Those in power, at the moment, aim to destroy the Second Amendment by any means possible and, with it, liberty.
They know what they are doing. A favorite tool for them is "red flag" laws. These trespass the Second Amendment, as well as Amendments IV, V, VI and XIV. Let us examine the damage done to each.
Amendment II reads in part, "The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed." Government is specifically denied making any laws concerning the people's right to bear arms. No exceptions are permitted outside a new amendment through Article V allowing only the states -- 3/4th agreement required -- to process a change, not the federal government.
Anything short of this is a serious "infringement" (violation) of the Constitution. All executive orders of any president or laws of any congress infringing this right are null and void upon origination. This is so, whether it be Congress' "red flag" laws, Biden's magazine limitations or similar measures originating from any state, county or city. This was ensured by the Founding Fathers. No other amendment was more strongly worded against governmental manipulation. The federal government's present attempt to disarm the civilian population cannot and will not stand.
Amendment IV reads in part, "The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated." Today computers and electronic devices are our "papers" and "effects," our instruments of self-preservation and identity. In the case of arms, it is "unreasonable" to confiscate them based on someone's assumption that they may be used inappropriately. We might also wish to remove the people's automobiles, knives, hammers, or medicines they might use to harm themselves or others. Heretofore, "probable cause" for government home invasions, searches and seizures was based upon evidence, not opinion or accusation. Again, there exists no crime in having things until wrongfully using them against others. Otherwise, personal freedom is nonexistent.
Amendment V reads in part: "No person shall be ... deprived of ... property, without due process of law." Due process is denied to thousands under "red flag" laws. No one was accused, arrested, charged with a crime or convicted before his or her guns were confiscated.
Amendment VI requires that all accused must be "informed of the nature and cause of the accusation ... be confronted with the witnesses against him ... have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and ... have the assistance of counsel for his defence." In the case of "red flag" laws none of these four required conditions, prior to confiscation, is met because no crime has been committed. The targeted person has no opportunity to resist gun confiscation.
Finally, Amendment XIV states, "No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty or property, without due process of law." This amendment extends all "privileges or immunities" to the states as well. Thus, states too cannot infringe on the right of the people to keep and bear arms. "Red flag" laws totally deny "due process."
"Red flag" laws aim squarely at removing the Second Amendment from a segment of the civilian population and violate four other amendments as well -- almost half the Bill of Rights.
"Red flag" laws are thought to be the "go-to legislation" for the presumed mentally unstable of society that could resort to violence against themselves or others. These potentially allow thousands of innocent citizens to be punished solely based on the fear that a crime might be committed. Secret lists of innocent people are created by family, acquaintances and potentially by disgruntled ex-lovers or spouses -- perhaps even the government. Anyone that can approach a judge with the claim that someone is a danger to himself and/or others, the sheriff is sent to disarm and confiscate that person's weapon(s). Those identified are punished without having committed a crime -- all this, too often, without a shred of evidence of criminal behavior.
In some states, anyone can make a phone call to the police -- even from outside the state. "There is no hearing. All the judge has before him is the statement of concern." Moreover, "little certainty is needed. Some states allow initial confiscations on just a 'reasonable suspicion,' which is little more than a guess or a hunch."
The biggest problem with red flag evaluations is that they happen "ex parte," without the defendant present to defend himself. Due process, guaranteed in the Bill of Rights in three places, is denied. If "ex parte," a second hearing is scheduled, some weeks later, at which the defendant must provide evidence of his innocence. In other words, one must prove himself innocent of something he never did or possibly never thought of doing but for which he has already been punished by the forcible confiscation of his weapons. Whatever happened to "innocent until proven guilty?" We are dangerously close to destroying the backbone of our judicial system, the presumption of innocence.
Red flag laws are unconstitutional and were struck down by the U.S. Supreme Court in Caniglia v. Strom et al. as recently as May 17, 2021, by unanimous decision. These violate due process and strip away Second Amendment rights from citizens who have committed no crimes. Caniglia's guns were seized by police acting on a call from his spouse, a clear violation of the due process as articulated in the Fourth Amendment (X22 Reports Ep. 2800B-June 15, 2022, 8:10).
Democrats are presently in charge of the legislative and executive branches of the nation and govern nearly half of the state governments. They also greatly dominate mainstream media and internet news, censoring everything contrary to their narrative, thus coverage of this decision was and is noticeably absent. So far, they appear to be disregarding this Supreme Court ruling in their bold, aggressive attempt to disarm American civilians and damage the Constitution.
Harold W. Pease, Ph.D., is an expert on the United States Consitution and a syndicated columnist. He has dedicated his career to studying the writings of the Founding Fathers and applying that knowledge to current events. He taught history and political science from this perspective for more than 30 years. To read more of his weekly articles, visit www.LibertyUnderFire.org. Opinions expressed are those of the author.