Watch red flag laws carefully

Shawn went on another gun control rant (“New red-flag gun laws are halting violence( on Nov. 24 that I agree with, partially.

Someone reporting a person posing a danger to himself or others may have their firearms taken away. Sounds great, in theory. In the 1970s while a police officer in CDA, it frustrated me when called to a domestic abuse to see the woman bleeding and not being able to do anything. It’s a misdemeanor and had to occur in our presence. When I returned to law enforcement in Idaho in the 1980s a new law was in effect: I could arrest without observing the incident. Nice, until I went to a home where the woman had deliberately injured herself to get the man arrested.

Will this happen with red flag laws? Of course it will. Angry ex-wife calling in false reports about ex-husband, somebody mad at someone — yes it will happen. A 20-year-old in Connecticut wrote horrible, racist rants on the internet, but never threatened anyone. Is that legal? Yes, as long as there are no threats. Instead, he was red-flagged, and when the police went to where he lived, his father’s house, they confiscated his father’s pistol and rifle. They also took a camouflaged uniform and gloves plus some body armor. Are those deadly? As retired Army I have my camouflaged uniform and gloves at home, plus body armor from being a cop, and several firearms.

Red flag? They seem to work, for now, but let’s give them time, and don’t ignore problems.

Steven Stuart

Spokane