Your Network and Source for National Gun News

Number of “Red Flag” States that can Confiscate Guns without Due Process has Doubled Since the Parkland Shooting

On Monday, Illinois Gov. Bruce Rauner (R) signed a “red flag” measure into law, making it legal for police officers to confiscate firearms from individuals deemed to be dangerous by a judge. Now, Illinois has become the eighth state to adopt this law since the Parkland shooting, increasing the number of so-called “red flag” states to thirteen.

Following the Parkland shooting, laws enabling the legal confiscation of firearms without due process from individuals deemed to be a threat gained a lot of traction among the gun-control crowd and even enjoyed the support of some Republican politicians, including President Trump.

Supporters of these laws argue that they will enable police officers, family members, and other people who may be aware of a threat to report an individual to a judge and petition that their firearms be removed from them until such a time as they can prove that they are not a threat.

While the measure seems understandable enough on the surface to garner support even among those who typically defend Second Amendment rights, its deeper implications are concerning.

American citizens are afforded all of their Constitutional rights unless they are proven guilty of a crime in a court of law, at which point some of those rights (such as the right to bear arms and protection against warrantless search and seizure) may be stripped away from them.

The problem with “red flag” laws is that the individual in question is not given their day in court before their Constitutional rights are taken away from them. Rather, the decision is made by a judge who is only able to hear one side of the story.

So far, there have only been a handful of cases where these “red flag” laws have been put into action, and most of them seem justifiable in the sense that the individuals who had their firearms taken away did indeed seem to be a serious threat to the safety of themselves and others. Nevertheless, the structure of these laws leaves the door open for serious and dangerous violations of Constitutional rights.

Imagine, for example, that an individual is falsely accused of being a threat by someone who has a grudge against them. They could then present false evidence before a judge without giving their target the opportunity to counter it, stripping away their Second Amendment rights and their ability to defend themselves.

In the end, it is not up to family members, police officers, and other associates to decide whether or not someone should be in the possession of firearms. It’s not even up to the court unless that person has been found guilty of a felony crime. States enacting “red flag” laws, however, give the courts and accusing indi“viduals the power to strip away Second Amendment rights without due process, creating an incredibly slippery slope.

While “red flag” laws have garnered plenty of support from high profile politicians, they’ve also been met with some opposition. The NRA initially came out as neutral on “red flag” laws before changing to oppose them, saying that they would only support such measures if the individual in question was given a chance to defend themselves in court before their firearms were removed from them rather than after.

The American Civil Liberties Union also came out against “red flag” laws, rightfully saying that Constitutional rights could be violated if restraining orders on firearms were issued too freely.

The problem of firearm restraining order being issued too freely is no doubt the core issue with “red flag” laws. Under the current law, an American citizen’s right to bear arms is very clear-cut – if they are not a convicted felon, declared mentally unfit, or a fugitive from the law then they have a right to possess firearms.

Under “red flag” laws, though, the issue is not nearly as straightforward, and it becomes up to the discretion of a judge to determine whether or not an individual should be granted Second Amendment rights. There is no standard for what defines a “dangerous person” and no limit on the power for courts to take away the firearms of anyone they choose for any reason at all.

No other Constitutional rights are treated in this manner. A person cannot have their right to vote stripped away because the courts decide they are not educated enough on the issues, nor can they have their First Amendment rights taken away because they make inflammatory comments. Second Amendment rights should be no different.

~ National Gun Network

30 Comments
  1. Dan says

    Get ready folks! They’re coming after your guns solely on the say of a pissed off neighbor or anyone who doesn’t like you! This is unconstitutional and it is a travesty! These State’s Governments are overstepping their constitutional authority here!

    1. Buzz Waldron says
  2. C.T Ashby says

    An interesting story , but they failed to list the states which have passed this law

    1. cliff says

      ILLINOIS…Don’t you read?. “king” andrew cuomo in N.Y. is attempting to do the same. Just another “back door” UNCONSTITUTIONAL gun grabbing scheme by anti-freedom DEMOCOMMUNISTS and RINOS, to disarm the LAW-ABIDING citizens for easy “takeover” or “elimination” if they so desire. (history repeating itself)
      Just think about it, WHERE have you heard the same “lines” before. “for the safety of the people” OR for the “good of the country”????? Could NAZI GERMANY ring a bell for just ONE of MANY examples? Give up your ONLY means of defense against a TYRANNICAL ‘government” and prepare to meet your maker.

