Kudos to Mr. McCarthy - he hits this one out of the park.
Easy to do when you aren't in the park to begin with.
If legislatures compose red-flag laws with sufficient due process rights, it would be unreasonable to oppose them. They would represent a meaningful precautionary step, which the public favors after too many massacres. They would not burden the vast majority of law-abiding gun owners.
...is the same as "If we can just find a way around that pesky Constitution thing we can sate the howling of the mob (ginned up by the media and totalitarians drooling over the prospects of having the means of attacking anyone) and take Rights away.
Have you even considered that the anonymous person calling in and claiming to know the target on the raid might assert that someone who doesn't even have a firearm is an armed and dangerous maniac.
Suppose someone left a hot tip (burner phone) with the local police that YOU have a machine gun and were threatening to shoot up (fill in with local event). That you had been doing so many drugs that you were totally off your nut and you had to be stopped....Up goes the Red flag, in goes the SWAT team, and demands you surrender the weapon you claim not to have--IF you live through the doorkicking event and don't grab for your phone (Oops, it looked like he was going for a gun...) YOU are incarcerated for not surrendering the weapon you never had, but wasn't on the records because it was obtained illegally.
Gee whiz, this could be interesting.
But now go back and review the numbers, that "vast majority" of gunowners who would not be inconvenienced, and revisit the MD incident, which was the deadly outcome of one of one hundred fourteen complaints statewide (and one of nine in the county).
Depending on how you work with the numbers, why, that's less than 1% (0.877%) of those who had complaints made about them who got killed statewide (
much higher if we just consider the county).
Is that "acceptable" inconvenience? After all, over 99% didn't get killed.
But translate that percentage to all the gun owners in America, and just the gun owners, not the people who get 'swatted' by an ex G/F over the cat or something, and you would end up with well over
700,000 people killed over unsubstantiated complaints of unsure provenance and veracity--people who had committed no crime.
There is Nothing reasonable about that. Not at all. It exceeds the number of troops killed (both sides) in the Civil War, and that's just police acting on a 'reasonable' law?
Between Dayton and El Paso, 0.000009% of Americans were killed. That's tragic, unfortunate, seriously bad, but orders of magnitude fewer, percentage wise, than the people already killed in red flag raids in just one State so far. Considering one of the victims was the sister of the shooter (in Dayton), the whole thing might not have been quite a random as it is being presented.