Extreme Risk of Tyranny

What Are Extreme Risk Laws? Red flag laws seek to temporarily remove guns and prohibit future purchases of gun for those individuals who have been identified as being in crisis and presenting a significant risk of harming themselves or the community at large. There are two opposing views to the passage of red flags laws. This week, I will be examining the arguments in favor of and in opposition of red flag laws.

APM Research Lab conducted a study of 1,000 American adults from July 16 to 21, 2019. This was just two weeks prior to the mass shootings in El Paso, Texas and Dayton, Ohio.[i] The study found that over three-fourths of those surveyed supported family-initiated red flag laws. For police-initiated red flag laws the support dropped slightly to seventy (70%) percent.[ii] The Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence reports in their fact sheet on red flag laws that two other studies conducted in 2015 and 2017 had similar results from those polled.[iii] Senator Lindsey Graham of South Carolina has publicly declared his support of passage of red flag laws at the state level.[iv] Following the shootings in El Paso, Texas and Dayton, Ohio, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell from Kentucky and Senator Richard Blumenthal of Connecticut have expressed their support for red flag laws.[v]

The advocates of red flags laws promote the limited number of people who can request the protective order from a court. The laws limit the individuals who can request the order to law enforcement or family members. However, some states have expanded the list of individuals to include romantic partners or cohabitants.[vi]

Proponents of red flag laws state that a judge can order the temporary removal of guns from an individual once evidence has been presented that shows the individual is a risk of inflicting harm on himself or the public at large. The judge can issue the order prior to a hearing on an ex parte basis, but the individual is entitled to a hearing and the opportunity to present his own evidence refuting the petition’s allegations.[vii] This temporary removal of guns will save lives is the argument made.[viii] Proponents of the laws also state that the current laws in effect require evidence to be presented before the order can be issued and include punishments for filing false petitions. The punishments may include fines or jail time.[ix]