The NRA, Trump, and a gaggle of gun controllers and politicians have pushed for “red flag” Extreme Risk Protection Orders The alleged idea is to bypass due process to confiscate firearms from someone who supposedly poses a threat to himself or others, no evidence needed. “Due process” would come after the theft — sometimes weeks later — and leaves the allegedly “dangerous” person free to do whatever they think he might do sometime in the future.
Just yesterday, I wrote a bit of satire about the just-signed rule banning bump-fire stocks, and added this bit:
When asked about the NRA’s position on “red flag” extreme risk protection orders, another controversial gun control proposal the NRA has supported, Aikiddin whined, “No one who isn’t potentially thinking about doing something, but hasn’t, has anything to fear from red flag laws. And we think that balancing PRE-crime infringements of rights with POST due process offers legal symmetry.”
“What could go wrong?” she chirped. “But we can raise money on that, too.”
I stand corrected.
No one who isn’t potentially thinking about doing something, but hasn’t, and doesn’t know someone who maybe might consider doing something eventually, has anything to fear from red flag laws.
UPDATED: Police, school officials avert Middlebury middle school shooting
After confirming the whereabouts and establishing short-term plans for both young suspects, police turned their attention to securing their alleged source of guns.
“We executed what is called an ‘extreme risk order’ (Monday) night at a relative’s house who had all these firearms,” Hanley said. “They were locked up (in the home), but one of these kids said he had access to them and could get them. So we took advantage of that extreme risk order statute that was passed. We needed to separate the person from their ability to do this.”
Not the suspect. Firearms safely secured. And they executed an “extreme risk order against an innocent person no one had even claimed was a risk.
They just violated someone’s human/civil rights for as much as six months, and without the chance to beg for restoral for up to two weeks. Because someone else — who may not even reside in that home — was accused of a pre-crime.
And the minors whom they believe were planning a crime?
“There may be some other charges down the road, but right now it’s the treatment issues we’re dealing with.”
They confiscated ten firearms from someone else based on something that they not even charge anyone for.
What could possibly go wrong? It isn’t as if anyone will ever further abuse that precedent.
(More Tip Jar Options)