Unconstitutional and Tyrannical Red Flag Gun Confiscation Laws Are Coming FAST

(Psst: The FTC wants me to remind you that this website contains affiliate links. That means if you make a purchase from a link you click on, I might receive a small commission. This does not increase the price you'll pay for that item nor does it decrease the awesomeness of the item. ~ Daisy)

By Adam Palmer

Within minutes of the tragic mass shootings in El Paso and Dayton, gun control fanatics were predictably not letting a crisis go to waste by calling for extreme measures of gun control. The usual suspects were at it – Soros organizations, MSM, left-wing extremists, and Democratic Party members – but, interestingly enough, they were joined by many Republican lawmakers as well. While Lindsey Graham, a Senator who has scarcely seen a right in the Bill of Rights he hasn’t wanted to carve up for dinner, is no shocker, others in staunchly red states have also joined the call for stricter gun control measures. Most surprising, however, is that President Donald Trump has jumped on the bandwagon, calling for “red flag laws” among other egregious measures to deal with the recent spate of shootings in the United States.

The response from Trump’s base has been a mix of personality cult support and virulent opposition, hinting that Trump, if he goes forward with his “red flag” proposal, could be shooting himself in the foot for 2020. After the last few years, it is clear that nothing Trump could ever do would convince a leftist to vote for him. However, he can convince his own supporters to stay home in 2020 and that appears to be what is going to happen if he doesn’t quickly pull an about-face in the manner that he has done in the past in regards to many of his positive attempts to govern (Syria, Afghanistan, etc.).

So what is the problem with Red Flag laws?

For those that may not be aware, “Red Flag” Laws are allegedly devised to disarm individuals who may be at high risk to commit violent acts before they are able to do so. These “red flags” can be thrown up by law enforcement, mental, and medical professionals regarding a person’s mental state and/or capacity to do harm. In some cases, family members and others can also trigger the gun confiscation order. A number of states in the US already have such laws, Maryland being the most memorable example.

In an article entitled “Maryland’s ‘Red Flag’ Law Turns Deadly: Officer Kills Man Who Refused To Turn In Gun,” Kimberly Eiten writes,

A 61-year-old man is dead after he was shot by an officer trying to enforce Maryland’s new ‘red flag’ law in Ferndale Monday morning.

Anne Arundel County Police confirmed the police-involved shooting happened in the 100 block of Linwood Avenue around 5:17 a.m.

. . . . .

According to police, two officers serving a new Extreme Risk Protective Order (Red Flag Law), a Maryland protective order to remove guns from a household, shot and killed the man listed on that order.

“Under the law, family, police, mental health professionals can all ask for the protective orders to remove weapons,” said Sgt. Jacklyn David, with Anne Arundel County Police.

That man was identified as Gary J. Willis of same address.

Officials said Willis answered the door while holding a handgun.

Willis then placed the gun next to the door.

When officers began to serve him the order, Willis became irate and grabbed his gun.

One of the officers tried to take the gun from Willis, but instead Willis fired the gun.

The second officer fired a gun, striking Willis. He died at the scene.

In other words, gun confiscation has already begun but it has begun incrementally and not as a mass sweeping door to door operation. Selco wrote from his experience about how gun confiscation might go down and it appears he was right. Gary J. Willis was executed for not willingly allowing his basic rights to be violated. Guess we could have skipped the trouble of that whole Revolutionary War thing, right?

Red Flag laws trample all over our Constitutional rights.

If it sounds to you like Red Flag laws are actually the imposition of “pre-crime” policies, you’re right. If they sound unconstitutional to you, you’re also right. Red Flag laws violate at least three Amendments to the US Constitution – the First, Second, and Fourth.

It’s important to note that some county sheriffs are refusing to enforce Red Flag gun laws and others are forming 2nd Amendment sanctuaries, but these are too few and far between to stop this altogether. The violation of the 2nd Amendment is the most obvious since forcibly disarming an American citizen through a matter of law who has committed no crime is a clear infringement on the Second Amendment. In fact, so is the idea that “mentally ill people should not have access to weapons.” The fact is that mentally ill people still have rights in this country but more on that later.

The Fourth Amendment is violated because American citizens are essentially tried, convicted, and disarmed without due process and the First is violated because the alleged “crime” or “red flag” is not an actual crime but speech and/or expression (in many cases it is merely the feeling of a threat by the person throwing up the red flag) both of which are expressly protected by the First Amendment.

