Source:

Hundreds of Virginians have had their guns confiscated from them through red-flag laws since those rules went into effect more than two years ago, according to data in the Virginia Firearms Transaction Center.

Red-flag laws allow police to seize firearms from a person if a judge deems him or her to be a threat to himself or others, even if that person has not been convicted of a crime, charged with a crime or even accused of a crime.

Virginia judges have issued at least 327 emergency substantial risk protection orders, which allow police to temporarily confiscate firearms to address an immediate risk. Judges have issued 257 permanent substantial risk protection orders, which confiscate the guns permanently, unless overturned through the court system. The data runs from July 1, 2020, when the law went into effect, through August 2022. The data does not state how many guns were confiscated from the individuals.

“Red Flag laws are an invention of the gun-control crowd and are unconstitutional due to their usurpation of Due Process,” Philip Van Cleave, the president of the Virginia Citizens Defense League, told The Center Square.

Trump is part of the “gun-control crowd,” it would seem

Erich Pratt, senior vice president of Gun Owners of America, told The Center Square that these laws are contrary to due process protections.

“Red Flag gun confiscation orders turn our legal system on its head,” Pratt said. “For centuries, the standard has been ‘innocent until proven guilty.’ But Red Flag laws reverse that standard into ‘guilty until proven innocent,’ because they throw real Due Process out the window – revoking someone’s Second Amendment rights without a jury trial or right to counsel. Not surprisingly, at least a third of red flag orders are initiated against innocent people – and the guns which are erroneously confiscated can take up to nine months to return. These laws have even been used to disarm women – such as the case in California where a cheating husband used the state’s red flag law to disarm his wife, who was a concealed carrier.”

Well, they’re all innocent until proven guilty. Is Pratt talking in circles?

Red Flag laws are working about as well as all gun laws; not at all.

It seems that in this case, the person whose guns were seized was able to obtain another firearm – assuming the police got all he originally had, of course – and then killed a neighbor over an argument.

And this is the law we’re supposed to trust? This is the law we’re supposed to count on to keep us safe?

Couple this with reports of people using these laws to punish those they have a beef with, those who have been disarmed without any real cause, and at least one death attributed to a red flag order, and it’s not hard to see why red flag laws are so unpopular with gun rights activists.

It’s all very predictable.

Never forget.  You have a new push for red flag laws courtesy of the NRA.

Red Flag laws are still a favorite of Republicans. Tucker Carlson on Red Flag Laws

WoG has The Wish List. You have a Second Amendment right to buy firearms unless you’re mentally ill. TCJ has discussed at length the deeply problematic definition of mental illness. It’s just an opinion of a witch doctor.

This mother is a hero.

Pregnant Mom Evens the Odds, Fends Off Armed Robbers With AR-15

“A Florida woman who was eight-months pregnant and came out wielding an AR-15 rifle reportedly saved her husband and pre-teen daughter last week from a pair of violent intruders who’d broken into the family’s home,” Fox News reported.

“They came in heavily hooded and masked. As soon as they had got the back door opened, they had a pistol on me and was grabbing my 11-year-old daughter,” King explained.

He recalled being pistol-whipped and kicked in the head.

“It became real violent, real fast,” he said.

Just one more gun law and poof – utopia attained.

California Moves Full Steam Ahead With Two More Gun Control Laws

The Judiciary Committees in both the Assembly and Senate approved of Gov. Gavin Newsom’s proposed bills that came on the heels of the tragic shooting in Uvalde, Texas.

The first bill, SB 1327, is an attempt to “limit the spread of illegal assault weapons and ghost guns.”

The second bill, AB 2571, limits a firearms manufacturer “from advertising or marketing any firearm-related product, as defined, in a manner that is designed, intended, or reasonably appears to be attractive to minors.”

NPR.

That sort of telegraphing of intentions is common among mass shooters, said David French, an editor with the conservative publication The Dispatch who recently wrote in support of red flag laws.

French, who told Morning Edition he keeps an AR-15-style semiautomatic rifle at home, said that red flag laws would be more effective than a ban on such weapons.

Such a ban wouldn’t work, French says, because “it’s a virtual impossibility — there’s tens of millions, 20 million maybe or more of them in circulation right now.” Such a ban has little support among conservatives, he said, unlike red flag laws.

Does it surprise anyone that sellout and collectivist David French supports red flag laws?  French claims himself to be a Christian – I have seen no evidence.

If he is, why wouldn’t he speak to the main issue of the day, i.e., the weakness, tepidness and lethargy of the churches, of the rejection of the Almighty in the public square, failures in parenting (because of the above), government failure at proper parenting (because that’s not in the province of the state), and the moral wickedness of the society?  Perhaps because of cowardice?

A law cannot possibly make up for the lack of a moral rudder.  Guns have always been ubiquitous in America.  School shootings have not.  You do the math.

And maybe universal background checks too.

