order Act will allow for the seizure of firearms in all 50 states with no due process so long as an official can justify the seizure on the grounds of  “protection of the community.”

This proposed law would give family members and police the ability to seek a court order that would strip the subject of said court order of their gun rights for up to 14 days. These court orders would be obtained with ex parte proceedings, meaning that the individual having their firearms seized would be unable to defend themselves in these proceedings. This legislation would also grant the ability to extend the temporary seizure up to a period of 180 days.

H.R. 2377 was put forward by Georgia Democrat Lucy McBath. Note that Congresswoman McBath took her seat in Congress with major backing from the gun control lobby and gun control pontiff Michael Bloomberg. Prior to landing the seat on capitol hill, McBath served as the faith and outreach leader for Moms Demand Action(MDA) for roughly 5 years. Also, take note of the fact that McBath put this bill forward after meeting with several high-profile members of the gun control lobby and President Joe Biden.

The bill is extremely partisan and only managed to squeak through the House Judiciary Committee after a seven-hour hearing that ended in a one-sided vote.

While the bill has its supporters, it also has its detractors.

Kentucky Republican Thomas Massie said in an op-ed, “When faced with legal bills that can easily amount to $10,000 for a hearing and the worst that can happen is their guns will be taken away, few people find that it makes sense to fight Red Flag laws.” Rep. Massie would continue saying “Under Red Flag laws, initial firearms confiscations usually require just a ‘reasonable suspicion.’ Judges will initially confiscate a person’s guns on the basis of a written complaint. When hearings take place weeks or a month later, courts overturn a third of the initial orders. But since few defendants have legal representation, the actual error rate is undoubtedly much higher.

By depriving individuals of their property and rights without having been charged, arraigned, or convicted of a crime, this bill violates Constitutional due process rights set out in the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendment,” said Ohio Republican Jim Jordan.

Texas Republican Chip Roy also chimed in, saying “you have the opportunity to be heard after – after – your rights have been taken away.

This legislation is controversial, there is no doubt about that, but for many on the left this is a no-brainer and it is easy to see why. The debate over this legislation boils down to the old argument of safety vs. liberty, many on the left would rather be safe than free. The sad part is this, this legislation really isn’t going to protect anyone and no one will be safer as a result excluding a few exceptions. Security theater is just that after all, theater.

Reproduced with permission. Original here.