But Trump went even further in his speech responding to the recent shootings, stating that the US should have stronger laws regarding “involuntary confinement” and that the Federal and State governments would be working with social media companies to detect individuals who are threats before they are able to do any damage. In other words, the Government will be working with (supposedly) private social media companies to determine individuals who should be forcibly disarmed as a result of their speech and expression online.

Mental health and psychiatry are being weaponized.

And as for involuntary confinement, the US already allows for “mental health professionals” to involuntarily confine people for the slightest statements, violating their rights and, more often than not, ruining their lives with forced medication and victimization. The fact that mental and medical professionals have as much authority as they do should be considered abhorrent in a free society.

Indeed, the truth is that, while no one wants a severely mentally ill person walking around with a gun, mentally ill people still have rights. And if they have not committed a crime, they have the same rights as everyone else.

And thus we arrive at the second frightening aspect of Red Flag laws – the further weaponization of mental health and psychiatry. This is precisely the methods used by the Soviet Union when critics of the government were deemed mentally ill and forced into “treatment” where they remained or where “re-educated/medicated” into conformity.

But abuse of psychiatry and the mental health/law enforcement meld is by no means unique to the Soviet Union. The mechanisms are already in place in the United States and have been for some time. Indeed, every day in the United States countless people are forcibly hospitalized having committed no crime whatsoever.

In her article, “The Crime Of Thinking Different,” Wendy McElroy wrote in September 2014,

The term “psychopathological mechanisms” of dissent describes the political abuse of psychiatry in the former Soviet Union and other totalitarian regimes. Non-approved beliefs, attitudes or behavior are classified as mental problems, which converts them into a medical diagnosis that can be handled in an extra-legal manner. Dissenters or ‘the different’ can be detained indefinitely in mental hospitals where they are drugged or otherwise ‘cured’ into conformity.

. . . . .

If accurate, a news story out of Cambridge, Maryland, in late August indicates “psychopathological mechanisms” is in full swing within the US. On August 22, a 23-year-old middle school teacher named Patrick McLaw was placed on administrative leave and taken into custody by police to be psychologically evaluated.

Why? The first reports stated, “Members of the Dorchester Sheriff’s Office, the Cambridge Police Department and…County Public School board have removed…McLaw for allegedly penning two books under the alias, ‘Dr. K.S. Voltaer’.” A police investigation is underway. [Note: the word “alias” connotes crime; “pen name” is the appropriate term for anonymous authorship.]

One novel, The Insurrectionist (2011), is set 888 years in the future and revolves around a school shooting. The Amazon blurb explains, “On 18 March 2902, a massacre transpired on the campus of Ocean Park High School…the largest school massacre in the nation’s history. And the entire country now begins to ask two daunting questions: How? and Why?…It becomes evident that the hysteria is far from over.” (The second novel, Lillith’s Heir, is a sequel.) The Amazon description is correct. The hysteria was just beginning.

The police searched McLaw’s home for weapons; none were found. They searched the school with dogs for bombs and guns; none were found. McLaw apparently does not have a criminal record. According to a local paper, The Star Democrat (April 23), he was nominated last April for Dorchester County’s “Teacher of the Year” award but lost out. Nevertheless, on September 1, Sheriff James Phillips stated that the teacher-novelist “is no longer in the area. He is currently at a location known to law enforcement and does not currently have the ability to travel anywhere.”

After a blitz of media coverage raised constitutional issues, the story offered by authorities changed. The novels became only “pieces of the puzzle” of their investigation. The State Attorney for Wicomico County Matt Maciarello now claims that McLaw drew police attention due to “a four-page letter to officials in Dorchester County.” The 4-pages were apparently a letter of resignation. In a highly unusual and prejudicial move, personal details from the letter were leaked although the authorities will not produce the document itself for independent verification. They will merely leak what is to their advantage.

Bottom line: No arrest was made, no charges were laid, no warrant has been issued and there has been no public accusation that McLaw threatened anyone. He is being held for psychiatric evaluation based merely on the fact that the police are investigating him for what or what may not be a crime.

The prevalence of “psychopathological mechanisms” is a touchstone of totalitarianism and a measure of how far a society or situation has distanced itself from liberty. Through American history, the distance from liberty has been an ebb and flow.

. . . . .

