The author of this article is herself a victim of violent crime, where a gun was used by a mentally ill stalker who murdered her husband in front of her.
“If someone is a danger to themself or others, simply taking away guns is not a serious response. That person can still harm or kill and it does not get them the help they need.” What i have said repeatedly since the first time I heard of Red Flag Laws.
Red flag laws are not necessary to prevent dangerous people from having guns. These laws are unconstitutional, as they put the accused in a position of being assumed guilty until proven innocent. Taking away a citizen’s guns before a hearing occurs in a courtroom is incredibly wrong. If someone is a danger to themself or others, simply taking away guns is not a serious response. That person can still harm or kill and it does not get them the help they need.
If you listen to the mainstream media on a regular basis, you have likely heard talking heads espouse about the importance of red flag laws in preventing what they call “gun-violence.” The far left would have you believe that anyone opposed to red-flag laws must want innocent people to die. They must put their love of guns before innocent lives. This is simply not true.
As a victim of a violent crime myself, where a gun was used by a mentally ill stalker to murder my husband in-front of me, one would think I’d support red flag laws. I do not. Why? Because I believe due process is incredibly important and absolutely must be upheld before anyone has their constitutional rights taken from them. Red flag laws can and are abused by those who seek revenge for any number of reasons, including situations such as divorce, arguments and differences in politics.
By Nikki Goeser
