Gun advocate Dana Loesch targets ‘Red Flag’ laws as unconstitutional

(Screenshot from Fox News)

While red flag laws have become increasingly popular on both sides of the political aisle since the mass shootings in El Paso, Texas, and Dayton, Ohio, many conservatives are still warning that such laws can be a slippery slope and don’t quite hold up as Constitutional.

Conservative commentator and consistent Second Amendment supporter Dana Loesch took to Twitter to school supporters of red flag laws, aka Extreme Risk Protection Orders (ERPOs). Loesch offered ten reasons why red flag laws are dangerous and unconstitutional.

“#RedFlagLaws are an inversion of ‘innocent until proven guilty.’ The standard of evidence is low and while state laws vary, many different people, not just family, can report you,” she tweeted as her first reason.

This is correct. Standards can vary state to state, which creates the slippery slope problem and red flag laws presume guilt before innocence. If reported, someone can have their freedoms stripped until the government deems them “sane” enough to handle firearms.

“You don’t have to be in the room (and advance notice isn’t required) for the petition to be granted meaning you must wait to defend yourself. Most laws provide no penalty for abuse and no state law allows for civil cause of action against false accusers,” Loesch continued.

This is also an issue with specific red flag laws. They are open to abuse and those who abuse them face no specific consequences and it also strips the accused of representation, which is fundamental to the American justice system.

Loesch then gave a scary fact about how long things can drag out when someone is stripped of their guns and investigated.

“Time varies as to how long until respondents can have their day in court. A study conducted on Indiana’s law, which said 14 day wait, revealed that the average wait was 9 months. Rights delayed are rights denied,” she tweeted.

The laws have also not led to a reduction in crime in the places that they are used, noted Loesch.

“@davekopel, who has done excellent research on this, has noted that of the four states with the oldest gun confiscation laws, Connecticut, Indiana, California, and Washington, no research has revealed any statistical reduction in crime,” she tweeted.

“(Also still No. 4) Furthermore, Kopel notes that nearly 1/3 of such orders are improperly issued against,” she then added.

They can also leave people defenseless…

“No advance notice is given ahead of serving a #RedFlag order. That worked out horribly for Maryland resident Gary Willis, who was shot and killed when answering his door early morning before the sun was up. This puts LEO in a HORRIBLE position of enforcing these orders,” Loesch wrote.

They can also ruin lives…

“Counsel is not provided (Blumenthal draft does, it’s of little solace considering), meaning you could be like FL man Jonathan Carpenter, who is waging an expensive court battle to clear his name and reclaim his property because his name was too similar to a drug dealer’s,” reported Loesch.

John Carpenter is a Florida resident who was completely abused by the government. A woman put in a complaint about her drug dealer, who happened to have the same name as Carpenter. Police arrived at Carpenter’s house and took his guns. It wasn’t until he could actually show up to court that police realized the mistake they had made.

Without actual charges, red flag laws also focus too heavily on guns — to the detriment of the accused…

“We aren’t arresting people, we’re arresting guns. State laws ignore the very reason the petition was granted in the first place: danger resulting in violence or mental instability. No mental evaluations given, no charges for a crime,” Loesch tweeted.

Loesch’s final points hit on practical problems, like the violation of civil rights, as well as the issue of what exactly is done with confiscated firearms.

Loesch then offered alternatives to red flag laws.

Powered by Topple


Latest Articles