From its inception as colonies, the United States has included the political abuse of those who are seen as psychologically deviant. Between early 1692-1693, at least twenty people died because they were accused of violating the orthodox beliefs of authorities; they were called witches which may be as close to a psychiatric diagnosis as that period offers.

The most totalitarian situation or institution America has known was slavery; only the current prison system compares. During this period, the abuse of psychiatry revealed a second purpose; it not only provides social control but also justifies savagery in the eyes of those who commit it.

Consider the psychiatric term “drapetomania.” It refers to a mental illness defined in 1851 by a respected American doctor named Samuel A. Cartwright in order to explain why slaves ran away. His essay Diseases and Peculiarities of the Negro Race stated that fleeing slavery “is as much a disease of the mind as any other species of mental alienation, and much more curable, as a general rule.” The recommended cure was “whipping the devil out of” slaves as a preventative measure against those who display signs of this impending mental illness.

In his 2010 book The Protest Psychosis: How Schizophrenia Became a Black Disease, psychiatrist Jonathan Metzl explored the 1960 history of the Ionia State Hospital for the Criminally Insane (Michigan), which is now a state prison. The hospital was notorious for diagnosing blacks who advocated civil rights with schizophrenia and confining them for treatment. Treatments could become de facto lifelong sentences without legal recourse. Along with many other state asylums, the hospital was justly closed down during what is called “an era of deinstitutionalization” in the 1970s which came as a result of outrage over the brutal use of psychiatry as social control.

Such use has been gradually increasing. Metzl ascribes much of the increase to successive changes in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM) which is published by the American Psychiatric Association. First published in 1952, it is considered to be the definitive guide to mental illness but its definition of mental illness has altered significantly through five editions. A few alterations are praiseworthy, such as the removal of homosexuality as a mental disease. Most of them are dangerous invitations for abuse. For example, the second edition added “hostility” and non-violent “aggression” as symptoms of a mental disorder. The latest edition defines Oppositional Defiant Disorder (ODD). To be diagnosed with ODD, a person must display four manifestations from the following three behaviors for more than 6 months: an angry mood, argumentative behavior, or vindictiveness. The definition is so sweeping and vague that anyone who has a sustained reason to argue with authority could be diagnosed with ODD.

It has become common for courts to order a mental evaluation of those in custody or in family court, whether or not the ‘crime’ is violent. A prominent example is the whistleblower Bradley or Chelsea Manning. In many cases, they provide a legal justification for stripping people of legal rights and credibility. In other cases, authorities simply wish to punish a dissenter and discourage others from acting similarly. An October 9, 2010 headline in Raw Story read, “Cop hauled off to psych ward after alleging fake crime stats.”

NYPD officer Adrian Schoolcraft accused his supervisors of faking crime statistics and ticket quotas to make them look better. He backed up the accusations with documents and hundreds of hours of recorded tape which he supplied to the Associated Press. As a result of his alleged “hostile” behavior, he was taken in handcuffs to a hospital for evaluation.

Red Flag laws are a slippery slope to more tyranny.

For those that believe Red Flag laws are “reasonable,” it is important to know that, once given power, those who receive it never give it back. Even more so, they use the power they have gained to eliminate any opposition to their rule. If Red Flag laws are put in place today, the “red flags” may be threatening language. Tomorrow, they may be racism. Next week, they may be political disagreements. In a month, they may be any arguments at all. Next month, who knows? The goalposts are always moving. We have already seen how the definition of racism, homophobia, transphobia, unpatriotic, and violence have been broadened to such a nonsensical degree. But, in a system of tyranny, the definition of dissent is always changing.

For those who still don’t think these laws are a grounds for grave concern, you should remember that the people who are reporting your posts and pages on Facebook today will be the same people reporting you to the police tomorrow.

What do you think?

Do you think Red Flag laws will be implemented in more states? Do you think they are necessary for public safety or tyrannical and unconstitutional? Please share your thoughts in the comments.

Guest Contributor

Guest Contributor

Leave a Reply

Leave a Reply

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

45 Responses

  1. From all apparent indications,
    the entire left wing is so far off their rockers that they can’t even discern reality from their own collective delusions. But none of them will be red flagged, will they?
    No. This is to disarm the opponents of the communist takeover.

    1. Unfortunately, many Repubs are joining them so as to avoid criticism. “Constitution! We don’t need no freakin’ Constitution.”

      1. Far too many “Republicans” aren’t. They seem to think that they need approval from Dems (not happening!) instead of being leaders — as they were elected to do.

    2. Disarmament and take over? Yes. But not all tyrants are communist. Many kinds of authoritarian ideologies exist. They all want a disarmed population.

  2. DEFINITELY trampling our rights.Without due process anyone could be considered threat.Time to safeguard your weapons and store them somewhere the police will not find,if they come knocking.

  3. That’s OK, I’ll give them mine, one bullet at a time. If it didn’t work for Australia, what makes these morons believe it will work here in the USA? There is a definite reason we have a second amendment. A more appropriate old saying could not state it better than this; “The Second guarantees the First”. Short, Sweet and Concise.

    Apparently lawyers and judges have forgotten about who they serve, because they are certainly trying to tear apart our Constitution. Judges swear an oath of allegiance to our Constitution, so when they pass any bill or law that counters our Constitution, they should be debarred and thrown off the bench. We can no longer allow one man wearing black fluffy robes to try and run the government from a court bench, which has been tried as of late.

    Courts do not run our government, our Congress does along with our president. AND THAT IS THE NAME OF THAT TUNE !

    1. Judges do not swear an oath to the Constitution. They theatrically make a commencement of such a induction when elected to the bench. But, a Judge is nothing more than a Lawyer wearing a Black Robe who became a Lawyer with the passing of the B.A.R. exam.

      B.A.R. = BRITISH ACCREDITATION REGISTRY.

      British….The Crown…..They work for the Crown using Maritime (Admiralty) Law, not Constitutional Law.

      They honor no Constitution.

    2. Gary J. Willis did just as you say. The neighbors didn’t jump in because it was just a single squad car. Until the shots rang out, it looked like a simple “welfare check”. And that, my friend, is how it will be done. No MRAPS and SWAT teams until things have gone WAY “south”.

  4. If Red Flag Laws are passed, today it is the so called extreme mentally ill they are after… A foot in the door to add to the list next week or next year or next decade. Look at your Tax from 1913, only the top one percent would ever see this tax… Now look at it…same here for Red Flag law. When the list is done, only Politicians and Hollywood will have guns. The rest of you are to insane to own one.

  5. Well written and thought out article. However, facts, data, and history do not matter to today’s leftists, regardless of their “education.”
    But, the author forgot to add the obstacles and costs to get your firearms back after they’ve been impounded by law enforcement, after one has been vindicated.

  6. Daisy Luther…really? I am a big supporter of your (excellent) prepping ideas and careful planning lists. Big supporter, even bought a book last week.not.

    I am also anti-non-hunting guns…shoot for food only. But I feel that the article about gun rights, and the Second Amendment, and ‘the government is coming for your guns’ contributes to the over-hyped idea that citizens NEED to arm themselves and that it is OK for assault weapons. As Trevor Noah said the other night: if you need 100 bullets to shoot a deer, maybe you should consider fishing.

    As a long time prepper, I think the best way to secure our futures is to encourage individual emergency preparedness, which you do so well. AND to engage with your neighbors and community for a regional response to potential emergencies…which increased guns do not.

    Let’s not feed the fear and anger. Let’s use our collective wisdom to assure and educate. And make the world safer for all of us.

    1. Angel, first of all, the Democrats have made it VERY clear that they are most definitely coming for the guns of law abiding citizens, should one of them get elected. Furthermore, your statement about needing 100 rounds to hunt a deer is mistaken. The 2nd amendment is NOT, I repeat is NOT about hunting. We have the right to keep and bear arms to defend against all enemies, foreign and domestic. Educate yourself.

      1. I wonder if it is only an innocent coincidence that, at the very same time we are hearing screams from the liberal Marxist-Communist left that they want to kick off Civil War 2 against the Red States, and at the very same time we see the (((enemies))) who own and control Hollywood announce that a new movie, titled The Hunt – due to hit the theaters in the Sept-Oct time frame – where the basic story line in this movie will feature armed-to-the-teeth, elite liberals hunting down and killing the ‘deplorables’ who voted for Trump, and at the very same time we see headline articles that quote Rocker Tommy Lee where he “Warns Trump Supporters: ‘We’re Going to Pay You Back So F*cking Hard for All This Sh*t’”….that at the very same time all these hate filled, Communist psychopaths are vomiting out all of these dangerous sounding threats of extreme violence – that the left and the RINO cuck gutless and treasonous fake right are all of a sudden obsessed with banning the most effective makes and models of modern firearm (AR’s) that would be the most useful by the residents in the Red States to defend themselves against these leftists who promise to murder them and their families in CW2?

