The Looming Gun Control Showdown

Radical leftist Democrats in congress are planning to pass gun control bills now that they control both the House and Senate as well as the White House.

A showdown (or showdowns) is looming.

Forbes takes a look at the upcoming battle over Second Amendment rights.

Some snippets:

Gun control rhetoric from Dems is nothing new, but by holding slim majorities in the House and Senate and with Biden in the White House, they’re feeling emboldened that now is the time to move on a wide variety of gun control measures that had heretofore been stymied by a gun-friendly Trump administration and Republican majorities in at least one of two legislative bodies.

Mostly missing in the national political debate over guns, however, is where law enforcement stands regarding their willingness to enforce proposed or newly enacted gun laws. As Colorado legislators discovered in 2019 and 2020 when ‘red flag’ legislation passed—designed to allow police to seize guns from people suspected of posing a significant danger to themselves or others—laws are meaningless without enforcement.  

Dozens of the state’s 64 sheriffs publicly proclaimed the bill unconstitutional and refused to enforce the new law, with roughly half of the state’s county governments passing resolutions stating that they do not support enforcing such laws or will not, “infringe on the right of the people to keep and bear arms,” as one county board phrased it.

Sheriff Steve Reams of Colorado’s rural Weld County became one of the leading voices opposing the legislation and he made the rounds on the national news talk-show circuit to share his sentiments. “If a judge issues an order saying a person can’t possess weapons, and also compels law enforcement to perform a search warrant to seek out those guns,” said Reams, “I believe that’s a violation of a person’s constitutional rights. I have a hard choice at that point. I can potentially violate someone’s constitutional rights. Or I can violate a court order. I would rather be on the side of violating a court order than someone’s rights.”

At the center of gun rights advocate’s concerns regarding red flag laws is the lack of meaningful due process. “What if a disgruntled ex-lover has a vendetta against their former significant other and wants to use these laws as retaliation?” asks George Brauchler [This actually happened to me five years ago. - A.], former District Attorney for Colorado’s Douglas, Arapahoe, Elbert and Lincoln counties, who narrowly lost a bid to become the state’s Attorney General and who has prosecuted some of the nation’s most notorious mass shootings, including the Columbine High School and Aurora Theater massacres. “We expect our justice system to make an abuse of our laws nearly impossible to achieve. Many of these red flag laws do not. A person unfairly targeted by someone using a red flag law isn’t given a fair chance to defend themselves in the court of law before a judge can call for the confiscation of their firearms. There is more due process protecting your privilege to drive than your right to bear arms.”

To read more, go here. 

California AG Wants To Extend "Red Flag Law" To 90 Days

This goes into the Never Let a Good Crisis Go To Waste file.

Every time news from California about actions detrimental to our constitutional rights, the more glad I am that I moved out of the state.

While still living in California, I experienced the state's "red flag" temporary Gun Violence Restraining Order (GVRO) due to a vengeful ex.

Now, according to the NRA-ILA, the GVRO may be extended allegedly due to the coronavirus. Naturally, the radical left-wing attorney general, Xavier Becerra, wants to extend the time of the GVRO.

They wrote:

Yesterday, the California Attorney General sent out a press release on domestic violence issues related to the COVID-19 crisis.  Included in his release was an automatic extension of up to 90 days for temporary Gun Violence Restraining Orders (GVRO) that have not yet had a formal hearing.  This move highlights a major problem with GVRO/Red flag laws: a person can lose their rights with no due process, and in this case, the deprivation can be extended with the stroke of a pen by an anti-gun bureaucrat. 

Under current law, a temporary GVRO automatically expires 21 days after it is issued. State law also requires a full hearing to take place within the 21 day period. It is only at the full hearing that due process protections apply, where an individual has the right to counsel and to be heard on the allegations before the court.  However, with emergency powers invoked by the Governor and such authority extended to the judicial branch during the COVID-19 crisis, hearings can now be postponed for up to 90 days, resulting in some temporary orders being in effect for up to 110 days.  

If this could happen in California, where Democrats have total control of the state government, it can happen in other states. So much for due process and constitutional rights.

To read more, go here.

How To Prepare For A "Red Flag" Gun Confiscation Order At Home

Above, yours truly at the Jamestown gun range. Photo by Victor Gomez.

Three years ago, I was served with a restraining order by an ex, which included a provision that I must surrender my firearms to a licensed gun dealer or to the police. This was under a California "red flag" "Gun Violence Restraining Order" law that was enacted in 2014. Until this episode, I never heard of this law. 

Rather than go through everything, this post will recount what happened. Eventually, despite some cost and a prolonged hassle, I got all my guns back after I was able to show that her claims were bogus.

New "red flag" laws are being enacted in some states where the police can show up at your home unannounced and confiscate your weapons, no matter whether the party filing such orders were truly in fear of their life or just wanted to get revenge (as in my case).

