Written By: R.A. Goodnight

“Freedom of speech is a principal pillar of a free government; when this support is taken away, the constitution of a free society is dissolved, and tyranny is erected on its ruins.”

Benjamin Franklin

It was late, around 1 a.m., when I was ripped from my dreams. As consciousness returned to me, I recognized the sound of our home alarm screaming in the night. I looked to my right and, through the glow of the television, I could tell by Teresa’s eyes that she hadn’t triggered the alarm system. As my feet hit the floor, I grabbed an HK pistol from the bed side safe and chambered a round. Teresa grabbed our infant daughter dialing 911 and headed for the closet, while I stepped outside the bedroom and closed the door behind me. Until the police arrived, almost twenty minutes later, I stood between an unidentified threat and the safety of my family. (BTW—That’s 20 minutes IN THE CITY for the police to arrive).

I look forward to the day when firearms have no place in our world; to when we each live securely in our own homes and have no need to know the ways of war. (Isaiah 32:18; Isaiah 2:4 NIV) But today is not that day. In the current environment in which we live, I have been thankful more than once to possess a means with which to defend my family or myself.

Regardless, we cannot deny that such rights do get abused. The country has been terrorized by many tragedies over the last few years, even the last few weeks. I cannot imagine how I would feel if I received a phone call telling me I had been separated from my daughter or wife due to a violent act fueled by another’s disorder or hate. My innermost being cries out for those who have had to live that nightmare. And, in the middle of the tears, the pain and the regret perhaps we find ourselves questioning and searching for solutions. But, hidden amid the chaos and fear, there are cleverly disguised traps in some of the solutions being proposed.

The “Red Flag Laws” that have gained support should raise red flags themselves for any who value their freedoms, regardless of our opinions on firearms. These proposed laws, should they become law, will pave the way for the abuse of many of our liberties, not just our second amendment rights. The basic idea proposed is simple: If an individual believes another person is capable of acts of violence and owns firearms, the concerned individual can petition to a judge. If the judge agrees, law enforcement will be dispatched to the accused’s place of residence to confiscate any firearms. Many believe that this is a reasonable idea.

Why do I suggest that we be concerned?

I believe many individuals reason such laws would never have an effect upon them, as these laws are only for those who intend harm toward themselves or others. But think for a moment on how intent is being established under these laws. If you offended someone, if a social media post was misinterpreted or if your religious persuasions were deemed hateful, an opposing individual could raise a red flag against you, even if you didn’t own a firearm. “So what?” some have responded. “A judge would be able to tell the difference. So, these laws have no way of being abused.” Do we really believe that?

Consider this. For the last two years we have seen the country waste millions of dollars on legal action attempting to prove that our current elected leaders committed treason. How did all of this begin? The opposing party convinced a judge of alleged guilt, based upon lies and motivated by hate. If similar laws can be used against the highest office in the land, why would we believe ourselves to be immune from such tactics?

What effect could such laws have upon our other protected rights? Consider these:

  • The first amendment protects our right to religious beliefs. It protects our right to think, believe, speak or write ideas as we choose. Red Flag laws pave the way for those beliefs, ideas and words to be weaponized against us. This is already happening at an enhanced rate toward Christian beliefs and these laws will only make that easier.
  • The second amendment is obvious. A citizen of this country has a protected right to own a firearm, unless they have forfeited such right through proven and convicted criminal activity. Your religious beliefs and expressions of your Christian faith do not constitute criminal activity, even though many would like to change that.
  • The fourth amendment protects private individuals from unreasonable search and seizure. How reasonable would such laws be if activated only by the word of another?
  • Similarly, the fifth amendment ensures that our property (in this case a firearm) cannot be confiscated without just compensation. It also protects our right to due process. Due process would demand that any claim be proven prior to confiscation.
  • The tenth amendment states that powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution are reserved to the states or the people. The power to confiscate personal firearms has not been granted to the United States via the Constitution. To the contrary, it is restricted from it. The states are given the authority on how they would choose to deal with the reoccurring issue of private firearms ownership.

Let me be clear on this point: This article is not about firearms. Ownership and use of firearms are subjects that each Christian needs to decide upon for themselves. What this article is about is our awareness, our ability to look beyond the clamor and see dangers that threaten other fundamental liberties that we will not compromise on. Freedoms such as religion, speech, press and due process. When did these ever become negotiable? It is about giving authority to men over aspects of our lives, where they do not have any authority (constitutionally or spiritually), nor should they.

Even if not a firearm owner, why would we trade our liberty to think, believe and worship without immediate fear of retaliation at the promise of security provided by men—a questionable promise in of itself? It is a high price to pay for something they cannot even guarantee. In the end, we risk losing both. No additional security paid for with our liberties and, once you give them up, they are difficult if not impossible to get back without a fight.

“Those who would give up essential liberty, to purchase a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.”

Benjamin Franklin

Thankfully, I have heard two of our state representatives express grave concern for the dangers these laws pose. Both Congressmen Kevin Hern and Congressman Markwayne Mullin have expressed similar concerns should such laws be officially proposed. They have both stated they will not support them. Congressmen Mullin shared a nice podcast addressing why he would not support them and you can listen to it on Soundcloud (link below). In his podcast he asks some very thought-provoking questions. For example, “So how can a judge, by asking a few questions make the determination that a male or female is not fit to bear arms without due process? We can’t.”

We thank both of these Congressmen for their continued cautious support to protect our freedoms.

In the meantime, let’s pay attention and listen to what is being said (or not said). We certainly can’t just go by what we see and hear on television. There are many important aspects of our daily life hanging in the balance. These kinds of proposals require extensive research and thought. They are not to be taken lightly, because sometimes the very essence of the law is in what is NOT said rather than what is written.

https://soundcloud.com/user-213561710/mullinpoints-podcast-episode-24)


I would consider it a privilege to hear from any of the readers. Reach out to me, share your stories. man2man@omegaleague.com 
@omegaleagueman