Law Offices of Susan T. Perkins’ Post

Joe Biden patted himself on the back for signing the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act. Then he and Kamala promptly ignored it. Biden used the BSCA to issue executive gun control orders that exceeded any authority granted by the Act as well as violating the Administrative Procedures Act and the Constitution of the United States, as amended. Harris, as the head of the OGVP (Office of Gun Violence Prevention), which should not be confused with the OGPU, the secret police organization in the early days of the Soviet Union, has been pushing red flag laws and spending allocated funds on programs that don't come close to meeting the requirements Congress added. These included full, substantive, due process at all stages of the ERPO process (which eliminates ex parte orders), investigation of all claims prior to an order being considered, and penalties for making false claims. However, the big flaw with red flag laws, at least as they apply to self-harm (suicide and attempted suicide), is they don't obligate anyone to provide help to the person named in the order. They also don't require any type of mental health assistance or counseling; don't apply to anything except firearms; and don't require the immediate restoration of Second Amendment rights and immediate release of any guns seized. Looking at CDC mortality data, red flag laws don't seem to have much of an impact on the total number of suicides and states that passed them actually saw an increase in the percentage of suicides committed with firearms. Moreover, there doesn't seem to be any data on the outcomes. What percentage of the subjects of red flag interventions went on to end their lives in other ways or with a gun they obtained in spite of the order? Red flag laws, as they exist in American states today, make sense only if they are considered as thinly veiled gun grabs.

Mental Health History Is History: A Lifetime Ban on Gun Possession Due to History of Involuntary Commitment Violates the Second Amendment* Gun control is a widely debated issue in the United States that often centers on whether restricting access to firearms will increase safety. What is often left undiscussed is the stigma and stereotypes that long-lasting bans on firearm possession have on those subjected to gun control laws. Section 922(g)(4) of the Gun Control Act imposes a lifetime ban on gun possession for persons who have a history of involuntary commitment. The Sixth and Ninth Circuits, in Tyler v. Hillsdale County and Mai v. United States, respectively, were asked to decide whether this lifetime ban violates the Second Amendment. Applying intermediate scrutiny, the Sixth Circuit said yes while the Ninth Circuit said no. This Recent Development examines this resulting circuit split as well as the government’s justifications for § 922(g)(4)—preventing crime and suicide—and argues § 922(g)(4) fails to adequately address those important issues, making it unconstitutional under the Second Amendment. Section 922(g)(4) permanently categorizes those with a history of involuntary commitment as mentally ill, instead of addressing the real issue: keeping guns out of the hands of those who currently present a danger to themselves and others. Recognizing that the government’s interests are nevertheless important, this Recent Development proposes the adoption of a federal extreme risk law that adequately instills measures aimed to prevent crime and suicide while also protecting the rights of those subjected to involuntary commitment.

This was what the ESP Governor was refering to: One example of a government response to gun control that was perceived as brutal occurred in Australia in the aftermath of the Port Arthur massacre in 1996. Following the tragic event where a gunman killed 35 people and wounded 23 others, the Australian government, led by Prime Minister John Howard, swiftly enacted sweeping gun control measures known as the National Firearms Agreement (NFA). The NFA included: 1. Ban on Assault Weapons: The government implemented a ban on the sale, importation, and possession of semi-automatic rifles and shotguns, as well as pump-action shotguns. 2. Buyback Program: The government initiated a mandatory buyback program to remove prohibited firearms from civilian possession. Owners were compensated for surrendering their firearms to authorities. 3. Tightened Licensing and Registration: The legislation introduced stricter requirements for firearm licensing and registration, including background checks and waiting periods for prospective gun owners. 4. Amnesty Period: A temporary amnesty period was declared during which individuals could surrender illegal firearms without facing prosecution. While the measures were aimed at reducing the risk of mass shootings and curbing gun violence, they were met with resistance from some segments of the population, particularly gun owners and advocates of gun rights. The buyback program and the mandatory surrender of firearms were viewed by some as heavy-handed government interference in individual rights and liberties. However, despite initial opposition, the NFA is often cited as a successful example of gun control legislation. Australia experienced a significant decrease in firearm-related deaths and mass shootings following the implementation of these measures. Nonetheless, debates about the balance between public safety and individual gun rights continue to shape discussions about gun control policies around the world.

https://lnkd.in/gsAcNWpK "The United States has the world’s highest rate of gun ownership by civilians. Estimates suggest that there are more than 12 firearms for every ten civilians in the country, making U.S. gun ownership per capita more than double that of the country with the second-highest per capita rate—Yemen (according to a 2018 Small Arms Survey analysis of more than 200 countries). The United States also has high rates of violence. According to a 2016 study by Erin Grinshteyn and David Hemenway, homicide rates are six times higher in the United States than in most other developed countries, and firearm homicides account for much of this difference. Grinshteyn and Hemenway also found that, although the United States does not have higher-than-average suicide rates, U.S. rates of firearm suicides are eight times higher than in other developed countries. In addition, unintentional firearm deaths are more than six times more common in the United States than in comparison countries. Statistics like these raise reasonable questions about whether it is the large number of guns in the United States that elevates U.S. residents’ risk of violent death, or whether people in the United States feel a greater need to arm themselves to defend against an especially violent society. For instance, if gun ownership rates suddenly fell by half, would suicide and homicide rates drop? Or if suicide and homicide rates fell by half, would gun ownership rates drop? To see whether we could shed some light on the answers to these questions, we applied our research review methodology (for identifying evidence of the effects of various state-level gun policies in the United States) to broader questions about how gun ownership or the prevalence of guns in society affects suicide and homicide rates."

