Sneaky Congress Hides Red Flag in National Defense Authorization Act

Red Flag Gun Grab Laws
Sneaky Congress Hides Red Flag in National Defense Authorization Act

WASHINGTON, D.C.-( is hiding a red flag law in the William M. (Mac) Thornberry National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) for the Fiscal Year 2021 (H.R. 6395).

The NDAA authorizes the military to “red flag” anyone subject to the Uniform Code of Military Conduct. According to the NDAA, a friend or relative could report the service member as “abusive.” An ex parte “court” will hear the claims of the friend or relative and decided whether to take firearms away from the accused. The gun owner doesn’t have a chance to defend themselves or even know that someone is accusing them of abuse.

In the civilian world, law enforcement and the courts refer to red flag laws as Extreme Risk Protection Orders (ERPO). The NDAA refers to these red flag laws as Military Court Gun Confiscation Orders (GCOs). Even though the names of the rules are different, both laws work primarily the same way. Like ERPOs, GCOs lack due process. The court would assume the military member is guilty of abuse until they could prove their innocence as a later date.

According to gun rights advocates, the same service members that swear an oath to the Constitution will lose their Constitutionally guaranteed rights under the new NDAA. Military police or SWAT teams would carry out a raid of the gun owner’s house in the middle of the night to strip them of their gun rights.

The service member would then have to prove their innocence to get their firearms back from the same government that they are protecting.

The NDAA leaves a lot of gray areas in the GCO provision that would be filled in by the future White House administration. If an anti-gun politician becomes President, like Democrat Presidential Candidate Joe Biden, then the amount of evidence needed to strip the rights of the service member decrease or the amount of evidence to get the guns back would increase significantly. Anti-gun politicians seem to have this flexibility built into the NDAA intentionally.

Politicians have slipped in this Constitutionally questionable provision into the NDAA under cover of darkness. Politicians on both sides on the aisle have been quiet over the inclusion of the GCO provision. It is unknown why there is silence from self-proclaimed pro-gun Republicans on the issue of GCOs in the NDAA. Some gun rights advocates theorize that they do not know that the provision is in the NDAA. Others feel the Republicans are compromising with anti-gun Democrats to get the NDAA passed through the House of Representatives.

Certain “pro-gun” Republicans are open to Red Flag laws. Dan Crenshaw purports to be pro-gun, but he has called for Red Flag laws in the past.

Gun Owners of America is asking all their members to email their representatives and asking them to oppose H.R. 6395. The gun-rights group is also asking their members to call their representatives at 202-225-3121 to ask them to protect the rights of those that protect us.

Gun Owners of America created an easy to use form at

About John Crump

John is a NRA instructor and a constitutional activist. He is the former CEO of Veritas Firearms, LLC and is the co-host of The Patriot News Podcast which can be found at John has written extensively on the patriot movement including 3%’ers, Oath Keepers, and Militias. In addition to the Patriot movement, John has written about firearms, interviewed people of all walks of life, and on the Constitution. John lives in Northern Virginia with his wife and sons and is currently working on a book on leftist deplatforming methods and can be followed on Twitter at @crumpyss, on Facebook at realjohncrump, or at

Most Voted
Newest Oldest
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

Our forefathers would be shooting by now……



uncle dudley

Congress never votes on a clean or single item bills, they always have riders or amendments attached where they hide the pork or laws they know that will upset their base.
I guess they think they are smarter than us and can get away with it, these people forget real quick who they work for once they hit D.C. and we need to remind them from time to time by voting them out of office.


Someone needs to attach a rider or amendment on a bill making it illegal to attach a rider or amendment on a bill.


This is what most of the past Presidents want the power to Line Item Veto’s so they could stop the Attachments from just being past when a bill is signed, of course the House and Senate won’t pass this because they can’t get their pet projects through if they lose this power, brings to mind current nice little projects by Pelosie and the CV19 bills that Trump is trying to get through, look at what the Demo-Rats are attaching to them!!!!!!!!!!!!! Don’t forget about TERM LIMITS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Get Out

Kick the door down of one of these guys at 0200 to execute an ERPO or GCO and the outcome may not be what these buffoons hoped for.


Yeah……….. too bad the smelly fecal remnant that wrote the bill isn’t in on the raid (to take on in the noggin).
Remember these politicians……


Let me get this straight, you’re in the military, say you’re a Marine. Every Marine’s basic job is a Rifleman. You have taken away his rifle, now what?

Who’s going to fight the wars Congress declares, these useless law makers?


You were entirely credible in your thesis until you used the word “Masonic.” The Founding Fathers of our nation were nearly all Masons.


And many/some of them owned slaves. What is your point?

Silence DoGood

Except, the American Patriots belonged to the “Free and Accepted” Masonic Lodge, while their British opponents and American Tory supporters belonged to the “Scottish Rite” lodge; a sharp distinction at the time…now lost in time. Much later both of these Masonic Lodges were sadly merged.

John Dow

I’m reading the bill – I don’t see what’s referred to in the above article. Section 542 is about protective orders, and it reads pretty much like any state’s law. PURPOSE AND FORM OF ISSUANCE.—A military court protective order may be issued for the purpose of protecting a victim of an alleged sex or domestic violence offense, or a family member or associate of the victim, from a person subject to chapter 47 of this title (the Uniform Code of Military Justice) who is alleged to have committed such an offense. The term used above ( Military Court Gun Confiscation… Read more »

Last edited 2 years ago by John Dow
a.x. perez

If the bosses are going to insist on Red Flag Laws they should include the following safeguards: Hearing to determine whether or not to return weapons must be held within 72 hours of order being served. Complainant must be present or order will be vacated. Obviously from above, no anonymous complaints. Order must be served between 900 hours and 2100 hours. (no midnight raids resulting in gun fights). If order is served as part of a divorce attorney to party must pay all court costs, even if gets favorable decision. If order is overturned weapons must be returned the day… Read more »


Mac Thornberry is my rep. He just got a letter.

Mystic Wolf

Just call the dems what they really are satan worshipping DEMONcrats, that’s right they are DEMONS just one look at their face and eyes will tell you that, the eyes of a demon are as black as coal and it shows in the face as well.


Nothing at all said about this in the WH summary. Stop trying to insight shit, we have enough crap going on as it is.


When I was in the military the ‘powers that be’ could search the serviceman’s quarters any damned time they wanted to and confiscate anything desired, and they did. They didn’t find what they were looking for, but that did not disprove the assumption of guilt on the part of the serviceman.


Why don’t these people have the courage to say, “we don’t like the Constitution!”


Dan Crenshaw …….. isn’t that the one-eye (“hero”) guy??


THANK YOU for including the take action link! Now if we could just get ole Harold to do the same.


One already largely looses their 2A rights when entering the military.