Red Flag Laws

Map of current and proposed red flag law states

Are you aware that several states have laws in place to circumvent your Second, Fourth, and Fifth Amendment rights, relating to guns. Are you aware that in most of those states it only takes one person to declare you as a danger to yourself or others to have your legally-owned firearms confiscated. After the declaration and with no chance for consideration or rebuttal, the firearms are removed from your possession. Often, this is done with a surprise, no knock raid in the pre-dawn hours.

Map of current and proposed red flag law states
As of the end of 2018, 13 states had passed “Red Flag” laws. Mostly the usual suspects on the left coast and New England; but, Florida is also on that list. Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Ohio are currently considering such rubbish.

Are you aware that this is being proposed on a National Level?

In some states, these “Red Flag” laws may be called Extreme Risk Protection Orders (ERPO) or a Gun Violence Restraining Orders (GVRO). In most cases, they can be best described as being slightly more selective than the Salem Witch trials. Someone reported, therefore, you are guilty until proven innocent. The dunk tank or the fire pit will determine your innocence.

Before you declare me as being over the top in my hyperbole, what are you going to do when your front door bursts open at 3 a.m., when you know for sure you don’t have any warrants, drugs, or the like. I know I am going to assume home invasion and prepare to repel boarders.

In most cases, the SWAT team will have been sent to enforce compliance. They will crash through the door as a stack of armed and armored (mostly) men. In the fog of a “home invasion,” people (most likely me) will die. Don’t even think about what will happen to my dog.

SWAT team members raiding a house with red lasers
The photo may be dramatic and artistic, but a SWAT coming through your doors in the predawn hours will be traumatic, if not deadly.

Maryland passed such a law in mid October 2018. They have already used it at least 9 times as of the publishing of this article. In those 9 seizures, one has already been fatal to a citizen. I realize it is a small sample set, but two things concern me. First, the issuing judge and Maryland Law Enforcement community stated, “This is proof the law is working.” Did we initiate a Bureau of Pre-Crime while I wasn’t looking? Second, at this rate over 350 people will have their right to possess a firearm removed through extra judicial means, in the first year and roughly 35 people will be dead because of it.

Even if you take the word of the partisan group Gun Violence Archive, a group that claims there have been 307 mass shootings in the first 312 days of 2018. Of course, they include every incident of gang violence, bank robbery, and drive-by shooting as part of their statistics. Even inflating the numbers like they do, only gets them to 22 “mass shooting” victims in Maryland in 2018. If we exclude Baltimore from the rest of Maryland, that number drops to 3. Have you seen the gang violence statistics on Baltimore? I digress. So, by my math, they are willing to have roughly 50% more people die keeping “mass shootings” from happening? I guess, if the correct people (gun owners) are dying, it isn’t a bad thing to them.


Second Amendment

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

Fourth Amendment

Second Amendment document

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

Fifth Amendment

No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

As most of you know, the Fourth Amendment and to some degree the Fourteenth have been under assault. Supreme Court deference to the state and its investigatory powers is strongly documented.

  • Terry v. Ohio Basically the “frisk at will” exemption
  • Florida v. Bostick The “he didn’t stop us from searching” exemption
  • Schneckloth v. Bustamonte An uninformed citizen is a legally searched citizen
  • Mapp v. Ohio We got the exclusionary rule. In other words if the search is illegal, then any evidence obtained is excluded from use in court.

This would be good news, except; Herring v. U.S. gives law enforcement the “good faith” exemption. Simply stated, if the police make a procedural mistake the fall out is on you, not them.

Pediment of the U.S. Supreme Court building
Previous case law dictates that the Supreme Court is unlikely to strike down red flag laws.

All of the above cases are my way of pointing out that the Supreme Court is unlikely to limit or strike down these new “Red Flag” laws. My fellow patriots, Constitutional Conservatives, and gun people; get off your butts and make sure your state is not attempting to pass such laws. If they are, get moving and work to pressure your (theoretical) representatives to follow the letter and intent of the Constitution and vote these travesties down.

As of the end of 2018, 13 states had passed “Red Flag” laws. Mostly the usual suspects on the left coast and New England; but, Florida is also on that list. Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Ohio are currently considering such rubbish.

You have been warned.

Do you have red flag laws in your state? Do you consider red flag laws a necessary evil or simply an evil? Share your answers in the comment section.

The Mission of Cheaper Than Dirt!'s blog. "The Shooter's Log", is to provide information - not opinions - to our customers and the shooting community. We want you, our readers, to be able to make informed decicions. The information provided here does not represent the views of Cheaper Than Dirt!

