There has already been a study done on existing Red Flag Laws that showed them to only be effective about 5% of the time. Unfortunately, I don't have a link.
It doesn't really matter how effective they are. I know that is a harsh thing to say, but it makes it no less true. It would also be effective to implement 100% gun control. IOW, no guns whatsoever. None in private hands, none in police hands, none in military hands. Of course, this can't be done, but it would be effective. Red Flag Laws, as has already been discussed and demonstrated numerous times, are obviously gross violations of our Constitution. The Constitution is the underpinning of all our laws and the country itself. You throw out the Constitution and what do you have? Just a bunch of land and people with no system of laws and probably tyranny. Our Constitution has already been violated way too much. Especially the 2nd Amendment.
It sounds like your real beef is with the government over the tightening of laws allowing family members to be committed. Violating Due Process isn't a substitute for this.
Except that I’m not talking about current red flag policy, I’m talking about increasing the likelyhood of identifying true mentally ill people, which in turn WILL make Red Flags more reliable.
Look I understand the absolutist views on the 2nd Amendment, but they will not survive, and you know it, so why not improve the ability to identify truly menally ill people so that we become more efficient at it, and have less reasons to infringe on honest, healthy gun owners.
If you think in this day and age of rampant drug use and mental illness, coupled with Internet hate, that we can survive with absolute gun rights, I’m sorry to say you are fighting a valiant fight, but a losing fight.
