Any proposed “red flag” gun law at the federal level should have two key amendments added before it makes its way to the House and Senate floor. After all, if seeking an “extreme risk protection order” against someone you know is OK for guns, why stop there?
The two amendments:
Anyone who has a reasonable belief that someone they know is going to create an Internet account (Facebook, Twitter, etc.) and engage in libel, slander, unlawful harassment, copyright infringement, etc., can seek and be granted an ex parte order from a court. That order would direct law enforcement to seize that person’s electronic devices, including phones, and disable that person’s Internet access until judicial proceedings can take place.
Any prospective father who has a reasonable belief that his wife/girlfriend/etc. is contemplating an abortion can seek and be granted an ex parte order from a court. That order would direct law enforcement to take the prospective mother into custody–prospective custody for the unborn child, that is–until judicial proceedings can taken place.
These are not unreasonable, of course. They merely maintain the status quo and prevent crimes or other violations of the law from happening. As David French would say, these two amendments merely fill the gaps in existing law by granting standing to a defined, limited universe of people to seek temporary orders to maintain the status quo. Properly drafted, these amendments can save lives while also protecting individual liberty!
Any proposed “red flag” gun law at the federal level should have two key amendments added before it makes its way to the House and Senate floor. After all, if seeking an “extreme risk protection order” against someone you know is OK for guns, why stop there?
The two amendments:
Anyone who has a reasonable belief that someone they know is going to create an Internet account (Facebook, Twitter, etc.) and engage in libel, slander, unlawful harassment, copyright infringement, etc., can seek and be granted an ex parte order from a court. That order would direct law enforcement to seize that person’s electronic devices, including phones, and disable that person’s Internet access until judicial proceedings can take place.
Any prospective father who has a reasonable belief that his wife/girlfriend/etc. is contemplating an abortion can seek and be granted an ex parte order from a court. That order would direct law enforcement to take the prospective mother into custody–prospective custody for the unborn child, that is–until judicial proceedings can taken place.
These are not unreasonable, of course. They merely maintain the status quo and prevent crimes or other violations of the law from happening. As David French would say, these two amendments merely fill the gaps in existing law by granting standing to a defined, limited universe of people to seek temporary orders to maintain the status quo. Properly drafted, these amendments can save lives while also protecting individual liberty!