This post is part of a long series of planned blog posts about proposed gun control measures to reduce the risk of mass shootings.
“There is broad conceptual agreement that regardless of whether you view gun ownership as a right or a privilege, a person can demonstrate through their conduct that they have no business possessing a weapon.”
“Felons, the dangerously mentally ill, perpetrators of domestic violence — these people have not only demonstrated their unfitness to own a weapon, they’ve been granted due process to contest the charges or claims against them. There is no arbitrary state action. There is no collective punishment. There is, rather, an individual, constitutional state process, and the result of that process is a set of defined consequences that includes revoking the right to gun ownership.” https://www.nationalreview.com/2018/02/gun-control-republicans-consider-grvo/
Link to Serious Example of this Proposal: http://lawcenter.giffords.org/gun-laws/policy-areas/who-can-have-a-gun/gun-violence-protective-orders/
1) What problem does it solve?
“Time and again mass shooters give off warning signals. They issue generalized threats. They post disturbing images. They exhibit fascination with mass killings. But before the deadly act itself, there is no clear path to denying them access to guns. Though people can report their concerns to authorities, sometimes those authorities fail or have limited tools to deal with the emerging danger.” https://www.nationalreview.com/2018/02/gun-control-republicans-consider-grvo/
2) How well does it solve the problem?
Negative Answer: Given what people knew before a mass shooting, it’s doubtful that anyone would have sought a GVRO authorizing confiscation of the shooter’s guns if that option had been available.
3) What new problems does it add?
4) What are the economic and social costs?
Negative Answer: Such orders can easily be used to take away innocent people’s Second Amendment rights.There is much potential for abuse by malicious or mistaken petitioners, abetted by judges who will be inclined to err on the side of what they believe to be caution by revoking the Second Amendment rights of possibly dangerous people. https://reason.com/blog/2018/02/20/are-gun-violence-restraining-orders-cons
5) Given the above, is it worth the costs?