Raising a red flag over ‘red-flag laws’

Amid intense political debates over gun violence, so-called red-flag laws and other gun control policies that impact the free exercise of our Second Amendment rights are the cause of the moment. While proponents argue that such policies foster public safety, restricting individual rights presents a dangerous slippery slope.

Senator John Kennedy (R-La.) recently highlighted the reality of restricted Second Amendment rights as he spoke about disarming our nation’s veterans. He explained how veterans are essentially being disarmed for nothing more than needing help managing their financial affairs — a disgraceful affront to constitutional rights that has been going on for years.

Under current law, the Department of Veterans Affairs can report veterans to the FBI’s National Instant Criminal Background Check System if they require an assigned fiduciary to help them manage their pension or disability benefits, flagging them as unable to purchase a firearm. This has stripped a constitutional right from law-abiding citizens who sacrificed for and served this nation. Yet very few Americans even knew it was happening until Kennedy went to bat to stop it.

Consider how many Americans need assistance with financial planning and management and might meet the standard to be disarmed should such a practice spread from the V.A.

This red-flag practice with veterans exemplifies one of the major dangers of red-flag laws.

The danger lies in the subjective nature of deciding who poses a risk and the significant potential for misuse or overuse. Of particular concern is the potential to weaponize the subjectivity of red-flag laws for personal vendettas, political motivations, or simple misunderstandings, taking advantage of a slippery slope that may not seem all that concerning right now.

The unintended — or perhaps completely intended — consequences for law-abiding citizens and the freedom this nation enjoys could be catastrophic, which is why appropriate concern is necessary.

Second Amendment rights and the potential violation of them by the VA are especially concerning for Texas, which is home to America’s largest veteran population and first in gun ownership. With almost half of Texas adults reporting they have guns in their homes, the state is on the front line of the gun control issue.

Unfortunately, the situation in Texas is also becoming worrisome.

The Texas House earlier this year passed legislation across party lines that adds new NICS reporting requirements for gun purchases. While lawmakers may claim to have good intentions, we should be wary of any law that gives greater regulatory power to an increasingly authoritarian government — and any lawmaker who doesn’t see the danger in that.

Such laws can set a dangerous precedent. If we allow the erosion of one fundamental right, where do we draw the line? We must tread carefully, considering not just the immediate or well-intentioned impact but also the long-term consequences for our nation. A society that willingly sacrifices individual liberties for the sake of supposed and subjective security may find itself in a perilous situation. As Benjamin Franklin famously said, “Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.”

Our communities deserve representatives who will safeguard their rights and freedoms by recognizing laws and policies that would encroach upon them to serve activist agendas.

We must do everything in our power to prevent carefully crafted narratives and slippery-slope policies from leading to dangerously authoritarian laws that undermine our freedoms.

America was founded to guarantee and protect liberty, and we must uphold the core values that are fundamental to safeguarding our constitutional rights. They are the fabric of American greatness. The lives and futures of free and law-abiding American citizens might well depend on it.