--------------------
Guess we'll find out how many there are.
Rubio, Durbin, and Feinstein will look good in handcuffs, ankle braces, and orange jumpsiutes.
---------------------
By Matt Agorist
: Senator Marco Rubio (R-FL) has introduced S.292 — Extreme Risk
: Protection Order and Violence Prevention Act of 2021, and
: he has garnered support from the gun-grabbing Democrats and
: Republicans alike. On Wednesday, this latest Red Flag gun
: confiscation bill, gets a hearing in the Senate Judiciary
: Committee, which includes notorious gun grabbers like
: Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) and Dick Durbin (D-IL).
: Unlike red flag legislation on which TFTP has reported in the
: past which involve state laws, S.292 will apply to all
: states and Indian Tribes. Under the guise of a “grant
: program” the bill will bribe states to enact the most
: comprehensive red flag law we’ve ever seen.
: The Assistant Attorney General shall make grants to an
: eligible State or Indian Tribe to assist the State or
: Indian Tribe in carrying out the provisions of a qualifying
: State or Tribal law.
: S.292 is described as a bill: To provide family members of an
: individual who they fear is a danger to himself, herself,
: or others, or law enforcement, with new tools to prevent
: gun violence.
: However, as the Free Thought Project has reported in the past,
: these “tools” have failed repeatedly and pave the way for
: rampant abuse. Naturally, the “fact checkers” have already
: taken to defending the bill, claiming that it doesn’t
: remove due process.
: However, citizens who are targeted by these laws will be
: deemed guilty first, and only after their guns are taken
: will they have a chance to defend themselves in court. This
: is de facto removal of due process.
: According to the legislation, “If the court finds by clear and
: convincing evidence that the respondent poses a significant
: danger of causing personal injury to himself or herself or
: others by having in his or her custody or control, or by
: purchasing, possessing, or receiving, a firearm or
: ammunition, the court shall issue an extreme risk
: protection order for a period the court determines is
: appropriate, which may not exceed 12 months.”
: This “clear and convincing evidence” can be presented over the
: telephone, according to the legislation.
: A court may conduct the hearing required under clause (i) by
: telephone, pursuant to local court rules.
: There is a reason murder trials are conducted on telephones.
: Under the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments, due process clauses
: are in place to act as a safeguard from arbitrary denial of
: life, liberty, or property by the government outside the
: sanction of law. It is a fact that a person can be denied
: life, liberty and property outside the sanction of the law
: under red flag legislation. Although it may be temporary,
: this is a difference only in degree — not in kind.
: A recent fact check by Politifact claims red flag laws are not
: a removal of due process because the accused is guaranteed
: to have a hearing “not later than 14 days after the date of
: such order.”
: Despite citing the elements of Due Process, as laid out by MIT
: — which specifically states the defendant has the right to
: know the charges or all the major elements of the charges
: and in some cases the right to know the rules and policies
: that are relevant; in some cases the right to know who is
: the accuser and that they deserve the timeliness of the
: process and of each step of the process — Politifact
: claims, without reference, that the 14-day period after the
: person’s guns have been confiscated, is due process.
: According to Politifact, “the due process requirements in a
: given case can vary, though, based on the circumstances or
: type of proceeding.” They provide no source for such a
: claim or provide any detail on the alleged variances.
: The fact of the matter is that it is entirely possible for
: false accusations to be made and an innocent person suffer
: harm by being unable to defend themselves from accusations
: stemming from the secretive process of red flag laws.
: Whether or not it is one day or 100, the removal of
: someone’s right to face their accuser while punishing that
: person in the process, is wrong.
: On top of the unethical process of red flag laws, as TFTP has
: reported, they have proven to be ineffective. One such
: instance happened earlier this month. On April 15,
: 19-year-old Brandon Hole did the unthinkable when he
: stormed into an Indianapolis FedEx facility with a Ruger
: AR-556 semi-automatic rifle and killed eight people.
: As he was a resident of Indiana, he was subject to the state’s
: red flag laws. In March of 2020, he actually found himself
: on the receiving end of the state’s red flag law.
: “[Hole’s] mother told law enforcement in March 2020 that her
: son told her he would attempt ‘suicide by cop,’” CNN
: reported. “At the time, officials took a shotgun found at
: his home into custody, Marion County prosecutor Ryan Mears
: said Monday. And yet, later that year, Hole was able to
: legally purchase assault rifles.”
: Another example is the tragedy that unfolded in California in
: 2019, as a deranged gunman, Kevin Douglas Limbaugh, walked
: up on an innocent woman, officer Natalie Corona, pulled out
: his guns and began shooting her repeatedly until she died.
: Limbaugh then fired several more shots at others before
: turning the gun on himself and taking his own life. Had
: more people been nearby, Limbaugh would’ve likely carried
: out a mass shooting.
: Limbaugh’s case is important to bring up due to the fact that
: — before he killed a cop — he, like Hole, was subject to
: California’s “red flag” laws in 2018. Limbaugh was given a
: high-risk assessment that ordered him to turn in his
: registered weapons to police, the only one being a
: Bushmaster AR-15. On November 9, Limbaugh turned in the
: weapon.
: Despite being banned from possessing and purchasing a weapon,
: he still obtained one illegally and used it to commit
: murder.
: Nikolas Cruz was a similar case as he had committed multiple
: felonies, was known to both the police and the FBI, and yet
: he still managed to obtain the weapon he used to carry out
: the Parkland massacre.
: In reality, the impetus behind the red flag gun laws seem to
: be more about political grandstanding and less about actual
: safety — especially considering their track record.
: Despite many states adopting red flag laws and thousands of
: guns being seized, there is still almost no evidence they
: reduce crime.
: “The evidence,” The New York Times reported in 2019, “for
: whether extreme risk protection orders work to prevent gun
: violence is inconclusive, according to a study by the RAND
: Corporation on the effectiveness of gun safety measures.”
: Plain and simple, government officials cannot be trusted
: unwittingly with the tyrannical power to arbitrarily remove
: the due process of individuals on a whim. If not stopped in
: its tracks, this red flag movement could be the fatal crack
: in the dam that is the only thing holding back the
: government from disarming entirely peaceful and
: non-threatening individuals with whom they disagree.
: If we really want to solve America’s problem of gun violence
: we must seek to understand why Americans are so willing to
: kill, not punish law-abiding citizens.