Comments (48)

  1. I am a former Marine, and a Life Member of the NRA. I strongly stand for the 2nd Amendment, and in my state of Washington our gun rights are recognized under state constitution (for now). But in our state a mentally unstable person is not allowed to own or possess firearms. I do not subscribe to the hysteria generated by ‘mass shooting’ events that affect a fraction of a percent of Americans, but I do believe there are situations where a person’s family or close associates know when a person is coming unhinged by a mental health problem or extreme emotional state that may lead to that person killing someone. Are we to expect that the victim must accept being dead so that we can then disarm the mentally unstable perpetrator? I say that is not a reasonable expectation, and if we know a person might be about to commit a homicide, we should take action. I am not talking about ‘Pre-Crime’ as the post suggests, and I can’t relate to any specifics about such laws in states other than my own. That being said, I will relate personal experience in this matter. My father is 80, has been diagnosed by multiple physicians as having dementia. It has progressed over the last 5 years. Because of his age and declining mental condition, including emotional control, his doctor had his driver’s license pulled. This made him very upset, such that for almost a year he talked about killing his doctor. We treated it as hyperbole, but one day he told my brother that he “didn’t have much time left, going to have to take care of that doctor very soon.” Up to this point, he hasn’t been convicted of any crime, but he was committing one every time he threatened to kill his doctor. At this point my brother and I felt, because of his dementia, that we couldn’t confidently say that Dad wouldn’t make good on this threat. He has guns, including a .357 Magnum revolver that can fit in a pocket. He could take it to his next appointment and make good on the threats. We decided that invoking the Extreme-Risk Protection Order law that just passed in Washington. I had to go before a judge with sworn statements from my brother and with the dementia diagnosis, and she grilled me for about 20 minutes before agreeing to the temporary order. The temporary order is only good for 2 weeks. We would have to appear again within two weeks for a hearing on a permanent order (1 year). The Sheriff served the warrant, but because this is a civil proceeding in our state, they cannot enter his property to enforce the order. No SWAT team is sent, no door broken. In fact, he could refuse to surrender his weapons to the police, and they have to walk away. We arranged for him to go to town with me, and the Sheriff stopped us a block from his house. They did this to be able to contact him outside the home to serve him the subpoena to appear in court and the temporary order. They do this to avoid a situation where a person becomes angry and responds by grabbing a gun in their home and that leads to a shootout where someone dies. They don’t want to shoot someone while serving this paperwork because they are cognizant that the individual has not been convicted of anything, and they are not in a position to forcibly enter the residence. They talked with him and he admitted to them what firearms he owns, and admitted making the death threats. The deputies asked him if he would agree to them entering his home and taking the firearms, as well as relinquishing his CPP temporarily. He wasn’t too happy about it, but agreed, and allowed us to collect the guns. This is an experience I did not enjoy. My Dad lives in a rural location where his home is not visible from the road or his neighbor’s homes, and I don’t like him not having the security of a firearm. But I also could no longer risk him killing his doctor and my brother and I joining him in prison because we didn’t report his threats. It all went peacefully, and he had his hearing in 2 weeks time to make his own argument against the order. As I stated before, the deputies stated if he refused to hand over the guns, there was nothing they could do. However, not following a court order may have it’s own consequences. Anyway, we went to court and the judge again questioned me extensively, then let Dad speak for himself and then asked him questions for some time before coming to a decision. I had told the judge that while his doctor had expressed the opinion my dad should be in a secure memory-care facility, I was not convinced that step was yet necessary and suggested some testing that would help Dad and the family really know where Dad is mentally. Dad initially was agreeable, and so the judge issued the 1-year order plus this testing. She told Dad that if he got the testing he could return sooner than a year to request the order be lifted sooner and get his firearms back. I feel this is a good example of a situation where this law is doing what it should be doing. My Dad’s case was one of the first in Washington. Everyone in the system is figuring out how to administer it. Since, Dad has now decided not to have the testing, and has just resolved himself to not getting them back. That is unfortunate. I was hoping that we could get a better diagnosis that might provide for the return of his weapons sooner. We have got him another doctor so hopefully he will lose his mental fixation at getting even with his old doctor. In a year, if nothing has changed, and his condition continues to deteriorate, we will be faced with returning to court to get a new order. At that point they may release the firearms to myself or my brother. Now our case involves a prior medical diagnosis of a progressive mental disorder, so it accomplishes the goal of preceding law against the mentally ill having firearms. There are going to be cases less cut-and-dried, and only the future will reveal how it works out in our state. But my experience was that the courts were not in a hurry to take away Dad’s guns. The judge seemed as concerned about his rights as she was about the risks he posed with his death threats + access to firearms. I hope that the law continues to be used with that concern for the gun owner’s rights.

