As this story over at Wilder Wealthy Wise titled "Red Flag Laws, or, How To Repeal The Second Amendment Soviet-Style Without A Pesky Vote" that Steve Quayle had linked to on his website Monday morning reported, "the history of psychiatry is tied directly to the political" and "psychiatry is still the most politically abused medical profession" in the world today so there is the very real potential of 'red flag laws' being used by people such as deranged neighbors who hate the 2nd Amendment, angry spouses and insane leftists with a political agenda to attempt to take the guns away from law-abiding Americans.
With many liberals believing that all guns should be outlawed and many psychiatrists being liberals, anybody who doesn't see the massive potential problems with 'red flag laws' isn't paying attention or has a leftist political agenda. Really think that those who have been reporting your 'offensive' posts to facebook and twitter won't also call in to the 'red flag gun law' tip lines to have your guns confiscated, too? As we'll see in the next section below, law enforcement officers are also concerned about 'red flag gun laws'.
And their story reports that others are also very concerned about the possible unintended consequences of red flag gun laws, including gun owners who might be suffering from depression refusing to see a medical doctor about it for fear that they'd have their own guns taken away, leaving them defenseless. From the NBC story.
Matthew Larosiere with the Firearms Policy Coalition believes red flag laws may discourage gun owners from seeking mental health treatment and potentially cause even more deaths.
He points to an incident in Maryland when Anne Arundel police killed a 61-year-old man while attempting to serve a gun restraining order.
Larosiere points out that in some instance, the court can grant a gun restraining order without the gun owner’s knowledge until police come knocking at the door.
“They don't even know that there has been a hearing. What is that going to do, when we’ve already see how tense relationships are with police. You think it’s going to make it better? I don't think so,” Larosiere said.
"If you're a gun owner experiencing a tough time and you know that if you go to a therapist there's a chance that you'll have your rights removed, does that increase or decrease the chance that you'll see a therapist and get medication?"
“I’m unaware of any of the recent mass shootings where a red flag law would be impactful,” said Steamboat Police Chief Cory Christensen.
He and other officials worry extreme risk protection orders do not allow for due process and pose threats to the safety of officers tasked with taking guns away from people suspected to be a threat.
Routt County Sheriff Garrett Wiggins, a Republican, has supported Trump in some areas and disagreed with him in others. When it comes to taking away people’s guns, at least according to the Colorado red flag law, he sees the potential for abuse.
“I agree there are people out there, mentally ill people who should not have access to firearms,” he said. “But how you determine that is the big question.”
According to the state’s law, which takes effect in January 2020, family members and roommates can petition a judge to revoke a person’s firearms for up to 14 days. It does not provide explicit criteria for what kind of behavior constitutes a threat and tasks law enforcement officials, not mental health professionals, with handling such cases.
During a public forum in May sponsored by Routt County Republicans, just days after Colorado passed its red flag law, Wiggins told a crowd of about 50 people that he sees a lot of problems with the legislation. Chief among them was the safety of his deputies who would have to issue an extreme risk protection order and take away guns from a reportedly dangerous person.
Despite his reservations, Wiggins is not surprised by the President’s support for red flag laws, even though many Republicans reject gun control efforts.
“I think everyone, regardless of political affiliation, is looking for answers,” he said.
But as he added, “You can’t legislate evil.”
According to Wikipedia, as of August 2019, 17 states and the District of Columbia have passed some form of red-flag law. The specifics of the laws, and the degree to which they are enforced, vary from state to state.
And interestingly, while Connecticut was the first state to enact a red flag law in 1999 following a rampage shooting at the Connecticut Lottery, their 'red flag law' failed to prevent the 'Sandy Hook event' in 2012.
And not surprisingly, while prior to 2018, only five states had some version of red flag laws, following the Stoneman Douglas High School shooting in Parkland, Florida in 2018, that number more than doubled as more states used that shooting to enact such laws including Florida, Vermont, Maryland, Rhode Island, New Jersey, Delaware, Massachusetts, Illinois, and the District of Columbia.
In fact, while the states of Maryland and Illinois are both 'red flag' states, this latest mass shooting in Chicago that left 6 wounded and the fact that Baltimore has a homicide rate 10X higher than the US are further signs that if someone wants to cause havoc, they're going to find a way to do it whether laws are in effect or not. A long held argument against 'gun control' is the fact that should guns suddenly become illegal, do you really think criminals will voluntarily hand over their unregistered weapons?
And while Republican Congressman Dan Crenshaw recently angered Republicans by coming out in support of red flag laws, with his argument that "everything turns on due process and how due process would be protected under the type of Red Flag Laws", Crenshaw didn't take into account the very real possibility that those diagnosing 'mental illness' in gun owners may themselves believe that guns should be illegal, while also suffering mental illness, 'Trump derangement syndrome', as well.
