It seems progressive left is renewing its efforts to deprive Americans of their right to defend themselves by making it easier for authorities to confiscate their firearms.
11 States are currently considering measures that would empower judges to bar citizens from owning guns if they determine the citizen in question poses a “threat” to themselves or others. The proposed measures, called Gun Violence Restraining Order, will permit police to raid homes and seize people’s firearms without so much as telling them and prohibit targeted individuals from purchasing guns and ammo.
Such orders, while only on the table in New York, Pennsylvania, New Jersey, Delaware, Virginia, Wisconsin, Illinois, Missouri, Minnesota, Michigan, and Massachusetts, are already on the books in California and Connecticut.
The California version of the law is especially draconian, as it requires nothing more than the word of a family member or law enforcement officer that someone is mentally ill for them to have their guns confiscated.
While California has always been known for anti-gun policies, the state’s Gun Violence Restraining Orders have made it even more difficult for people who try to exercise their Second Amendment rights there.
Let the Sunshine State be an example to gun owners of what will happen if their state legislators pass similar measures:
“The rationale behind the California bill was to keep firearms out of the hands of potential mass killers, such as Elliot Rodger, who killed six people in Isla Vista, California, in 2014. News reports indicate the family tried to get law enforcement to take Rodger’s guns prior to the killing spree. Researchers also say that gun confiscation can prevent suicides. Jeffrey Swanson, a psychiatry professor at Duke University, believes that a Connecticut gun confiscation law that’s been on the books since 1999 has saved 100 lives, Atlantic writer Dan Friedman wrote. The Connecticut law that Swanson studied is different from the California law and allows only law enforcement to request risk warrants, the NRA’s Institute for Legislative Action noted.
Second Amendment-rights groups say they understand the intent behind the laws but believe that gun owners should have a right to make their case first.
‘It’s important for gun owners to have the opportunity to put up their own defense before losing their Second Amendment rights,’ the NRA said in a statement on its website.
When Connecticut legislators wanted to strengthen that state’s law and make it similar to California’s law, the NRA argued that the proposal had “low evidentiary standards” and allowed “doctors and family members, including even distant relatives, ex-husbands or ex-wives, to strip” gun owners of their rights. The Connecticut proposal eventually failed, but other states are considering similar legislation.”