The occurrence of mass shootings in America in the past decade has been on the increase. Recently, the El Paso shooting and the incident in Dayton have raised serious concerns on the safety of innocent civilians. Furthermore, the aftermath has been characterized by public outcry advocating for the implementation of effective gun policies as a measure to save lives. The shooting sprees have been advocated for causing the loss of lives and detrimental impact on the lives of victims, survivors and their families. Furthermore, the frequency of the occurrence of such ordeals in the country has led to widespread panic in society. In an effort to restore sanctity and security in the community the government has established the Red Flag legislation to reduce the gun-related violence in public spaces (Carlson, 2002). President elect Donald Trump in a statement made to the America people pushed for the more stringent gun control measures that had already been initiated in several states in the country.
The Red flag law has been inexistence since the late 1990s and refers to a legislation that allows the police, family members and makes a legal petition to the court asking the judge to temporary seizure an individual firearm. The provision stipulated that the permit is legal only when the individual is considered a threat to society or themselves. Massachusetts recently joined California and Washington DC in the implementation of the law after Governor Charlie Baker commissioned the bill in 2018. According to the reports, the Senate vote was unanimous and almost twenty representatives from the House voted for it implementation. The Extreme Risk Protection Orders (ERPOs) law in Massachusetts was in response to mass shootings and increase in suicide rates. After the Red Flag law has been executed individuals are prevented from buying or even selling firearms. Proponents of the law in Massachusetts have praised its implementation in the state because it will lead safer streets for the residents. Moreover, the gun law operates within the corridors of law and the public is assured that the presence of the legislation will not hinder due process or violate the 2 nd Amendment. Following the enactment of Red Flag law in Massachusetts, the local enforcement agents has seized guns and ammunitions from individuals considered a threat to other and themselves. The ERPOs are often sought by victims of domestic terrorism and other acts of violence. Citizens in the state can now file petitions against dangerous individuals by following the procedure laid out by the authorities.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
Opposition to the Massachusetts Red Flag Law
Just like in the other states where the Red Flag law was initiated, the legislation was met with opposition from a significant portion of the public who considered it a violation of the civil liberties. In Massachusetts a similar scenario was witnesses when the bill was proposed in parliament. As the supporters lobbied for its advocacy, the opponents were on the other side campaigning for the destruction of the ERPO by stalling its implementation (Spitzer, 2015). The opposition’s primary objective was the protection of the gun rights embedded in the American constitution that in their view reflected the ideals of the American way of life. Following this, they were not amused by the enactment of the legislation and were not afraid to express their disappointment. To them, the law had again failed to uphold democracy by overlooking the gun rights of the people of the commonwealth.
According to the constitution, the majority vote takes precedence when making the important decisions to establish a new legislation to the rule of law. In the House of Representatives, fourteen out of the thirty four representatives voted against the bill. The Senate on the other hand, voted unanimously to support the bill except Fitchburg Republican Sen. Dean Tran who was the only one in opposition. Dean Tran was elected as the Senate in 2017 and has been the incumbent Senator. As part of the Senate his vote was vital to the final decision on the fate of the bill. Tran was not afraid to stand alone on opposition of the Red Flag law showing his support for the civil liberties. It therefore follows that his sentiments on the gun laws share similarities with those of gun enthusiasts in Massachusetts and the rest of the United States.
The Gun Owner’s Action League was one of the parties that were on the forefront fighting against the Bill. The organization is made up of members who are all gun owners and helps them to exercise their gun rights. Individuals with membership are educated on the gun laws present in the state while stipulating the legal procedure for licensure and safe use of the firearm. After the decision was made for the policy to become legislation, the Gun Owner’s Action League was part of the opponents who publicly expressed their disapproval with the Red Flag law and its implication on the fundamental gun rights of American. The legislation was in violation of the 2 nd Amendment that makes it illegal for the authorities to infringe the right to bear arms. According to the group’s executive chairman, Jim Wallace the Red Flag Law was flawed and undermined the Bill of Rights. Wallace believed that the entire bill was flawed and worked only to confiscate the right to bear arms from the people of Massachusetts. He posited that the well-being of gun owners must not be overlooked when implementing laws concerning the gun laws. Wallace argued that the bill did not have provisions that will consider the mental health of people whose guns have been retrieved by the authorities.
Gun enthusiasts in Massachusetts and other parts of America are not ready to give up their rights. This resistance to change will be a problem for the Red flag law in the region because the culture of gun ownership is deeply rooted in the very fabric of the American culture. Gun rights are part of the national identity of Americans particularly those who oppose the legislation (Larson, 2010). The American Gun Association and the National Rifle Association are the leading gun rights advocacy groups in the region. The organizations have been in existence for decades and over the years they have attracted over 5.5 million members from all over the United States of America. People living in Massachusetts and members of the NRA will be on the opponents of the bill. According to opponents of Red flag, safety of the community and the right to keep arms complement each other hence there is no need for more stringent restrictions on the gun ownership. In this case, the opposition was unable to garner the enough support to push their agenda making them accountable to the Extreme Risk Protection Orders (ERPOs).
References
Carlson, A. (2002). The Antiquated Right: An Argument for the Repeal of the Second Amendment . P. Lang.
Larson, J. M. (2010). Government Gone Wild: The Real Reason for the 2nd Amendment. Phoenix L. Rev. , 4 , 911.
Spitzer, R. J. (2015). Politics of gun control. Routledge.
