These laws allow judges to seize a person's guns without a trial, based solely on a written complaint that the person might be a danger to themselves or others.
If the person on trial does not agree to voluntary psychiatric treatment, they may be committed involuntarily or have their guns confiscated.
Based only on a written complaint, which could come from a relative, friend, neighbor, or police officer, a judge decides whether to take away a person's guns.
Gun control advocates argue that the person should not even know that the judge may be deciding to take his or her guns.
Laws used to confiscate guns are typically enforced when dealing with suicidal people.
A person intent on violence may not even need a gun to inflict mass carnage.
Are we going to also take away their cars? Gun control advocates find it much easier to conjure up new laws without protections than to fine-tune laws already on the books.
It's becoming increasingly difficult to discern fact from fiction, and unfortunately the media has a strong bias. They spin stories to make conservatives look bad and will go to great lengths to avoid reporting on the good that comes from conservative policies. There are a few shining lights in the media landscape-brave conservative outlets that report the truth and offer a different perspective. We must support conservative outlets like this one and ensure that our voices are heard.
Elections have consequences, so it is important that voters who want to save our democracy, should v
Friday, May 27, 2022
Red Flag Laws and Unintended Consequences
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment