Opinion
Texas/United States – -(AmmoLand.com)- The controversy over “red flag” laws, also known as Emergency Response Protection Orders (ERPO), is not going away. Anti-Second Amendment extremists have been pushing versions that are being signed into law. The first problem is that those versions have real problems. The second problem is that after the repeated screw-ups of the bumbling cowards of Broward County and the FBI’s fumbling of two tips prior to Parkland, there is a real desire to see some form of EPRO passed.
Now, Senator Marco Rubio is coming under fire for his support of one flawed bill – but Rubio is no foe of our rights. The fact is, Second Amendment supporters owe Rubio a huge debt of gratitude for outing the desire of Bloomberg and his ilk to ban all semi-automatic firearms during that CNN orgy of Second Amendment shaming they claimed was a town hall. Rubio, even though his current bill is flawed, is likely to be open to polite feedback about the problems with that bill. But that feedback needs to be backed up by a push from other pro-Second Amendment officials.
There is good news: Senator Ted Cruz of Texas, a very strong supporter of our rights, is working to highlight matters of concern for Second Amendment supporters on the “red flag”/ERPO issue.
During a hearing on the Protecting Communities and Preserving the Second Amendment Act, he questioned David Kopel of the Independence Institute as to which states did protect due process.
Kopel noted that Connecticut had an excellent procedure for starting the “red flag” process by requiring an independent investigation prior to a hearing. He also praised Vermont’s system for not only having penalties for false and malicious allegations, but also for allowing someone who did get placed in a “red flag” law to hand the firearms over to a federally licensed dealer or to someone else.
Some might complain that Cruz is “negotiating rights away” or selling out, but that is not the case. He’s giving vulnerable pro-Second Amendment supporters cover to oppose the “red flag” laws proposed by anti-Second Amendment extremists. The testimony Cruz elicited in question also managed to reveal the insincerity of one major gun control group, which opposed a process to create a uniform “red flag” law with due process protections.
It’s not – it’s smart strategy. The fact of the matter is that we can’t beat every anti-Second Amendment proposal with nothing but assertions that it violates the Second Amendment. Sometimes, we need to have an alternative proposal so that elected officials who support the Second Amendment can have cover to vote against the worst anti-Second Amendment proposals.
In the best case, it means our rights remain intact for the short term, buying us time to educate the general public and win hearts and minds. In the worst case, it limits the damage done to our rights. But both options help keep the pro-Second Amendment officials in place, where they can slice away at bad laws, advance good legislation, and even limit damage when all else fails. Before you damn the pre-ILA NRA for the 1968 Gun Control Act, remember that LBJ wanted a federal licensing and registration scheme – and the NRA stopped it.
Keep in mind, Ted Cruz came off a shockingly close Senate race against Beto O’Rourke last year. He will need Second Amendment supporters to pull him over the line in 2024, whether for another presidential run or for re-election to the Senate. The focus every two years should be to not only keep him and those like him in office, but to send them reinforcements and to educate the public so as to increase our options against the anti-Second Amendment nonsense too many politicians introduce.
About Harold Hutchison
Writer Harold Hutchison has more than a dozen years of experience covering military affairs, international events, U.S. politics and Second Amendment issues. Harold was consulting senior editor at Soldier of Fortune magazine and is the author of the novel Strike Group Reagan. He has also written for the Daily Caller, National Review, Patriot Post, Strategypage.com, and other national websites.
From the peanut gallery; Harold has some valid points. Folks can rant and rave all day long about “shall not be infringed” , but where does that really get you? Did someone “like” you on Facebook? Did you get a re tweet (or however that works)? What good did that attitude really do? Folks say things like “come and take them” or “stack it high and deep”, but are they actually doing anything to further the cause? IDK. If folks are waiting until they have to use guns and ammo to persuade, it will be too late. That is a… Read more »
As always the devil is in the details. There are ERPO laws that would be infringements of the Second Amendment, and ERPO law which would not. The latter would impose an order for a person to not have access to firearms only after due process of law, including the right for the person intended to be denied access to firearms to present witnesses, question witnesses against him/her, and the like, and would be subject both to appeal and to automatic review after some period of time, and have as a basis for the order a clear showing that the person… Read more »
No amount of “cove”, no amount of compromise, no amount of concession to due process, hides the fact that these laws, as written and implemented, are a gun confiscation.
So long as these laws only remove firearms from the supposed dangerous person, they are a gun confiscation.
If the person is a danger, why is he or she left with cars, gas cans, axes, knives, ropes, and a whole lot of other implements that can be used to kill with?
As Nancy Reagan admonished, ‘Just Say No!”
why is it that no talks about the origin of disarming the people comes from. it is from a foreign source. someone outsider, unelected body of world want to be controllers. they have their own constitution, there by our constitution not considered…Hint: this same foreign group of unelected officials are also the ones feeding the NGO’s THAT FORCE A THIRD WORLD POPULATION ON ALL NATIONS…open borders. we already have background checks, we need to do what those laws are suppose to do. stop trying to punish all for a crime of a few. they want this sanctuary garbage and release… Read more »
If the entire government was controlled by the Democrats, there would be no confusion in identifying of the enemy.
We can beat all anti 2A laws with bullets. #NOCOMPROMISE #SHALLNOTBEINFRINGED #IKEPTMYBUMPSTOCKS All politicians are scum
Compromise is failure.
ITS ALL UNCONSITUTIONAL….THIS IS EXACTLY WHAT HITLER WANTED AN GOT…NOW 80-85 YEAR LATER SOME PEOPLE IN THIS COUNTRY THIS SORT OF BEHAVOR IS WHAT AMERICA NEEDS…SICK…SICK…SICK..
Due Process is the core to our fundamental Rights; to so easily crack that core with feel good legislation, (which deprives a citizen of that basic dignity not only protected by, but guaranteed in, our Constitution and Bill of Rights), is foreign to our 243 year strong System of American Jurisprudence and must be challenged and vigorously fought against at every level of government, State and federal! Otherwise, a false safety results, gun confiscation first, due process second results, abuses of the system become the new norm, freedom and liberty reduced to mere cold words printed on paper, ink spots… Read more »
I hear a lot of talk about watering the tree of liberty, etc.. Big talk, mostly complaining. Ask yourself “what have I REALLY DONE to protect the rights of myself and others. Do you donate to GOA, TSRA, NRA, etc. Do you show up during state or congressional hearings? Do you write your congressmen, OR DO YOU JUST COMPLAIN, and strut around like a rooster?