Well folks, it’s starting. As much as we like to believe people when they say “we’re not coming for your guns,” it’s hard not to feel that they are.
Of course, not OVERTLY, but still…
Just this week, the governor of New Mexico, Michelle Lujan Grisham, signed a law allowing the state’s courts to temporarily seize firearms from those people it deems a danger to themselves or others.
Called the “Extreme Risk Firearm Protection Order Act, it adds New Mexico to a growing list of 17 other states in the union which allow law enforcement to take away guns from people they consider dangerous.
So, we can all agree that people who are dangerous shouldn’t be owning firearms. The problem is, we can’t always agree who is dangerous.
So that’s one thing.
The other thing is, the governor issued a fairly clear and firm warning to her state’s law enforcement population: enforce this or else.
The “or else” turns out to be resign your post. In other words, get with this program or get out.
"They cannot not enforce," she said. "And if they really intend to do that, they should resign as a law enforcement officer and leader in that community."
Not surprisingly, laws of this type have faced opposition from both gun rights activists and law enforcement officials (often one and the same). CNN reports (obviously, duh) that both groups say these laws violate Second Amendment rights and don’t allow due process.
Over the weekend, Tony Mace, the head of the New Mexico Sheriffs' Association, wrote that these so-called red flag laws don't give gun owners an opportunity to defend themselves against an initial confiscation order.
"Citizens have a right to bear arms and we cannot circumvent that right when they have not even committed a crime or even been accused of committing one," Mace wrote.
"'Shall not be infringed' is a very clear and concise component of an Amendment that our forefathers felt was important enough to be recognized immediately following freedom of speech and religion."
Yup. Yup. What happens when “authorities” decide people with tattoos could potentially be dangerous. Or those with a funny last name. Or a different color skin.
Who decides what is dangerous and what isn’t? We’ve already been told law enforcement is doing too much “profiling.”
Exactly why do we want to give more power to government to force us to disarm?
You know the story about the frog in the pot of water, right? Throw a frog into a pot of boiling water and it will jump out. But put Kermit into a pot of cool water and slowly turn up the temperature, and he’ll be dead before he notices.