And as we see in the tweet above in response to Crenshaw's tweeting “Red Flag Law” emotionally trigger a lot of people, the concerns of gun owners becoming 'victims' due to their political beliefs, or just because they are gun owners, are very real. Gary Willis was not mentally ill nor a criminal but he was targeted simply for being a gun owner. How many more 'Gary Willis's' will there be in America due to 'red flag laws'?
As this story over at Fox News from just days ago reported, should 'red flag gun laws' be done without 'due process' it could lead to a massive government 'gun grab' with far too many judges willing to impose such orders in bad faith. And their story also warned such measures allow adversaries to institute gun seizures against individuals they simply dislike with far too many people who would use that in bad faith.
Then pointing out several different tweets by the 'four horsewomen of the apocalypse' and other leftist lunatics in Congress who've totally lost touch with reality while pushing their leftist agenda, their story then asked some very good questions. From their story.:
The most basic question the past week leaves any sensible person with is this one.
Do you seriously expect me to sit still for a government in which these seemingly deranged — at the very least obsessed — people can exert influence, craft law or regulations, and judge my mental fitness for exercising a constitutional right?
Then there’s this one. Am I supposed to let my rights be outvoted by these people, and let them elect officials to craft new vetoes over my state of “mental health?”
And this: If my right to self-defense is overridden by administrative actions, and I’m at the mercy of whatever the government will do for (or to) me, am I supposed to be content with a government whose effective standard is this?
Red flag laws won’t stop at being remedial. They will transmute into being prophylactic.
This prediction is a no-brainer. It’s 100% guaranteed to happen as laid out here. Instead of regarding mental health as a potential showstopper, if it happens to come up, activists will immediately begin arguing that everyone who wants to own a gun should have to undergo a mental health evaluation as a condition of gun ownership.
The consequences of this would reach far beyond gun ownership. Once the foot of mental health activism was in the door, everything people need a government license or permission for could be held at risk through mental health screenings. The very nature of the people’s relationship with government would shift, probably irrecoverably outside of literal revolution.
Remember, I’m not talking about the attitude of the whole mental health profession today. I’m talking about activists with agendas. Activists are usually a very small part of the communities they come from. The great majority of mental health professionals are people of high ethics and good character who have no interest in leveraging their profession to weaponize government against portions of the population.
But activists have a different profile. We’ve seen that with the media onslaught of a group of activists against Donald Trump, depicting his mental health in a garish light and demanding for many months now that he undergo a psychiatric evaluation (or simply be removed from office based on negative assessments they purport to have made from a distance). Democrats in the House are actually working with them.
Trump is the president, and in that office he can withstand such an onslaught without his life being altered. We the people are his employer; the activists may tell us his mental state is disqualifying, and we can decide not to accept their judgment. But no one else is the president of the United States. Most of us could find our lives materially altered, even ruined, under an onslaught like this one.
We already know activists will do this. Activists of various stripes demonstrated to us further this past week (as they have for months recently) the lengths to which they will go in service of their agendas.
It would be intolerable to see new gun laws made without acknowledging the certainty that they will (a) be abused and (b) become a slippery slope to preemptive “mental health” prophylaxis that puts too much arbitrary power in the hands of government agencies and the activists who ply revolving doors with them.
When listening to Officer McLamb in that video, please keep in mind that it was created while George Bush was in office and just as McLamb warned way back then, 'terrorism would be used to take away the rights of Americans', just as we've seen in the 'Patriot Act' and the unfolding 'police state' here in America.
In the first video below, we hear from Paul Joseph Watson who talks about America's mass shooting nightmare while in the 3rd and final video below from 'Health Ranger' Mike Adams titled "Leftists can't wait to MURDER all conservatives", Adams gives us the "raw truth about how deranged Leftists are planning to mass MURDER conservatives. But first, they have to take away your guns".
So with America in great pain due to the recent horrific events in El Paso and Dayton and our nation seemingly never more divided than it is today, please join us in prayer for the healing of our nation while hoping that it's not already too late.
EMERGENCY FUNDRAISER:Despite generous donations, the still dwindling advertising revenue over the course of the last two years has forced us to completely deplete all our savings just to survive and continue to keep All News PipeLine online.
So due to continuous attacks upon us and ongoing censorship, ANP is extending our emergency fundraiser through September. PLEASE HELP KEEP ANP ALIVE BY DONATING USING ONE OF THE FOLLOWING METHODS.
One time donations or monthly, via Paypal or Credit Card: