Despite the fact that mass shootings committed by current members of the U.S. military are rarer than lightning striking humans or winning the lottery, Democrats added a provision to the current National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA-the annual Pentagon spending bill) that would authorize military courts to order the confiscation of service members' personally owned firearms if someone complained that they presented a "risk" to themselves or others.
Such "red flag" laws are the current favorite way for Democrats and 'moderate' Republicans to allow civilian courts to do the same thing -- authorize police to go and confiscate personal firearms while denying gun owners their constitutional 'day in court,' so to speak.
In the legislation, those beholden to the United States Code of Military Justice could be issued a “military court protective order” by a military judge or magistrate, which would make “possessing, receiving, or otherwise accessing a firearm” illegal.
“A military court protective order issued on an ex parte basis shall restrain a person from possessing, receiving, or otherwise accessing a firearm; and a military court protective order issued after the person to be subject to the order has received notice and opportunity to be heard on the order, shall restrain such person from possessing, receiving, or otherwise accessing a firearm in accordance with section 922 of title 18,” SEC. 529 of H.R. 4350 states.
In addition, such military court protective orders issued on an emergency basis do not have to provide the recipient with the standard “right to due process.” Instead, “notice and opportunity to be heard” is only provided the defendant after the order is issued and guns are taken from their owners.
Translation: Those in the U.S. military are expected to take an oath to uphold and defend the Constitution of the United States while being denied certain protections under our founding document.
“EMERGENCY ORDERS.—A protective order on an emergency basis may be issued on an ex parte basis under such rules and limitations as the President shall prescribe,” the section continues. “In the case of ex parte orders, notice and opportunity to be heard and to present evidence must be provided within a reasonable time not to exceed 30 calendar days after the date on which the order is issued, sufficient to protect the respondent’s due process rights.”
Gun Owners of America (GOA), a pro-Second Amendment gun rights advocacy group, warned that such military gun confiscation orders will no doubt give left-wing lawmakers a precedent to extend the rule to the general population, and Democrats are already eyeing that.
“Like the proverbial camel’s nose in the tent, allowing this provision to remain in a bill pertaining to the military will eventually work its way into legislation applying to the rest of the population,” GOA wrote. “That’s why we need to raise our voices in unison against these gun confiscation orders.”
The fact is, however, these laws are unconstitutional. Not only do they violate the Second Amendment, but by depriving gun owners of due process, red flag laws are blatant violations of the Fifth Amendment, which states that no one shall be "deprived of life, liberty or property without due process of law." The Fourteenth Amendment uses the same identical words.
In Caniglia v. Strom, the Supreme Court unanimously ruled that law enforcement cannot cite the “community caretaking” exception to the Fourth Amendment in order to take guns from someone's home. The ruling, while not striking down red flag laws, does state that red flag laws may be challenged under the Fourth Amendment.
The military under Biden is becoming 'woke' and ineffective.