Red flag laws. They make sense and have precedent and legal statute to back them up.

[flamin lib]

One make-sense outcome of Parkland is that 13 states have passed "red flag" laws that authorize law enforcement to remove guns from people who may be a danger to themselves or others should a complaint be filed.

The gun rights side of the argument claims due process is violated by these laws and that they are a violation of the 4th Amendment. This is the argument that the gun lobby uses to vehemently oppose any such law but is it really a violation of due process?

I don't think so. according to https://lawshelf.com/courseware/entry/exceptions-to-the-warrant-requirement there are 6 exceptions to getting a search warrant before a search and seizure.

One is "consent". Consent isn't limited to the individual to be searched or whose property is seized. It extends to "a person reasonably believed by an officer to have authority to give such consent". The example cited on the website above is:

" If a suspect’s "significant other" provides police with a key to the suspect’s apartment, and police reasonably believe that she lives there, the search will not violate suspect’s Fourth Amendment rights even if she did not live there and even if she, in fact, lacked authority to consent. See Illinois v. Rodriguez, 497 U.S. 177 (1990)"

The cite goes on to explain that a 6 year old can't give consent however it seems plain to me that reasonable belief should extend to an adult who is intimately aware of an individual's circumstances such as a significant other, parent, employer or even a next door neighbor.

The gun rights movement absolutely opposes such laws regardless of safeguards like appeal or court approval. This is nothing more than a corruption of the 4th Amendment equal to the corruption of the 2nd Amendment.

So if their worst case takes place a gun owner surrenders his weapons until an appeal takes place. If our worst case scenario takes place people die.

And there is no appeal.

[Bayard]

1. I think they already confiscate guns in a restraining order situation

At least, that's what the judge/cops said when I was granted one against my evil neighbors in Calif.

[flamin lib]

2. Yes, you're right.

However restraining orders are different from red flags. Only a domestic partner or someone directly under threat can get a RS. Red flags open that up to school employees, relatives not living with the individual and others who are acquainted with the one who may be suspected a danger to anyone.

That's not exactly accurate (short hand) but the point of red flag is to broaden the scope of who can invoke what is effectively a wide ranging RS. Gun rights seem to trump (no pun) any number of things that otherwise make sense.