      1. Jack says

        Don’t you read! the other states were not mentioned! how rude.

    2. cecil says

      It really makes no difference as it will be after the fight and many will die,

  3. Bill says

    WHY is all of the demonrats that are overstepping their constitutional authority. And WHO is fueling this crap???? Time to take back OUR country and get out and vote before they come and take away your bvd’s. They are all power mongers who want to keep the American people under their thumbs along with stealing everything we have worked for.

  4. Joseph says

    Illinois is the dumbest state of all. They have the strictest gun laws and the most deaths by firearms. That is what happens when you let jerk off Democrats run your state.

    1. David says

      he is a Republican back stabber

      1. B b says

        Looks like the jackass that he is….

  5. David says

    this guy needs to go he is no Republican

  6. Merlin Wood says

    shoot

  7. Will says

    The democratic candidate is worse, typical Illinois situation. Bad or worse

  8. Joseph says

    THIS IS EXACTLY WHY THE SECOND AMENDMENT WAS ESTABLISHED. TO PROTECT THE PEOPLE FROM SOCIALIST COMMUNIST GOVERNMENT. THE FOUNDERS OF THIS GREAT NATION WERE MEN AND WOMEN OF GREAT FORESIGHT. THE ACTIONS OF THE LIBERAL LEFT SOCIALIST IS PROOF THAT THE SECOND AMENDMENT IS “MORE” IMPORTANT TODAY TO REMAIN A FREE COUNTRY. NO AMOUNT OF GUN CONTROL LAWS WILL STOP THE SICKOS AND CRIMINALS “BECAUSE THEY DO NOT CARE ABOUT LAWS”, THEY ARE SELF CENTERED AND DO NOT FOLLOW ANYTHING BUT THEIR OWN SELFISH WANTS.

  9. F. Peter Hutchins says

    How about a map showing the super idiot states.
    I do not want to live in one of them.

    1. Gordon Liddy says

      you got this far, you can Google the states…

  10. Gordon Liddy says

    the Laws are used under the Health and Welfare this way it bypasses the due process…

  11. Timothy Toroian says

    They talk about red flags, but how many times in the 5 years or so have we heard about a shooter who was “known” to officials, or interviewed by the FEBEs and deemed not to be dangerous or told a shrink he wanted to kill and did. And they want to go after honest solely on conjecture? Like they said to the Native Americans,”Turn in your guns, we will protect and feed you”.

    1. Buzz Waldron says

      Rev. Hill said on Larry King Show he was going to go out and murder people at health clinics… no one stopped him… he did it…

  12. bolivia trek says

    Im grateful for the blog post. Keep writing.

  13. “Currently it looks like Expression Engine is the preferred blogging platform available right now. (from what I’ve read) Is that what you are using on your blog?”

  14. Eve’s Rabbit says

    Great, thanks for sharing this article. Cool.

  15. Empire Today says

    “Thanks again for the post. Will read on…”

  16. CCTV packages says

    Thanks for the article post.Much thanks again. Really Cool.

  17. vibrator says

    “I’ve read a few just right stuff here. Certainly worth bookmarking for revisiting. I wonder how so much attempt you set to make such a magnificent informative site.”

  18. huge dildos says

    Thank you ever so for you article post.Much thanks again. Awesome.

  19. Бетсити says

    I really liked your blog.Thanks Again. Want more.

  20. waterproof jack rabbit says

    Fantastic post.Really thank you! Will read on…

  21. sex swings says

    Thanks for the blog article.Really looking forward to read more. Much obliged.

  22. sex swing review says

    Enjoyed every bit of your blog article.Much thanks again. Will read on…

Leave A Reply

Your email address will not be published.