Red Flag Laws

From iGeek
Jump to: navigation, search
Red Flag Laws... it's exactly what it sounds like

There's this idea that Red Flag laws might help -- that people could flag people who are at risk and get their guns taken away from them. It sounds good, as long as you don't think about it. However if you think it through: (a) most mass shooters most don't give warnings = all false positives (b) if you lower the bar enough that the red-flag laws apply, then everyone is guilty = all false negatives (c) it only forces shooters to wait (d) they just get/steal other guns or they can go to more deadly methods (e) it's already been abused where tried (f) Think SWATting someone (g) there's never been a study that shows that they help prevent gun violence (and they've tried to find justification in the past, many times). So while I'm not against the theory, there's no practical way to implement it, that wouldn't be a cluster-fuck and worse than doing nothing. On top of that, 75-80% of gun violence is gang related, so Democrats have blocked Republicans efforts to get Red Flag laws applied to Gangs: seriously. (They don't want to fix the problem, they want to punish the innocent).


Red Flag : 4 items

Not for gangs? - 75-80% of gun violence is gang related, so Democrats have blocked Republicans efforts to get Red Flag laws applied to Gangs: seriously. Democrats don't want to fix the problem (that would take away their excuses to attack legal gun owners), they want to punish the innocent and make the problem worse. Their excuse was that gang databases have been found to be inaccurate at times. That's not wrong, but it's not as bad as the No-fly lists, or the error rates of red flag laws in general. So they're protecting gang members in ways that they won't protect non-gang members. That's either stupid, hypocritical, or dishonest. Pick one (or more).

FEE's 7 Reasons (against Red Flag) - FEE did a 7 Reasons article that lists the following reasons why it's a bad ideas:
  1. No Evidence Red Flag Laws Reduce Gun Violence - in a free country you shouldn't restrict liberty without evidence it will help
  2. Congress Lacks the Authority - in a Constitutional Republic, the constitution reigns supreme, until they've ammended the constitution, it should be a no fly item.
  3. We Have Federalism - States can do it. (The ones that tried, haven't shown any positive results)
  4. Red Flag Laws Violate Due Process: duh! My 4th and 6th Amendment argument
  5. Red Flag Laws Could Lead to More Violence: obviously. You can't create this law, without door to door siezures, which is violence to beget violence.
  6. It’s Not Just the “Mentally Ill” and Grave Threats Who Are Flagged: false positives
  7. They’re Basically Pre-Crime: you're judging someone guilty before they've done anything. While that's great for dystopian SciFi thrillers, we probably shouldn't rush into it IRL

Ammo Control - If you want to know how well Red Flag laws work, just look at things like Ammo Control. This was California's idiotic idea (Proposition 63) to require background checks for buying ammunition. And how's that working out?
  • It created a huge surge in people buying and stockpiling (so it made MORE ammo available).
  • It means that a lot of people illegally buy out of state, and smuggle, or buy black market.
  • It generated lawsuits as a way to subvert the Second Amendment (because it is), wasting millions in legal fees.
  • Thousands of people that should be able to buy ammo, can't.

According the state's DOJ, 6 months into the program, of the 345,547 ammunition background checks performed, 101 stopped the buyer because he or she was a “prohibited person” who can’t legally possess ammunition, and 62,000+ people were falsely rejected. That means it's 613 times more likely to stop a legal citizen from exercising their rights, than to stop a bad guy. And that was the goal all along.

Crossing Guard and Veteran loses guns -
Crossing Guard.jpeg
For an 84 year old crossing guard, Korean War Veteran and 60 year police veteran (Stephen Nichols), had his guns seized and his license to carry revoked over someone mishearing something they overheard in a diner (he was criticizing a school resource officer in a conversation with a friend). Basically, he was complaining that a School resources/safety officer leaving his post to get coffee while school was loading would allow someone to “shoot up the school”. It was a warning about bad security processes and dereliction of duty, not a threat. No criminal charges were filed, no due process followed, but his guns and job were taken away anyways. Red Flag laws turn us into 1984, with people reporting other people over things they think they heard and thought crimes, while due process is crushed under the jack boot of leftist "good ideas" and tolerance.