One Republican senator and one Democratic senator are hoping they can find some common ground on gun reforms that will garner enough Republican support to pass the 60-vote threshold in the Senate …

Republican Senator John Cornyn and Democratic Senator Chris Murphy will meet virtually on Tuesday to “see if we can agree on a basic framework” about how to go forward on gun legislation proposals, according to an aide to Cornyn. An aide to Murphy confirmed the senator “is participating in tomorrow’s meeting and will be holding meetings throughout the week.”

[ … ]

“So red flag laws are on the table. Background checks, expansion and on the table, as well as things like safe storage of guns. I think we can get something done, but we don’t have a lot of time.”

One republican congressman is even open to a renewed AWB.

Is anyone surprised by any of this?

From a number of readers, the SCOTUS has placed limits on the scope of power police may take, while protecting the fourth amendment.

David Codrea has snipped the major details (this isn’t a long ruling).

Held: Neither the holding nor logic of Cady justifies such warrantless searches and seizures in the home. Cady held that a warrantless search of an impounded vehicle for an unsecured firearm did not violate the Fourth Amendment. In reaching this conclusion, the Court noted that the officers who patrol the “public highways” are often called to discharge noncriminal “community caretaking functions,” such as responding to disabled vehicles or investigating accidents. 413 U. S., at 441. But searches of vehicles and homes are constitutionally different, as the Cady opinion repeatedly stressed. Id., at 439, 440– 442. The very core of the Fourth Amendment’s guarantee is the right of a person to retreat into his or her home and “there be free from unreasonable governmental intrusion.” Florida v. Jardines, 569 U. S. 1, 6. A recognition of the existence of “community caretaking” tasks, like rendering aid to motorists in disabled vehicles, is not an open-ended license to perform them anywhere. Pp. 3–4. 953 F. 3d 112, vacated and remanded.

This is also being discussed at Ammoland here and here, and GOA is calling this a huge victory.

No doubt it is, and this is the right decision.  But some of the justices blather on and on about why they think it was okay to vote the way they did, which vote seems for all the wrong reasons.

I saw the decision, and looked immediately to see what Justice Clarence Thomas said.  He matters.  The rest of them are complete frauds and what they have to say matters no more to me than when a dog barks.

Now.  Let’s see how much this decision actually has an effect in the real life behavior of police.  As for the so-called “community caretaker” issue, that’s a myth fabricated out of whole cloth, with no basis in the law, and in complete contradiction with prior decisions such as Castle Rock versus Gonzales, Warren versus D.C., and DeShaney versus Winnebago County.

Only an idiot would believe in something like the “community caretaker” foolishness.  But the SCOTUS seems to be consumed with the notion – except for Justice Thomas.

This specific instance also highlights the continuing threat of so-called extreme risk protection orders.  Those come with warrants, while this case dealt with actions taken without a warrant.

Warrants are handed out like candy by judges.

David Codrea.

Kasich is the latest in a string of “Never Trump Republicans” to cast his lot with the Democrats, the very Party his past supporters donated money and labor to defeat at the polls. We’ve noted subversive efforts by groups like the Lincoln Project and watched prominent “neocons” like George Conway, Bill Kristol, and Carly Fiorina jump ship. We’ve seen “Big Tent Republicans” like Larry Hogan making no secret of abandoning what once was a Republican core constituency to move the GOP even further to the left. And just the other day, “conservative” columnist George Will announced he’s voting for Biden.

Funny that list.  I’ve always felt that Kristol and Fiorina were sniveling lackeys, Kasich just a buffoon, and George Will a true creep.  I’ve never liked any of them, and never found any to be a friend to gun owners.

Not that Kasich meant anything he promised to swindle gun owners into voting for him. Except he called infringements “reforms.” He came out against “Stand Your Ground” and even vetoed a gun bill that didn’t have it because it didn’t include “guilty until proven innocent” Red Flag seizures.

It’s always about red flag laws, isn’t it?  You can have these pretend rights, but we want to be able to take them away for any reason we deem fit, and we’ll send the Stasi to do it.

It’s the same thing going on in Wyoming right now.  Oh, the real news can get buried under the drama that the MSM whips up.  But read on and make sure to read to the end.  It’s all about pol support for red flag laws.

Ammoland.

The court granted the City’s petition. The court acknowledged that Lori could legally “walk . . . into any gun store and qualify to buy a handgun . . . and put [it] in that gun safe.” But it held that the City was nevertheless authorized to take the “low hanging fruit” of the guns the Rodriguezes already owned, irrespective of Lori’s ability to buy more, because of the danger that Edward presented. Stating that it was not “ignoring [Lori’s] Constitutional Rights,” the court concluded that it was not appropriate to return the firearms given the public safety concerns at stake.

Ah, those “low hanging fruit” guns.

The only thing low hanging about this is the moral compass of the fruits and nuts who made this decision.