I agree with the premise of this article.
If a Red Flag law does include the ability of a spouse in a domestic dispute, or neighbors and others to vilify someone to the authorities, this is in effect an on-ramp to tyranny.
Checking someone’s background at the time of purchase isn’t as intrusive to me.
Confiscation of weapons already owned, is a massive stop sign for me. If a person does come in contact with the law in such a manner as to make it clear they are a problem, then not so much.
If you commit a violent gun crime, your home should be searched for more guns.
If you are diagnosed with an upper level mental health problem, the same.
Too many problems with red flags.
Mental health isn’t a hard science. Look at “expert” witnesses in court cases. The shrink witness on one side will contradict the witness on the other side. A shrink will say what people pay him to say and there’s no way to prove otherwise since it’s conjecture, not science.
Say Dad is wealthy. Sonny wants the inheritance. Sonny tells authorities Dad is mental and he pays a shrink to confirm that. Authorities come and take Dad’s guns. Sonny hires someone to attack/kill Dad. Dad has no way to protect himself. Cha-ching for Sonny.
It sounds far fetched, but I’ve heard worse on true crime documentaries.
Red flag law may be unconstitutional if police can come to your house taking your firearms away without a warrant. All just because of a rumor by an ex-wife?
“If a Red Flag law ….
IF?
WHAT law? What BILL? Has president Trump proposed HIS version of a “Red Flag Law”?
What does it say? Oh, you don’t know, because he hasn’t proposed anything yet. But, you are already against it, ready to fire off letters to Senators over a bill that doesn’t even exist!
What if a Red Flag law was tied to a nationwide constitutional carry law? Would you oppose that?
What if a Red Flag law was tied to arming teachers and eliminating “Gun Free Zones”? Would you oppose that?
You would say “It depends on what is IN the Red Flag law”.
EXACTLY! Game, set, match.