  • Cherokee County gun store put up a billdboard mocking four Congresswomen, calling them idiots. [1] The left called this a call for violence (it wasn't). But if they had their way, they could use their fake cries of a threat, to take away others (like the gun stores) real rights to own a gun. If you don't think the left would stoop to these measures, you haven't been paying attention.
  • the VA (Veterans Affairs) was flagging people for taking issue with Veterans Affairs
  • Gary J. Willis, 60 was killed in Maryland because police came to his house to take his guns and he resisted. I'm not saying he was bright to fight it, but deaths like these are going to happen if you try to take away people's civil liberties. [2]
  • Marine in Oregon said that "If antifa gets to the point where they start killing us, I’m going to kill them next... I’d slaughter them and I have a detailed plan on how I would wipe out antifa." so for saying less violent thing than Antifa has said, they used Red Flag laws to take away his guns and put him in a mental hospital for 20 days. Why? MAGA hat. [3]
  • Imagine a wife abuser or rapists who calls it on his target so he'll know that she's defenseless when he comes over
  • Imagine the cops kick in your door at 2:00am without announcing themselves. If you show up armed to the party, you die. Why? Because angry progressives didn't like something you posted, so reported you were dangerous to trigger a Red Flag. At best it'll take weeks or months to get your life back. At worst, you die. This is already done and is called SWATting someone. It has a name for a reason. Making it easier, is not a good thing.


Fortunately for the left, their base isn't about deep thought before reacting, it's always, "DO SOMETHING"! No matter how dumb that something is.

But as soon as you think it through, it can't actually work. Either it's tuned too low -- and it isn't flagging anyone. Or it's too sensitive and you're flagging 99% innocents for the 1% that are potentially guilty. Even that 1% is ineffectual as it is so easy to defeat as to be useless: they just wait a few weeks, steal someone else's gun, all while having MORE time to plan. Most mass shooters have been in psychotherapy before, so they're not going to suddenly get cured in the few weeks it takes to get through the system. The idiot-left thinks that it's just a heat of the moment thing, but if you study the topic, most plan for weeks or months -- a few more weeks isn't going to change their mind. Worse, they might go to other more effective methods like Trucks or Bombs, which both have a higher kill rate. (Even knives are nearly as effective, but hopolophobes don't understand that). So it can't do any real good, but it can be easily abused... and will be. How do we know? Because the places it has been tried, already lead to abuse, and no known preventions.

Of course I don't think reason will change many of the gun-grabbers minds. If you hate your neighbors having the tools of defense, then mere facts aren't going to get in their feelings. But hopefully, there's a few with enough intellectual curiosity and objectivity to read something like this, smack their head with their palm, and go, "Duh! That's fucking useless:", and grow as a human being. But if all of them did, then Democrats would go extinct.

Sixth Amendment

Democrats/left are so against the 2A, that they're willing to sacrifice all our other civil rights (and bill of rights) as well, especially the 6th. The 6th basically guarantees fundamental rights like due process, the ability to face your accusers and the accusations. "Red Flag" laws (or ERPO's: Extreme Risk Protection Orders) are ones that say anyone can make claims that you are a threat to yourself or others, and thus should have your 2A (and 4A) civil rights taken away, based on secret Kafkaesque proceedings where the gun owner is barred from participating in the hearings, arguing their side of the dispute, or even seeing and addressing the accusers or charges until after the storm troopers have kicked in your door to take your property (for your own good).... and that's what a Police State looks like. more...

Fourth Amendment

Democrats/left are so against the 2A, that they're willing to sacrifice all our other civil rights (and bill of rights) as well, including the 4th. The 4th protects against illegal search and seizures by requiring probable cause. But "Red Flag" laws (and no fly lists), both violate the 6th clearly and stretch the 4th in some seriously questionable ways. Basically, anyone can claim you're dangerous and the storm-troopers will come and endanger you or your family if you resist, and you can try to sort it all out later.... and that's getting dangerously close to what a Police State looks like. more...


📚 References


There is a set of Fake Studies that try to pretend they're research, but their mythology is laughable (and not in a good way).


  • You can get a whiff of the bias at wikipedia if you read the talk section on Red Flag Laws... a user "Neutrality" obstructs point of fact by those opposed to Red Flag Laws, information about Gary Willis is all suppressed, Fee is blocked as "right wing blog" (2019.09.02). Lookup Gary J. Willis in wikipedia, and they have nothing about the consequences of Red Flag Laws, despite it being a significant event against Red Flag laws.