        There wouldn’t be any connection here, would there?

    2. Really?? You think this is about fear mongering? When they come for your hunting guns and tell you to fish what will you say then?? If they can take even one gun, they will take them all. Then they take everything you have.
      The second amendment guarantees the first. No gun=no voice.

    3. Dear Angel what experience do you have in dealing with violence? If armed criminals broke into your home in the middle of the night what would you do? And why would you want to restrict the rights of other Americans to defend themselves and their families with the best tools available? You really need to think for yourself and stop repeating arguments that have been proven false.. If you call 911 expecting men and women to show up with glocks and AR’s with high capacity magazines they why shouldn’t a law abiding home be able to own the same to defend their family?

    4. Sorry, Angel, but the Second Amendment did not ask you (or the government) what you THOUGHT I “needed” or was “allowed” to have where guns are concerned. The Second Amendment is not about deer hunting. And quite frankly, those who are willing to carve up the Second Amendment a little a a time, should be forced to live in Venezuela-where they have no gun rights, or to the UK. Both countries would suit those who want to nickel and dime the Second Amendment into extinction. When only the crooked government is “allowed” to own guns, you can sure as hell bet you will not be safe.

  7. Congress should pass a law that any elected official that votes to implement this obviously unconstitutional law should be immediately removed from office and prohibited from holding any position of public trust for life.

    But getting a law passed that would do this is like asking the foxes to leave their post of guarding the henhouse. It may take stronger measures to remove these power hungry representatives.

  8. This is all very true. People should open their eyes. Think rationale. Fear this kind of federal overreach.

  9. This is a well written article.

    However a few points to consider.
    1) Our RIGHTS come from a divine creator. Not the constitution or the bill of rights. So stop hiding behind a dead document that is meant as a public notice to government that you have no authority beyond what’s listed.
    2) You fall for the belief that the law is there to protect YOU! Due process is nothing more than a guide sheet to oppression. The first thing they do upon arresting you is demand disclosure of all your assets, firearms, and restrict your ability to travel. Omit or make a mistake it’s a felony and additional crime.
    3) EVERY law prohibiting ownership, possession, and use of ARMS is a violation of the Constitution. That means for everyone and anyone. Hiding behind your preferred choices of who should have what is how we got here.
    4) Nothing will change until Republicans get over their love affair with a corrupt police state. The abuses conducted at every level of what passes for law enforcement is disgraceful.

    Ask yourself how effectively as a percentage is Government?

    That’s right think about it for a minute. Now ask yourself how the justice system as a conviction rate over 95%.

    None are so deluded as those that believe they are FREE.

  10. Daisy,

    A Very Good article and timely. People need to know that with the ebb and flow of political power and influences, what seems to serve them today may imprison them tomorrow. “Fire is a wonderful servant, but a tyrannical master,” as is “power.”

    On an unrelated note … I often read your articles while working and can either “click” on them through your Facebook page or directly from The Organic Prepper website, but I don’t have the opportunity to do both. Which would be more advantageous for your business model? I want to support you as best I can, and if one would help more than the other I want to comply.

  11. IF THEY CAN GET THE GUNS…EVERYTHING YOU OWN IS NEXT,if you KNOW the LORD JESUS,you also know COWARDS will not be allowed into heaven,IF you go down,you better be fighting when you do,OR HELL will be where your going,THE POLICE GANGS want a WAR,give them one……

    1. Amen Arizona, here in Tennessee some of these folks have spent more money on defensive weapons than the homes they reside in. If you support our military & law enforcement don’t come here violating our rights because we don’t differentiate the criminals based on badges & costumes all will be treated equally & Violently if necessary.(Damn there’s a red flag)

