(Republican Insider) – Last weekend, the ever intellectually challenged Vice President Kamala Harris took an opportunity to flout the Biden administration’s brand new National Extreme Risk Protection Order Resource Center, which has been tasked with the mission of providing “support” for the “effective implementation of state red flag laws” and to “keep guns out of the hands of people who pose a threat to themselves or others.” Yes, those darn gun grabbers are at it again.
Of course, something Harris probably doesn’t know is there’s a very big problem with NERPORC. Congress never authorized the Justice Department to create this big government monstrosity. The White House and all those involved in the administration have confused “grants … to implement state … mental health courts, drug courts, veterans’ courts, and extreme risk protection order programs” with the notion of building a whole new center for one of the above-mentioned areas.
And this is not the first time they have jumped far beyond the bounds of the law and done significant damage in the process.
According to a new report from The Federalist, “The Department of Justice press release claims that Extreme Risk Protection Orders (ERPOs, also known as red flag laws) will ‘reduce firearm homicides and suicides.’ Surveys show likely voters support laws that ‘allow guns to be temporarily confiscated by a judge from people considered by a judge to be a danger to themselves or others’ by at least 2-1 margins.”
“But despite what the Biden administration and gun control advocates claim, all 50 states and the federal government have long made it possible to take a dangerous person’s guns away. Civil commitment laws go by various names, such as the Baker Act in Florida or the 5150 code in California,” The Federalist continued.
If a person is concerned that another individual is a danger to themselves or others, you can call the local authorities. Once they hear from you and agree the person is a threat, they then send out a team of mental health professionals to assess the person. If they, too, agree with your concerns an emergency court hearing is put together. An attorney is provided for individuals who don’t have the money to hire one. There are a wide variety of options made available to judges such as outpatient mental health care, a driver’s license suspension, or even gun confiscation and involuntary commitment, but only after the proper legal process has been carried out.
The Federalist then said, “Under red flag laws, a judge acts solely on the basis of a written complaint. He never talks to the person who made the complaint or the person against whom it was made. States vary on how quickly hearings must occur, but they all require that they take place within a month after one’s guns are taken away. But the steep cost of legal representation often deters defendants from seeking counsel, as lawyers can charge upwards of $10,000 for a hearing.”
When folks are informed that red flag laws have no mental health expert consultations and no court hearings before guns are taken away, public support for them turns. A survey conducted by McLaughlin & Associates, which was commissioned by the Crime Prevention Research Center, that featured 1,000 likely voters as participants, discovered 29 percent supported the law after being informed, while 47 percent were against it.
“Gun confiscation isn’t a serious means of preventing suicides. People can commit suicide in many different ways, and places that have banned all guns or all handguns have seen no change in total suicides. The evidence shows suicide rates remain statistically unchanged or even slightly increased,” the report added.
One of the key elements of successful treatment for depression is talking to someone about your problems. However, red flag laws actually discourage folks from discussing their feelings. The report provides an example. Law enforcement officers have a high-rate of work related depression, however, they are less likely to talk about these issues due to red flag laws. If an officer loses the ability to carry his weapon, he or she could potentially be out of a job.
“Allowing for easy gun confiscation can leave good, law-abiding people defenseless. Andrew Pollack, who lost his daughter in the 2017 Stoneman Douglas High School shooting in Parkland, Florida, recently had an Extreme Risk Protection Order used against him by a neighbor in rural Oregon. When Pollack finally had his hearing in court, the judge didn’t even need to hear a defense because there was no evidence that Pollack had threatened anyone. Unfortunately, while disarmed, he faced a mountain lion outside his home. His dog tangled with the mountain lion, requiring 50 stitches on his side. As is virtually always the case, there was no punishment for the neighbors bringing the false claim,” The Federalist stated.
In summary, a Democrat-controlled Congress granted the president authority to hand out grants to states that have red flag laws on the books, but never granted him permission to build an entire red flag center. This is just another attempt to infringe upon the Second Amendment rights of the American people under the guise of protecting them.
Copyright 2024. RepublicanInsider.org
While a liberal judge gives an order that an illegal alien has a constitutional right to carry a gun for self defense, the same deranged libs want to deprive natural born Americans of the same. Think about it , as the open border policy allows countless individuals into our country which is actually an invasion, our own government would have us not free citizens but defenseless subjects.