Texas Bans Red Flag LAWS!

To no surprise, the legislative session in Texas this year has ended on a high note for real Americans living in the state who value naturally bestowed freedoms recognized by the United States Constitution. Despite efforts from the left to thwart Foundational values, and by efforts I mean dishonesty and hyperbole designed to manipulate the public into embracing their subjugation, lawmakers have established a preemption measure prohibiting red-flag extreme risk protective orders (ERPOs) from being used to seize privately owned firearms and block Second Amendment rights without due process of the law. 

Senate Bill 1362 was signed into law over the weekend of June 21, as Texas Governor Greg Abbott addressed approximately 600 pieces of legislation on his desk prior to the Sunday veto deadline. The law, which goes into effect on September 1, is known as the Anti-Red Flag Act and is a vital measure meant to protect Texans from the true purpose of such orders, which are nothing more than a conduit to abuse and disarm Americans under the guise of protecting them from being a danger to themselves or others. 

Not having committed a crime, however, how is it possible to forcibly remove an individual’s private property, especially firearms and firearm rights protected under the Second Amendment, without getting into some sketchy Minority Report-style civil rights violations? It isn’t possible, and it’s unfortunate that we need to pass these laws in a country that has all but forgotten the Foundational preemptions already built into the Constitution. 

S.B. 1362 prohibits both the adoption and enforcement of most types of ERPOs, protecting Texans from unjust confiscations and the removal of rights without having been granted due process. If you think this feels redundant, given that the Constitution already states this, your feelings are correct. But what good is a law without any teeth behind it? Texas legislators addressed this with the imposition of criminal penalties and jail time for any attempt to enforce such an order outside of criminal proceedings, and in the case of existing domestic violence protection orders.

In addition, the bill prohibits Texas entities from entering into agreements to accept federal funds that Democratic administrations have previously used to bribe states and municipalities into adopting red-flag laws, highlighting a provision that renders any federal emergency protective order laws unenforceable in the state if they violate the Second Amendment.  

Republican Representative Cole Hefner sponsored S.B. 1362 with one thing on his mind, arguably that which should be the defining principle of any duly elected official: preserving and defending the rights of his constituents. 

“We don’t need magistrates or judges determining, without due process, someone’s Constitutional rights,” said Hefner.

Hefner can afford to keep it short and sweet because his disposition on the matter is cogent, based in logic and reason, and is entirely supported by the Constitution. 

Meanwhile, in the realm of uncompelling arguments, Nicole Golden, executive director of Texas Gun Sense, spouted off about red-flag laws eroding due process as “misinformation,” exposing herself as part of the subversion regime that continues to insult American intelligence by claiming these ERPOs take due process into account, which they do not by their very own definition. 

“If you look at other states’ bills, they’re built specifically with those protections in mind,” Golden lied. 

But that’s just the tip of the Democrat manipulation iceberg, as Darrell Miller, a “Constitutional law scholar” at the University of Chicago Law School, demonstrates with his inept critique of the consequences that arise from violation of the new law. 

“Laws [like S.B. 1362] not only tell cities and local governments that they can’t have a different policy from the state; they say, ‘If you have a different policy, we’re going to make it a crime to do so,’” said Miller.

With people like Miller being touted as “Constitutional scholars,” it’s no wonder Chicago has fallen to corruption and criminal violence. What is the point of a Constitution if it can be modified or completely negated by cities and local governments? Furthermore, I’d love to ask this charlatan if he’d support the amendment of other provisions in the Bill of Rights at the state and local levels. Imagine driving across a state with a library of handbooks just to keep up with the law in each traversed municipality. Imagine driving into a rural county and being arrested for exercising freedom of expression that the local government has decided is no longer acceptable. But Miller isn’t out of his mind. He’s just a shill who takes his marching orders like the good little brown shirt he is. 

Miller also takes issue with the fact that violation of the law does not come without consequences, including convictions, fines, and time behind bars, calling it “very disturbing” and referring to the provision as “punitive preemption,” accusing conservative lawmakers of wielding the threat against liberal strongholds, otherwise known as leftist dumpster fire cities. 

“It essentially criminalizes ordinary political differences,” says Miller.

The pot and the kettle are so muddled for this guy that I doubt he could make himself a cup of tea without accidentally drowning in his own BS. This familiar dance is a staple of the leftist diet, which requires useful idiots to deflect their own subversive maneuvers by accusing conservatives of the very behaviors that liberals are engaged in. It is the left that seeks to criminalize the Constitutionally protected behavior of law-abiding citizens every day based on arbitrary metrics, like magazine capacity, barrel length, and other inconsequential factors drummed up for no other reason than to reign down government tyranny upon those with whom they disagree politically.