  12. We will not trade our BIRTHRIGHT for a pot of beans as ESAU did.
    The [U.S.] Constitution(Bill of RIGHTS) is a limitation on the government, not on private individuals … it does not prescribe the conduct of private individuals, only the conduct of the government … it is not a charter for government power, but a charter of the citizen’s protection against the government.” Ayn Rand
    We are the only country in the world that has a Second Amendment.
    Find one government in all of history that banned it’s own ARMED FORCES from “Keeping and Bearing” ARMS.
    Find one government in the history of humanity that felt a need to document a “RIGHT” for it’s ARMED FORCES to possess ARMS.
    Oppressive Governments are ALWAYS banning the People’S RIGHTS to arms.
    The claim that the Founding Fathers wrote the 2nd Amendment to give Our ARMED FORCES a “right” to keep and carry ARMS is S-T-U-P-I-D.
    The only reason for the Second Amendment is to clearly spell-out the GOD GIVEN RIGHT of INDIVIDUALS to keep & bear ARMS.
    The only reason for the BILL(list) of RIGHTS was to codify INDIVIDUALS’ GOD GIVEN RIGHTS.
    Has there ever been a government that was not chock full of it’s “rights” up to and including declaring itself to be the Lord God Almighty?! (Rome, Egypt, Israel,etc)
    Does the 1st Amendment mean the GOVERNMENT is allowed to give speeches? Try shutting up any Politician. But THEY would LOVE to shut YOU up, hence the FIRST Amendment.
    Anyone who tells you the 2nd Amendment applies to the Army or State Militia, is telling you they think you are STUPID.
    There has NEVER been a government that felt it had to codify it’s army’s/soldier’s “RIGHT” to “Keep and BEAR ARMS” because there has NEVER been a government that refused to allow It’s own soldiers to KEEP and BEAR ARMS!
    The Second Amendment was written for the People, like the other 9 Amendments in the Bill of Rights. This was confirmed by the SCOTUS in the DC vs Heller decision, where they stated that the “People” in the Second Amendment were the same “People” that are mentioned in the First and Fourth Amendment.
    The 2nd Amendment clearly codifies the “right of the PEOPLE to keep and bear arms”, and certainly not “the Militia”.
    Why would “the Militia”, a type of army manned by citizen-soldiers as opposed to full-time “regulars”, need a constitutional amendment to guarantee they have the right “to keep and bear arms”?
    Is there any specific statement anywhere in the Constitution that the army Congress is empowered to raise has the “right to keep and bear arms”? Of course not. …………. That is assumed.

  13. This article addresses multiple varied and complicated issues sort of like an indiscriminate spray of bullets into a crowd.

    Yes psychiatric diagnosis can be misused. On the other hand there is such a thing as mental illness. The big state mental institutions were often safe and not unhappy places for people who truly needed to be there, and who wound up as street people when they were deinstitutionalized. Some people with schizophrenia do need to be treated involuntarily as unless treated they have a completely distorted perception of reality. One young man I know of killed his grandmother, he thought at the order of an archangel. Now he is in prison, treated and aware of what he did. Before that his family tried without success to get treatment for him.

    Almost any law restraining or compelling people for a good purpose can also be misused. Does anyone doubt that there are some people, usually isolated young men with few prospects, who are dreaming of violent shootings to have for a short period a feeling of power and revenge for their sense of having been wronged by the world? If only we could find just those few before they kill people! Usually we cannot, but surely the desire is understandable. Is there no way to write a law which would help us prevent these young men from their outburst of rage and actually help them, without persecuting innocent people?

    1. Susan, you have to make a decision.
      Liberty or Security.
      If you choose Liberty, you get both.
      If you choose Security, you get neither.
      Mental people don’t need a gun to fulfill their intentions, they will use what’s convenient.
      This is a Spiritual problem first and foremost.
      Don’t let give up your rights, it can’t solve the problem, it can only make it worse.

  14. Red Flag Laws are Alice in Wonderland Solutions .They should be called Red Queen laws: “Sentence first-verdict afterwards”. Confiscate a law abiding citizen’s guns on the hunch that he may misuse them later and (maybe) give them back if he can prove he is innocent. You call that due process? The road to hell is paved with good intentions and that is exactly where this nation would end up.

  15. What a frightening country that we now live in, and we are running out of places to run to and hide in. Most of us just want to live our lives and be left alone. Patrick McLaw should get a good attorney and sue the bejesus out of Maryland. Instead of valuing him as an excellent teacher with 2 published books to his credit, they want to destroy him. We become more like Nazi Germany every day.

  16. A backdoor for gun confiscation nation wide. And also a huge chill on free speech. Now commenting in anyway that isn’t agreeable to leftists and the PTB can get you flagged. This comment on any conservative site could be seen by someone as reason enough.

  17. I don’t care how nasty a person is, RED FLAG LAWS ARE UNCONSTITUTIONAL The state had better drop back behind the line of scrimmage on this one, or we’ll throw a flag on the field ourselves.

