The Same People Who Said “2 Weeks to Flatten the Curve” Claim Nat’l Red Flag Laws Won’t Be Abused

By Matt Agorist

On March 16, 2020, the Trump administration released a 15-day plan to slow the spread of the coronavirus in the US. It would take nearly 700 more days, 2 presidents, trillions of dollars, $7 gas, runaway inflation, and countless stolen rights before most Americans could experience some semblance of freedom again. All the rights stolen, however, were not and will not be returned.

For two extreme years, one of the largest power grabs in the history of the world took place as fearful citizens willingly surrendered their rights to the state for the promise of safety. But that safety never came and it never will.

Instead of learning from history, Americans are submitting to irrational arguments and fear once more; and this time, they are granting the federal government the power to seize their guns on a national level.

As TFTP reported after he was elected, President Joe Biden promised sweeping gun control and rolled out a list of Executive Orders attacking the 2nd Amendment rights of Americans. One of those orders was a promise to implement “red flag” legislation at the federal level. Now, after exploiting several horrifying tragedies, he’s finally getting his way.

On Tuesday, a bipartisan group of senators came together on legislative text which they claim will combat gun violence. The bill includes state funding to implement “red flag” laws and enhanced background checks.

“Today, we finalized bipartisan, commonsense legislation to protect America’s children, keep our schools safe, and reduce the threat of violence across our country,” Sens. Chris Murphy, D-Conn., and John Cornyn, R-Texas, said in a joint statement Tuesday along with Sens. Kyrsten Sinema, D-Ariz., and Thom Tillis, R-N.C.

“Our legislation will save lives and will not infringe on any law-abiding American’s Second Amendment rights. We look forward to earning broad, bipartisan support and passing our commonsense legislation into law,” they added.

Hypocrite Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., who has long opposed tougher gun laws, issued a statement saying he supports the bill, calling it “a commonsense package of popular steps that will help make these horrifying incidents less likely while fully upholding the Second Amendment rights of law-abiding citizens.”


But this is simply not true. Red flag laws do little to prevent mass shootings and a lot to trample the rights of law-abiding citizens.

Citizens who are targeted by these laws are 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.

As Reuters reports, under the legislation, a family member or law enforcement officer could petition a judge to seize firearms from a person they think is a threat to themselves or others. The judge could then hold a hearing without the targeted person being present and grant a temporary order for 14 days.

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.

In spite of what officials and the fact checkers claim, when a person is stripped of their constitutional rights, albeit temporarily, without being given the chance to make their own case based on what can be entirely arbitrary accusations, this is the removal of due process. It doesn’t work, and it is rife for abuse as there is no way to stop an estranged spouse from calling police repeatedly and telling them their ex is threatening to cause harm to themselves or others.

Anyone, any time, now has the ability to claim someone else is a threat and have police take their guns. One does not need to delve into the multiple “what if” scenarios to see what sort of ominous implications arise from such a practice.

While the Biden administration touts red flag laws as an answer to “the gun violence public health epidemic,” there is little thought behind them.

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. In fact, California which was one of the first states to enact red flag laws, already proved this notion. Kevin Douglas Limbaugh had his guns seized under the state’s red flag laws only to illegal obtain more guns months later before going on a shooting spree, murdering a cop in the progress.

“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.”

Despite no evidence that red flag laws work, the DOJ says their approach is “evidence based.” As Reason reports:

The Justice Department is cagey on this point, saying red flag laws authorize courts to “temporarily bar people in crisis from accessing firearms.” By “allowing  family members or law enforcement to intervene…before warning signs turn into tragedy,” the DOJ avers, such laws “can save lives,” which it claims “research has shown.” It describes red flag laws as “an evidence-based approach to the problem” without specifying exactly what “the problem” is. But since the only real evidence pertains to suicide rather than homicide, it should be clear that politicians who support these laws are doing a bait and switch: They cite mass shootings to justify authorizing court orders that are mainly used to stop people from killing themselves.

Though the DOJ claims it helps prevent suicide, other studies show it may make the problem worse as gun-control measures like red flag laws that seek to deprive people of their guns on an ostensible mental-health basis can actually deter struggling people from seeking the help they need. By this logic, a red flag gun-control approach to suicide prevention is not merely useless and tyrannical—it’s actually counterproductive.

The bottom line is that government officials cannot be trusted unwittingly with the tyrannical power to arbitrarily remove the due process of individuals on a whim. We all witnessed the immense damage that can be done by granting government such sweeping powers when we gave them two weeks to flatten the curve.

Arguably, it was our guns that protected us from turning into an Australia or Canada scenario during the tyrannical lockdowns. When they come for our right to self-defense, it 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.


Get the latest Tap posts emailed to you daily