"This week the White House also released a new report showcasing the work of the OGVP in its first year, organized by the four key responsibilities of the office, including implementing the Safer Communities Act, coordinating support for gun violence survivors, identifying possible executive actions to be taken and expanding partner coalitions with states and localities throughout the country." Apparently, implementation of the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act means willfully and repeatedly violating the Administrative Procedures Act, using taxpayer money earmarked by Congress in the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act to promote red flags laws and ignoring the conditions Congress imposed - such as due process at all stages - for qualifying laws, and promoting the New York state application for an emergency protective order as a model for the country. Then they're going to look into even more illegal gun control possibilities and "expand partner coalitions with states and localities." There are already 16 states, one-third of the nation, that won't help the federal government enforce new gun control laws and two Supreme Court decisions that support them. A state doesn't even have to pass a Second Amendment Sanctuary or Second Amendment Protection law; the state can simply say "NO!" So what has this boondoggle produced in terms of actual 'gun violence prevention'? Zip, nada, and zilch. Not even one fresh idea that doesn't simply penalize the 80 million American gun owners. Incidentally, every time they talk about the "OGVP" I keep thinking of the OGPU, the Soviet secret police from 1923 to 1932 and predecessor to the NKVD. Make of that what you will.

What Are Gun Control Laws in United States? The United States has a complex and evolving landscape of gun control laws that vary at the federal, state, and local levels. These regulations aim to balance the constitutional right to bear arms with public safety concerns. Understanding the current state of gun control legislation in the U.S. requires examining the historical context, key federal laws, state-level variations, and ongoing debates surrounding firearms regulation. The foundation of gun rights in the United States is rooted in the Second Amendment to the Constitution, which states, "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed." This amendment has been the subject of numerous legal interpretations and debates over the years, shaping the landscape of gun control laws. At the federal level, several key pieces of legislation form the backbone of gun control in the United States. The National Firearms Act \... #assaultweaponsban #backgroundchecks #concealedcarrylaws #federalfirearmsact #firearmregulations #guncontroldebate #gunlicensing #gunviolenceprevention #SecondAmendmentrights #stategunlaws #BusinessLaw #CivilRights #ConstitutionalLaw #CriminalDefense #EstatePlanning

GUN OWNERSHIP: WHY AMERICANS OWN GUNS Americans own more guns than any other country in the world. People of the United States own more than double the number of guns than the next country on the list. Since the founding of our country, the “Frontier Spirit” as exemplified by the 2nd Amendment to the Constitution, has informed the independent-minded, “we must take care of ourselves” ethos of our nation. Many surveys over the years have produced the following major reasons that Americans own guns.  * Personal Protection: 88%  * Target Shooting: 70%  * Hunting: 56%  * Sport Shooting: 30%  * Gun Collection: 15%  * Job: 7% Some of our citizens just don’t trust the government to protect them from threats. Some are afraid that government will take their guns away. For others, the gun is viewed as an icon of democracy. Still other Americans see firearms as the key to their freedom. For some, the gun is actually important to their identity. After all, the birth of our country is rooted in rebellion from the dictatorial monarchy of England. Hence, it is understandable that many people view the gun as not just a tool for self-defense, but a symbol of our freedom. ~Dr. Michael Levittan~ https://lnkd.in/gTsrvTZG 310-820-4111

Protecting Our Students By Robert Jordan In recent years, the issue of gun thefts from vehicles has emerged as a significant concern across the United States. A comprehensive study by Everytown for Gun Safety Support Fund highlights this disturbing trend, revealing that gun thefts from cars are now the largest source of stolen guns. #Activeshooter #SchoolSafety #SITE|SAFETYNET℠

Protecting Our Students By Robert Jordan In recent years, the issue of gun thefts from vehicles has emerged as a significant concern across the United States. A comprehensive study by Everytown for Gun Safety Support Fund highlights this disturbing trend, revealing that gun thefts from cars are now the largest source of stolen guns. #Activeshooter #SchoolSafety #SITE|SAFETYNET℠

Gun ownership in the United States is widespread and cuts across all sorts of cultural divides—including race, class and political ideology. Like all mass experiences in American life, owning a gun can mean very different things to different people. One thing that American gun owners tend to agree on, no matter their differences, is that guns are for personal protection. In a 2023 Pew survey, 72% of gun owners reported that they owned a firearm at least in part for protection, and 81% of gun owners reported that owning a gun helped them to feel safer. This perspective contrasts to that of gun owners in other developed economies, who generally report that guns are more dangerous than safe and that they own a gun for some other reason.