  2. I am glad to see that my post reappeared today. It was missing earlier in the morning. I post things that I know directly from my life experiences, I do not incite violence and I do not call for hatred.
    The issue regarding firearms and related topics is very close to my heart as my elderly father is still alive and he remembers how the “armed communist Bolsheviks” came in the middle of the night and threw my father and his family out from the family residence and took the family business by force. The young communist officer was jewish and the enforcers were young uneducated thug dumbed down Russians. This young officer examined my grandfather’s brothers hands and determined on the spot that his hands were not worn down enough / calloused enough by hard labor and that alone made him the enemy of the communist state. This young jew officer ordered that my grandfather’s brother be torn apart and dragged by two horses and since the people of the small town / village were already disarmed nobody could do anything. The ones that tried to interfere had their skulls bashed in by the butt stocks of the heavy Mauser like rifles. When I look at the news and the names of our politicians that are constantly promoting gun-control (FEINSTEIN, BLOOMBERG, SCHUMMER, BLUMENTHAL, LEVIN, STEINBERG, etc., etc.) I as well as my elderly father have this strange uneasy feeling that the people of the same tribe are up to their communist shenanigans here in the United States. It would be great to see the regular jewish population go against these jewish politicians instead of voting for these anti-American clowns because they are the members of the same tribe. AMERICANS need to put aside their tribal loyalties and unite to drive out these social communists out of our government. Just because the crooked politician is a member of your tribe does not mean that you should vote or support that individual. It should always be America first. and foremost. This is the problem we are facing right now. People feel obligated to vote for their kind due to some perceived loyalty. Again, the only thing that should matter is America first no matter where people came from. Also we must keep a closer eye on these so called “Secret Societies” whether it be the Scottish-Rite Freemasons, the B’nai B’rith Freemasons, the Skull and Bonesmen, etc., etc. We must also do all that we can to do away with the excuse, “It is a Matter of National Security.” There is a time and place for such things but this is often times used as a TOOL to end any meaningful inquiry and thorough investigation. We are just told to accept things because the people in power said so. Not so fast, let us take a thorough in-depth look at things, especially these so called mass school shootings for instance, and determine for ourselves. No just some laughing parents like “Robbie Parker”, some yellow police tape, a few police vehicles with flashing lights, and alleged witnesses that do not suffer any hearing damage as a result of all this loud-decibel filled shots fired. I haven’t seen one alleged witness state that he / she has problems hearing things due to ringing in the ears from all the alleged shots. Yellow police tape, numerous lit candles and teddy bears, and an immediate call to eliminate firearms. Really??? God Bless America, Long Live the Republic.

    1. You make my point about generalization. Were the majority of Bolsheviks Jewish? I know many of them were, but there were millions of Russian who were not, but were still involved in the Russian revolution. There were so many factions fighting for dominance at that time, who were allied against the Tsar, that after gaining control, they began to eat each other. Lenin won by murdering most of the other factions. And then again, you had Jewish thugs, criminals really, who assisted the Nazis in keeping order in the Ghettos and camps. And Jewish gangsters. But classifying all members of a certain religion or ethnicity as culpable, based on the bad conduct of some is just childishly simple and inane. I suggest your read THE RUSSIAN REVOLUTION A New History By Sean McMeekin to develop a good insight and perspective or the diversity of the revolutionists. It will also enlighten you as to the many underhanded plots and schemes of some of the superpowers of the day. A most enlightening presage of the second world war. And who was bankrolling the revolution and the German army also. I don’t question your statements, I only suggest that you lack perspective on the matter, and hope to broaden your exposure to the facts.

  3. IF…..your 2nd Amendment right can be nullified because of what you might do, then why cannot your 1st Amendment right be nullified for what you might say? With the recognition of “hate crimes”, why cannot one loose his /her right to speech because they MIGHT denigrate a particular race and/or religion.
    This is only the beginning of the final stage of decline for the Un-United States of America, what a shame.

  4. Unless you happen to be a member of the tribe of so called (((chosen ones))). I know of somebody first hand, have known this individual for many years. This individual has several degrees including a post graduate. This individual does not work and has everything purchased by well to do parents. The house, the luxury car (third vehicle as he crashed two vehicles and caused property damage to other people in the first two DUIs), many toys and items, etc. About 2 to 3 years ago this individual while under influence sent a text message to parents stating that they would be met with death at his hands. The police Dept. arrested this individual, confiscated this individuals weapons, and filed charges. By the way this was this individuals third DUI / DWI and multiple arrests for trespassing, harassment, assault and related issues. He paid the bail because this individual had memorized the co-applicant credit card number and was let out. Never spent a full day in jail!!! Always got released the next morning or bailed out using the co-credit card that this individual holds with his parents. The parents actually wrote a letter to the police and specifically indicated that, “their son has a history of psychological issues since childhood and that they believe that their kid could actually be a perpetrator of a mass shooting, etc.” So the parents finally did their job by informing on their precious little one after so many years of letting this individual slide on this rather serious issues. Guess what, he eventually got some years summary probation with some monitoring in the beginning, parents paid and installed the DUI blow device in his luxury car so that he can drive and commute like any of us. The icing on the cake is that Law Enforcement gave this individual back all of his firearms less magazines, ammunition, and they stole One very expensive Optic worth several thousands of dollars. By the way he is a member of the (((chosen tribe))) not observant as far as I know but who knows what goes on behind the scenes. The point is that if this happened to any other person they would be rotting away in the jail or prison and most certainly no firearms would be returned given the circumstances. Not to mention that California passed a law several years ago that requires a 2nd DUI offender to serve time in jail. None of this applied to this individual!!! The courts and law enforcement threw out all the rules and basically this individual is driving around with the DUI blow thing as if nothing. I will not disclose this individuals name because this individual helped me in time of need some years ago for which I am very grateful. It just makes me sick to my stomach how differently the people of the (((chosen tribe))) are treated than the rest of the population!!! No hatred here just the facts that show what kind of justice system we live in and the people that run this corrupt system.

