Vermont teen busted planning to carry out a school lmassacre.
That’s the good news.
According to the news report and the law as written, the actions taken by law enforcement were illegal and should have been prevented by the presiding judge.
This case raises serious questions about judicial review in gun violence restraining order cases. Many who push for “red flag” laws claim that the courts will weigh the evidence at hand and the law equally without violating individual rights. The Vermont law clearly states that it is only applicable when “prohibiting a person from purchasing, possessing, or receiving a dangerous weapon or having a dangerous weapon within the person’s custody or control.”
But in this case, the firearms in question were owned by a relative and kept in another home. Having potential access to them by criminal means like theft doesn’t qualify under the law.
Further proof that there is no such thing as a “good faith compromise” with gun control advcoates. Every single one is either:
- Actively seeking gun oonfiscation by means covert or wanton, or
- A useful idiot doing the work of those who are.
I’ve been involved in the issue a long time, and I have yet to meet an exception.