    IF YOU ARE A COP AND YOU ARE NOT FOLLOWING OUR CONSTITUTION WHEN YOU HAVE SWORN AN OATH OF ALLEGIANCE TO IT, THEN YOU ARE IN VIOLATION OF IT, AND THUS ARE A CRIMINAL.

    If you try to confiscate someones guns when you come loaded for bear, don’t expect to walk up to a law abiding home of a patriot and expect he’ll just bend over so you can shove the barrel of your gun up his butt. You boys have now become the criminals and will be treated accordingly.

    When you start taking away people’s rights because of fear, it will never stop, because hysteria is like a line of dominoes, once it starts, there is no stopping it. When men allow their egos, (read cops), when they are carrying, they begin to believe in their invincibility and righteousness of doing the states bullying. There will come a time when the people will start fighting back and the first line of offense to be taken out will be the LEOs. Is that really what you boys want ?

  18. I, being from Cuba, know exactly what the author of this great article is talking about!! 100%correct!! When Fidel Castro got power, he forced the people to give up their their arms, and the sheep did exactly that, and now have a tyrannical government ruling over them that is seemingly imppssible to get rid of, since the population IS NOT ARMED, ONLY THE GOVERNMENT!! Bearing arms in this Nation is NOT a privilege, IT IS A CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT!!

    THOSE WHO ACT LIKE SHEEP, WILL BE EATEN BY WOLVES!! something to think about!!

  19. This like any and all laws or regulations to chip away at God’s and the constitutional rights, are not for communism , but for the will of Satan. Put your differences aside, and unite to fight a common cause, for it is also Satan that divides so that we will not do this.

  20. Today’s AmericanThinker.com article plus comments on a non-obvious evil of “red flag laws” is vital to this discussion – about how innocent people can be killed through the ugliness of “swatting”:

    https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2019/08/red_flag_laws_just_legitimize_swatting.html

    And while the establishment media will easily discuss other countries’ weaponization of the mental illness industry (Stalin comes to mind), they are much less willing to cover this country’s ghastly commission of the same evil.

    When FDR could not find sufficient legal grounds to charge Ezra Pound who had broadcast some criticisms of FDR and the Federal Reserve while in wartime Italy, Pound was incarcerated in St Elizabeth’s mental ward up until 1957. Stalin would have applauded FDR.

    When the nation’s first Secretary of Defense, James Forrestal, was forced out of office in 1949 and into mental confinement on the 16th floor of a similar hospital, he was thrown out of a window of that 16th floor, and left behind a suicide note in somebody else’s handwriting — which the captive media of that day failed to mention.

    When the two US army crypto operators (one in France, and one in Scotland) picked up message traffic by the planners of the JFK assassination a couple of weeks before the hit, upon reporting their independent discoveries to their superiors, the mental hospital scam destroyed their careers.

    The point is that tyrants even in this country have a history of abusing the mental health industry, and will obviously do it whenever they get the opportunity.

    —Lewis

  21. PERFECT FOR RED FLAG

    The Civil Rights Act of 1871 is a federal statute, numbered 42 U.S.C. § 1983, that allows people to sue the government for civil rights violations. It applies when someone acting “under color of” state-level or local law has deprived a person of rights created by the U.S. Constitution or federal statutes.
    Related Products
    MORE
    Criminal Law: A Desk Reference
    Criminal Law: A Desk Reference
    Legal Research
    Legal Research
    The Criminal Law Handbook
    The Criminal Law Handbook

    Lawyers sometimes refer to cases brought under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 as “Section 1983” lawsuits. Section 1983 can apply in many scenarios, and claims under it don’t have to involve violence. But it’s often invoked when someone claims to be the victim of excessive police force.

    18 U.S. Code § 242 – Deprivation of rights under color of law | U.S. …
    https://www.law.cornell.edu › … › Part I. CRIMES › Chapter 13. CIVIL RIGHTS
    18 U.S. Code § 242. … and if bodily injury results from the acts committed in violation of this section or if such acts include the use, attempted use, or threatened …
    18 U.S. Code § 241 – Conspiracy against rights | U.S. Code | US Law …
    https://www.law.cornell.edu › … › Part I. CRIMES › Chapter 13. CIVIL RIGHTS
    They shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both; and if death results from the acts committed in violation of this section or if such …

  22. THE ILLEGAL RED FLAG LAWS, WITH OUT DUE PROCESS MIGHT ALSO COME UNDER THE HOBBS/RICO ACTS. TAKING OF PROPERTY (GUNS) ILLEGALLY. LIKE ROBBERY, EXTORTION THREAT OF ARREST.

