Apologies if this has been posted recently, however I just became aware that the House of Representatives has passed HR 4350 (NDAA Fiscal Year 2022) and have overwhelmingly voted in favor of National Red Flag confiscation laws.
What is especially concerning to me is that 135 House Republicans voted in support of this bill.
It might be too soon to panic, as Red Flag laws can literally be applied to anyone, regardless of how law-abiding that you might be, but I am becoming gravely concerned.
If you want to read the actual text in that HUGE document, search for:
“SEC. 529. AUTHORITY OF MILITARY JUDGES AND MILITARY MAGISTRATES TO
ISSUE MILITARY COURT PROTECTIVE ORDERS.”
Some key points as I read them:
*These are issued in cases of things like domestic violence, conspiracy, stalking.
*It must be requested by a victim.
*It is issued by a military judge or magistrate
*It is limited to 180 days at which point it is either renewed or it expires
*The victim must meet burden of proof by supplying evidence of the alleged risk
*The protective order applies to state and local courts and non-military courts cannot rescind them.
*The person against whom the order is issued can appeal it.
*An emergency order (lower burden of proof) is good for 30 days, at which point it must be fully reviewed.
And here’s the text specific to firearm access:
(j) Restrictions on Access to Firearms.-- (1) In general.–Notwithstanding any other provision of
(A) a military court protective order issued on an ex parte basis shall restrain a person from possessing, receiving, or otherwise accessing a firearm; and (B) a military court protective order issued
after the person to be subject to the order has
received notice and opportunity to be heard on the
order, shall restrain such person from possessing,
receiving, or otherwise accessing a firearm in
accordance with section 922 of title 18.
Happens every time a Democrat majority takes over in DC.
My greatest concern is the potential (and likely) abuse of any national Red Flag law.
If the most ardent desire of a totalitarian government is to disarm the population, thereby eliminating almost all effective resistance, then one sneaky and surreptitious way to accomplish such disarmament and confiscation would be a Red Flag law.
How many law-abiding gun owners are there who will actively resist a legal Red Flag order being served against them at their homes when said gun owner knows that they will likely be killed in the process?
How many law-abiding gun owners will allow their firearms to be confiscated with the hope that a potentially corrupt judicial system doesn’t rule against them forever, regardless of effective assistance of legal counsel?
The potential for the flagrant abuse of Red Flag laws should be obvious and I believe that we should all be gravely concerned.
These are limited to members of the military and enemy combatants who fall under the UCMJ. It is not a “National Red Flag Law” although full faith and credit means it would be valid and enforceable in all US states and territories.
It will be abused, no doubt about it.
I feel sorry for those who served who may become victims of it.
I appreciate your comments, Mike.
A totalitarian regime is not established immediately. It occurs in a series of steps, sometimes referred to as “incrementalism”.
Like the frog slowly boiling to death in a pot of water that is slowly heated, gun control laws are being gradually passed that may ultimately affect all of us.
To borrow from another metaphor, once the camel has pushed its nose under the edge of the tent, then the entire camel is coming in, and there is little that can be done to stop it.
Today, the government are prepared to Red Flag active duty military gun owners.
Perhaps tomorrow, the same confiscation schemes will be extended to military veterans.
“First, they came for the Trade Unionists, and I did not speak out, because I was not a Trade Unionist.”
I agree with you. I am against red flag laws in general. Almost every state has some other method that has greater requirements such as seeking a mental inquest warrant.
I was, was however, correcting the initial perception that the bill created a national Red Flag Law which it does not.