This Law Will Let Cops Take Your Guns, But Here’s What They’re Not Telling You

In the wake of recent national tragedies, liberals in Washington, D.C., and the media have been calling for more gun control. Democrats have pushed numerous new measures in recent weeks — measures that would not protect Americans from violence, but only deprive them of their Second Amendment rights. Now, a major news outlet is pushing their own plan, but there are a few details they are ignoring.

Whenever a terrible shooting occurs in the country, the left jumps on the gun control bandwagon. They refuse to acknowledge the real reasons these shootings occur, pointing only to the existence of guns. “If the killer couldn’t get their hands on a gun, this wouldn’t have happened,” is their common claim. Really? They can’t accept the fact that — with or without guns — these sick people would seek to cause harm.

Democrats are quick to find the easy, least effective answer to a problem. Instead of confronting the motivations of killers and terrorists, they want to deprive law-abiding Americans of their right to bear arms. Now, even a media outlet is pushing for gun control. ABC News openly endorsed a law that would allow the government to march into your home and take your weapons — even if you’re not there.

According to ABC News, “An Extreme Risk Protection Order (ERPO) empowers family members and police to take guns away from a person who may pose a danger to themselves or others. The person’s access to firearms is blocked until they can demonstrate that the risk is over. Essentially, ERPOs are a temporary restraining order for guns.”

That law would legalize firearm confiscation orders like those in Washington state. Such orders allow a judge to issue an ex parte order for the confiscation of an American’s firearms. This means the order can be issued without the firearm owner even being present for the process. His or her first knowledge of the order would come when police knocked on their door to sweep the house for firearms. [Source: Breitbart]
So basically, if your parents are upset with you because you didn’t visit them on Thanksgiving, they can order the government to take your guns, simply by claiming that you are a danger. Although that sounds unlikely, think about a bad breakup, where a scorned ex-lover wants to dish out damage. How easy would it be to cause their innocent ex grief? Sound crazy? Yeah, because it is. Think about it: this law would treat a person, who never committed a crime, like a criminal without any due process.

To back this shocking measure, ABC News cites that “4,500 Americans died from gun violence in August.” An amazing figure, but one that isn’t accurate.

In fact, ABC News reported that Everytown claims “4,500 Americans died due to gun violence in August” of this year. This claim is misleading in a number of ways.

For one, it does not differentiate between Americans who die due to suicide versus those who die via gun crime, homicide. Gun crime only makes up one-third of gun deaths each year in America. Two-thirds of the deaths are suicides.

The second misleading aspect of claiming “4,500 Americans died due to gun violence in August” is that the annual average for gun deaths is 31,000 to 33,000 (and the vast majority of these are suicides, as previously noted). If 4,500 were being killed each month, that would push the total number of gun deaths to 54,000 annually, which is an outlandish claim. [Source: Breitbart]
Once again, the liberal media is distorting the facts to push their agenda. They don’t care how flawed their “statistics” are; they just want to mislead you so that you’ll support their un-American plan. For a news agency to even be endorsing legislation is a shocking breach of journalistic ethics. The media is supposed to be impartial, reporting just the facts. For a long time, we know this hasn’t been the case with mainstream news. Yet, to openly do this today proves they no longer care about pretending to be honest or unbiased.

These kinds of orders already exist in states like Oregon, Connecticut, California, and Washington. However, experts have proven that — despite the massive regulation in these states — violent criminals can still always get their hands on guns.

UCLA law professor Adam Winkler spoke with the National Journal about the orders and explained that they would not have stopped [California shooter Elliot] Rodger nor would they have stopped Sandy Hook Elementary School gunman Adam Lanza. The reason in both cases is because family would have had to recognize the propensity for violence in the two attackers, for the purposes of securing a confiscation order, and there is no indication that either family did. [Source: Breitbart]
So, what would these confiscation measures be effective at? Preventing and disarming law-abiding Americans. Time and again, we learn that heavy gun control only harms innocent Americans. The more gun control in a region, the more the public are sitting ducks. Just look at gun-control Chicago, where violent gun-related crime is out of control.

Be sure to spread the word about this nefarious scheme to take your guns. Tell your local and state leaders you will not accept it!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *