Now that red flag laws are going in place in numerous states there’s a lot of data being generated.
One such place is Massachusetts, which recently passed a red flag law. Now, it’s touting the success of it.
Police seized weapons and ammunition last year belonging to six people deemed to be a threat to themselves or others under the state’s new “red flag” law, according to newly released data.
The law, passed in the wake of school shootings and signed by Gov. Charlie Baker in July, allows police, friends or relatives of a legal gun owner to seek a so-called “extreme risk protection order” if they believe that person poses a risk to themselves or others. The order gives police authority to temporarily confiscate that person’s firearms.
Data released by the state’s Trial Court shows the law, which went into effect in mid-August, has been used to confiscate firearms belonging to at least six people.
Most were white men but other details — such as names, addresses, the type and amount of weapons and ammunition seized, and the circumstances —were not disclosed. Cases were handled by local courts in Milford, Hingham, Quincy, Holyoke, Ayer and Brockton.
Supporters of the red-flag law say the data show people are taking advantage of it.
Because opponents of the bill always argued that the issue was that people wouldn’t take advantage of it.
I mean, I know I’ve written thousands of words about how the problem wasn’t that people would misuse this to punish folks they disagreed with but that people wouldn’t use them.
Sweet merciful John Moses Browning, really? That’s the takeaway?
Further, I’m not sure what to make of the inclusion of these being white men into the mix. I honestly don’t care what their skin tone is. What I care about is that six people were deprived of their Second Amendment rights because someone claimed they were a threat to themselves or others. What I care about is how many of these six men actually were a threat to anyone and how many just pissed off someone who wanted to make them pay.
I’m also surprised there were that many people still with guns in the People’s Republic of Massachusetts, you know?
Seriously, the issue here has never been a concern that people wouldn’t use these. Look at our arguments. No one has thought that. Not from the first time the laws were proposed.
So why is their use an automatic success?
The answer to that is simple. It’s a success simply because that’s all these laws are really about. They’re not about public safety. They’re not about keeping anyone from harm.
These laws are nothing more than about taking guns away from people. Right now, it’s people they think represent some immediate threat, but I’m going to let you know something. They see all of us as a threat and given enough time, they’ll try to find ways to disarm us.
So no, no one has ever been concerned no one would take advantage of these laws. The concern is that people will under the wrong circumstances. Where are the statistics showing me that hasn’t happened?
Just what I thought.