The Truth About Guns website has a good article on how to prepare for a "red flag" confiscation order at your house. Unfortunately for me, I had no idea that such a law existed at the time.

It begins with:

Last week, I shared a post by a former Alabama police officer-turned-lawyer turned prosecutor on how to react if police show up at your home with a red flag order. Just the thought of police showing up to take your guns stirred a lot of emotions in comments. Understandably so. But between the author’s recommendations and some in comments, prudent people can prepare. 

Who needs to think about red flag confiscation orders? If you live in one of those states with red flag laws (WA, OR, CA, IL, IN, NY, NJ, MD, FL, RI, VT, CT, DE, MA), and now Colorado, cops could show up unannounced at your home with a court order to take your guns. 

It couldn’t happen to you? 

Don’t be a fool. 

How is your home life with your significant other? Do you have any current or former disgruntled business partners or employers/employees? Have any issues with parents, children or other relatives?  How do you get along with the in-laws? The neighbors? Co-workers? Ex-girlfriends/boyfriends? Had any bad Tinder (or Grindr) dates? 

If you’re like most folks, you’ve angered someone at some point in your life who might file a complaint to get even. Especially if they know you embrace America’s gun culture. 

What can you do to prepare for a “surprise” visit from police with a red flag order in hand?

The article then tells what steps one can take to prepare for a surprise visit from the police.

To read more, go here.

"Red Flag" Gun Confiscation "SWATing"

Three years ago, I was served with a restraining order by a vengeful ex-fiancee in California. She claimed that I was "stalking" her, but in actuality I broke off the relationship and was actually avoiding her (I instituted "no contact"). This was in "revenge" for this and due to an impending Small Claims lawsuit I was filing against her (that was settled on the court show, Hot Bench).

In 2014, California passed a "Gun Violence Restraining Order Law". This was the law that affected my case. Until this matter, I never heard of such a thing as this. I had to surrender my guns to either the police or to a licensed gun dealer until the court hearing dismissed it (I had more than adequate proof that I wasn't doing the stalking, she was).

The process cost me some attorney fees and other fees to get all of my guns back. For details on my case, go here.

Now, New Mexico passed a similar "red flag" law and is about to be signed by the governor.

Of all of the gun bills passed by New Mexico's radical liberal majority, the "red flag" legislation is the most insidious.

NOQ Report has a good article and video on how these gun-grabber laws now in vogue are a danger to our constitutional rights.

It begins with:

A new video from the Firearms Policy Coalition highlights the dangers to Liberty and due process posed by so-called ‘Red Flag’ Laws. 

Gun confiscation SWATing, Extreme risk protective orders or so-call ‘Red Flag’ Laws are all the rage of the Liberty grabber Left and RINO’s these days. It’s bad enough that these unnecessary and unconstitutional violations of everyone’s due process rights are being ‘Rahmed’ through on a state level. But both the US House and Senate have their own versions. The latter co-sponsored by Senator Marco ‘RINO’ Rubio (R-FL) with the Senate Judiciary Committee to hold hearings on March 26. 

In a case of trying to solve a rare but emotionally charged problem, these will only serve to create an even bigger problem destroying several civil and human rights in the process. We’ve already established that this type of legislation is unnecessary since Involuntary Civil Commitment laws that protect due process rights are already on the books. Thus we have woefully unconstitutional gun confiscation coupled with and evisceration of due process rights. It’s enough to have any tyrant glow with pride.

Also, of interest to me, they discuss the abuse of such laws to "settle a score" as my ex did to me.

They wrote:

The danger of ‘Settling a score’ with someone with a gun confiscation SWATing 

There is the danger that someone could use these SWATing orders to ‘settle a score’ with someone – even if they don’t own a gun. In fact, it could be worse for the person in that situation since law enforcement would be incentivized to become more intense in searching for something that doesn’t exist. What is there to stop someone from using the threat of bringing one of these down on someone as a form of extortion?

 To read more and see the video, go here.

That's A Wrap!

Finally, after seven months, the arsenal is now completely back where it belongs.

This morning, I went to the Van Nuys Division of the Los Angeles Police Department to pick up my Ruger 10/22 rifle from the property department, where they were holding it for me. The whole process seemed like it would never end.

All this baloney started last August when Denise Santos tried to set me up on some sort of false stalking charge that culminated in a application for a temporary restraining order. I was served the order by one of her flying monkeys. This was a bizarre state of affairs since I was the one who ended things, including the imposition of no contact.

Above, Denise Santos on Hot Bench.