  5. It is my contention that these kinds of laws need more than one reporting party. I think it should require a minimum of three reporting persons and then once reported the gun owner should be interviewed by a qualified psychologist to determine if the reporting parties are correct before ANY action is taken to remove a person’s guns. This kind of law without those extra steps is subject to abuse, someone can make a report just because they have a vendetta or just didn’t like something the person said or looked like against the person, something like a lefty seeing someone wearing a MAGA hat.

  6. The incidence with these bozos that go out and create mayhem have caused a great deal of frustration to the public in general; I can see why they go off half cocked and pass such draconian laws. They could make it much better if they simply asked a person suspected of losing it to meet an LEO at another location where both feel safe, and detain them there until the firearms are removed. BUT the catch should be that this is a TEMPORARY condition until the sanity or presence of mind of the individual is fully determined, and put an automatic time limit on how long the LEA can hold the weapons. Then they should automatically go back to the individual when no legal reason is determined why they shouldn’t have all their rights. I know this is walking a thin line of freedom vs despotism, but as long as a very firm wording of the law leaves no room for taking someone’s rights without due process, then at least it could be said to be. more fair than what we have now.

    Let’s face it – the public has been whipped into a frenzy by these incidents. and the media is partly at fault for giving otherwise unstable people the idea to gain notoriety at any cost on the news. And really how many times have we found out someone who is armed isn’t legally supposed to be that way; so at least this would give a safer determination system to help in pubic safety. Don’t get me wrong, it think most of these laws should be abolished, but I also think they need to improve the NCIC reporting system so that verified nut cases can’t slip under the radar, and some form of control of the questionable suspects made available to LEOs with as little interruption of 2nd Amendment rights in violation.

    Waco was a good example of how it could have gone down better when the county Sheriff, who had the trust of the Branch Davidians made an offer to go and talk to their leader and detain him, and separate him from his followers so no escalation of tensions would occur. The outcome would have been much more peaceful and the BATF could have investigated any arms violations without an escalation of tension at the compound. Historians have been in agreement with that for decades.

    1. JCitizen, I think when you or anyone else justifies people taking draconian measures because they are frustrated with these bozos who go around shooting people is just plain wrong. Most of this nonsense is media driven because people simply want to take away our guns. No one seems to get nearly as upset by illegal immigrants coming to this country selling drugs which destroy people’s lives, raping, murdering etc etc. To the contrary those same people and the media don’t even want to address the fact that many of these folks are multiple offenders and have been kicked out of the Country more than once. No one seems to get overly wrought about far more deaths by both prescription drugs, illicit drugs and car accidents than die in all of these mass shootings. People also don’t realize that most gun deaths are suicides not homicides. There is absolutely no excuse for this type of focus when most people agree that this is a mental health issue, that as long as due process is provided there can be effective mechanism put in place to reduce these types of crimes which are not excessive compared to the many other illegal acts resulting in people dying yearly. Sorry this is just more BS

  7. This is an Infringement on our God Given Rights, any attempt to Confiscate my Firearms will be met with Brute Force. I will not sit idly by as my rights are taken away from me by a Government turned Tyrannical. Going to start a Revolution. Show no Quarter to Traitors. Put them all to the sword.

  8. No such law in TX …. yet. I am not completely clear on it, but I think the Veterans Administration may have such a policy though .. which I assume would have nationwide jurisdiction(?) Lot’s of veterans with PTSD. I am considering hiding my guns. Considering it very seriously.

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Time limit exceeded. Please click the reload button and complete the captcha once again.

Your discussions, feedback and comments are welcome here as long as they are relevant and insightful. Please be respectful of others. We reserve the right to edit as appropriate, delete profane, harassing, abusive and spam comments or posts, and block repeat offenders. All comments are held for moderation and will appear after approval.