    2402. Hobbs Act — Generally | JM | Department of Justice
    he Hobbs Act prohibits actual or attempted robbery or extortion affecting interstate or foreign commerce “in any way or degree.” Section 1951 also proscribes conspiracy to commit robbery or extortion without reference to the conspiracy statute at 18 U.S.C. § 371. The statutory prohibition of “physical violence to any person or property in furtherance of a plan or purpose to do anything in violation of this section” is confined to violence for the purpose of committing robbery or extortion. United States v. Franks, 511 F.2d 25, 31 (6th Cir. 1975) (rejecting the view that the statute proscribes all physical violence obstructing, delaying, or affecting commerce as contrasted with violence designed to culminate in robbery or extortion).

    The extortion offense reaches both the obtaining of property “under color of official right” by public officials and the obtaining of property by private actors with the victim’s “consent, induced by wrongful use of actual or threatened force, violence, or fear,” including fear of economic harm. See this Manual at 2405 and Evans v. United States, 504 U.S. 255, 265, 112 S.Ct. 1181, 1188 (1992) (only a private individual’s extortion of property by the wrongful use of force, violence, or fear requires that the victim’s consent be induced by these means; extortion of property under color of official right does not require that a public official take steps to induce the extortionate payment).

    RICO ACT
    The RICO Act provides both criminal and civil penalties. This means claims can be brought by prosecutors on behalf of the government, or by private individuals. In criminal prosecutions, the jury must be convinced of the defendant’s guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. This is the highest burden of proof that exists in the American legal system. Violations are punishable by up to 20 years in prison. The sentence can be increased to life in prison if authorized by the underlying crime. Offenders also face a fine of either $250,000, or double the amount of the proceeds earned from the activity.

    In July 2017, two former Baltimore police officers pleaded guilty to federal racketeering charges. They, along with few more members of Baltimore’s Gun Trace Task Force, were accused of scheming to steal money, property, and narcotics by way of detaining individuals, entering residences, conducting traffic stops, and swearing out false search warrant affidavits.

  23. All kinds of problems happen when you take GOD out of your society and base it on the left’s liberalism where YOU get to be God.

    You promoted abortion, atheism, eviloution, illegal immigration and now human lives and America mean NOTHING anymore and has resulted in the rise of the sodomites and gay “marriages” to help wipe out the nuclear family – the basis of any society.

    Harsh people deserve harsh rulers as any TURD world native will tell you. Return back to your God and banish the Left from your society and peace and rule of law will return to your land.

  24. American Psychiatric Asso says Half of Americans are mentally ill..
    300 million prescriptions for psychiatric drugs were written in 2009 alone..
    Your children on medication for ADHD?
    Single woman with children diagnosed with depression?
    be careful what you ask for

  25. Being labeled ‘mentally ill’ is the attack used by despots.. the number-one go-to excuse for mass murder and indefinite detention by tyrannical oligarchies is the accusation of “insanity”…crazy, insane, a loon, batshit, you name it..

    There are over 370 “mental disorders” listed in the latest version of the DSM (Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders.) The list includes “Tobacco Addiction Disorder” among other equally mundane and ridiculous so-called “mental illnesses.”
    If the DSM is the standard by which politicians wishes to remove our rights to own guns, then I’d guess 90% of the American people could probably be classified with a mental disorder of one kind or another.
    BEWARE, BEWARE

    1. What the heck are you talking about, Rich?

      Of course, it’s moderated. Every decent site is moderated unless you want spammers trying to sell you counterfeit Nikes and drugs for herpes and impotence.

      There are a few other things we do not permit. For example, we also do not allow personal attacks and racist comments that do not add to the conversation. If a person is just coming here to insult others, it has no place on my website.

      Best wishes,
      Daisy

Leave a Reply

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

You Need More Than Food to Survive
50-nonfood-stockpile-necessities

In the event of a long-term disaster, there are non-food essentials that can be vital to your survival and well-being. Make certain you have these 50 non-food stockpile essentials. Sign up for your FREE report and get prepared.

We respect your privacy.
Malcare WordPress Security