I first suspected that I was being set up when Denise sent me a text message while I was camping in Ventura Beach with my former roomie Jessica in early July. Included in her message, she said, "Please stop contacting me via text or email." At that point, I hadn't been texting her for weeks due to my imposition of no contact and the only time I emailed her was to send a demand letter, which the courts require before bringing forth a lawsuit. She knew a lawsuit would be forthcoming, so it should not have been any surprise. (The lawsuit was heard on Hot Bench in September.) Her text message caused my "Spidey sense" to start tingling. Why would she say that when I hadn't been in any contact with her? Hmm. In the weeks that followed, her accusations began to snowball. That's why I ratcheted up the rhetoric on this blog to leave an electronic "paper trail" during those weeks.

The last round of text messages occurred about 2 weeks after our Hot Bench appearance in September. Denise started off as accusatory and threatening. They began very rough, but ended (surprisingly) on a more cordial note. Finally, cooler heads prevailed from both sides. We haven't bothered each other since.

Getting back to the gun matter, part of the temporary restraining order was that I had to turn in all my firearms to either law enforcement or to a licensed gun dealer. This I did. Afterwards, she had the temporary restraining order dismissed as my attorney and I had ample evidence refuting her charges. But, in the months that followed, I had to deal with the California Department of Justice to get authorization to get my firearms back. This was a long and tedious process. Today, all I had to do was to go to Van Nuys with my i.d. and the DOJ authorization and they gave me the rifle. Finally, the last firearm has been returned to me and the matter is now closed.

I have to say that the officers with the LAPD in the West Valley and Van Nuys Divisions were pleasant and professional to work with during this process.

As they say during the end of a movie production, "That's a wrap!"

It Goes On...

Above, Denise Santos on Hot Bench. 

It was hoped that everything pertaining to my Denise Santos would be over and done with by now. It appears that this is not the case as there is one annoyance that has yet to be fully resolved.

DOJ = California Department of Justice - Bureau of Firearms

AFS = Automated Firearms System

LEGR = Law Enforcement Gun Release

Rather than re-write everything, here is what I posted at a gun owners' forum today:

Last summer, a vindictive ex-girlfriend filed for a temporary restraining order on me. Part of the order was to surrender my firearms to law enforcement. At the hearing, she dismissed the matter as I had ample proof that I was not bothering her. 

I had to file a Law Enforcement Gun Release Application with the DOJ and pay fees. After a long wait, I got the letters clearing me to retrieve my guns. I got all except for my Ruger 10-22 rifle that I bought in the early 1980s. The letter said that the AFS had "no record" of this firearm and was advised by the Los Angeles Police that I have to register it.  

I then sent the registration form and check for the fee back on December 9, 2016 (the check was cashed). I had to also re-file another Law Enforcement Gun Release Application and pay another fee.  

I just got the DOJ letter (dated February 13) again stating that AFS has "no record" of the firearm. This is two months after I filed to have it registered. I have 30 days from February 13 to get the gun under this letter (provided that it is registered in this period). This is ridiculous. If the gun is not put into the AFS system in time, I have to pay another fee with the DOJ with another LEGR application. 

I just sent the DOJ an email complaining about this. 

Does anyone have any recommendations on this? Do I have any recourse? Thanks.

Even though I initiated no contact with her, Denise nevertheless tried to set me up on some sort of stalking charge by filing the temporary restraining order. I had to get an attorney (as my gun rights were in jeopardy) and had months of text messages printed and brought to court proving that I was not the one doing the stalking. It was quite the opposite (also through her "flying monkeys"). This is a textbook case of a narcissistic smear campaign. (Oy vey! If I only knew then what I know now!)

Unknown to me, this episode is from a new law (2014) called the "Gun Violence Restraining Order".

In 2014, California became one of the first states to pass a “Gun Violence Restraining Order” law, commonly known as a “red flag” law, which prevents people deemed a danger to themselves or other from owning a gun.

I guess I'll have to keep on the DOJ's case so that the rifle gets timely registered. If I have to file another LEGR and pay a fee, it will be the third go-around. Jeez.

**********************

UPDATE (2/19/17): I received two responses to my forum query. They are:

It takes CA DOJ anywhere from 2-64 weeks to process a voluntary firearm registration.
(average time seems to be within 3-4 months)
The time period starts when they cash in your check.
When they finish processing your submission, they will mail you back acknowledgment.
You should submit the LEGR after they cash your check or when you receive the CA DOJ letter.

The check was cashed January 3.

I went through a similar situation two years ago and completely feel your pain. I reached out to the PD Detective assigned to my case and simply explained the issues I was having. She put a call into DOJ and three days later I received the reg letter and was able to go pick up my rifle.  

Just make sure to be cool..process sucks and everyone knows it but the good news is you're on the home stretch. Good luck.

Since the LAPD detective and I have a good rapport, I'll ask her to see if there's anything she can do. She's already aware of the situation. (I'll have to remember to get her a box of See's Candies next Christmas.)

***********************

UPDATE (2/24/17):

Good news was received in the mail today. I received a letter from the DOJ stating that the rifle is now registered and I am authorized to retrieve it from the LAPD Property Division.