top of page

Are Guns Really Going To Be Taken Away?


There has been a lot of conversation, communication, posts, talk, etc. regarding the possibility of guns being taken away from American citizens. Freedom to have guns has been removed from other countries, but the United States has not reached this point yet.  It does seem that the powers that be, have been tiptoeing towards the point of taking the right to own personal weapons.  There are also many more reasons, recently, to begin looking at tightening up gun laws, and perhaps taking the right to own a gun away completely.  It seems that there are mass shootings in the news every day and many citizens are crying for the government to do something about this problem. 

 

Just as many of us have heard many times, it isn’t the gun that kills people, but the person who is pulling the trigger.  Guns do make it much easier to kill people, putting personal distance between them and the person being shot, which can make just about anyone a killer. My understanding of the U.S. Constitution and the Second Amendment was that the right to bear arms was put in place to keep the government from ever having total control of the citizens.  However, I admit that I am not a constitutional scholar, so my simple reasoning may need some elaboration, however, the Second Amendment is still in place.  Legislation has been introduced over the years that clearly seems to target the slow and methodological process of removing the right to bear arms.

 

The most recent news in regard to restricting gun use is through the Extreme Risk Protection Orders program, which suddenly got national funding.  But was it really that sudden?  Many times, when we look back at legislation, it is not new to legislators, but only new to the public.  Check out this excerpt from the Justice Department.

 

“In 2023, the Justice Department’s Office of Justice Programs (OJP) awarded $238 million to states, territories, and the District of Columbia under the Byrne State Crisis Intervention Program (SCIP), which was created by the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act and is designed to help jurisdictions implement crisis intervention strategies, including ERPO programs. In addition, OJP awarded $4 million to support training and technical assistance under Byrne SCIP, including $2 million that was awarded to the Johns Hopkins Center for Gun Violence Solutions to establish the ERPO Resource Center.”  https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/justice-department-launches-national-extreme-risk-protection-order-resource-center

 

The way I read this excerpt, this legislation was introduced last year, and further research has demonstrated to me that many states have been using this type of legislation for quite some time.  The other thing that stands out as not that prevalent, is that this is only funded with 238 million dollars; although a decent amount of money, it is minor funding compared to the rate of spending by the United States.  I am as alternative news-minded as many other people are, but this does not seem like the big hype that many people are touting it to be.  It is, however, part of the totalitarian tiptoe idea, and it will likely blossom into something bigger.  The other piece of this funding is that the organization spearheading the program and the research is the “John Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health – The National ERPO Resource Center.  https://erpo.org/”.  Just like the COVID epidemic and the laws that came out of that period, societal change and laws are being driven by the medical community. 

 

While researching this topic, I found myself thinking about the movie, “Minority Report”, which prosecuted people based on pre-crime algorithms.  Since we are now in the AI realm, I decided to put this platform to work comparing these two scenarios, which follows:

 

“Extreme Risk Protection Orders (ERPOs) and the concept explored in the movie "Minority Report" both address the prevention of potential future crimes, but they operate on fundamentally different principles and methodologies. ERPOs are legal tools used in various states across the United States that allow law enforcement or family members to petition a court to temporarily remove firearms from individuals deemed to be at high risk of committing violence. This process is grounded in legal proceedings and requires evidence and due process.  On the other hand, "Minority Report," a science fiction movie directed by Steven Spielberg, presents a dystopian future where a specialized police department called "PreCrime" apprehends criminals based on foreknowledge provided by psychics known as "Precogs." This system of crime prevention is purely fictional and raises ethical questions about free will and privacy. While ERPOs are real and currently implemented measures aimed at reducing gun violence and preventing crimes, they rely on tangible evidence and respect individual rights within the judicial system. In contrast, the predictive policing depicted in "Minority Report" remains within the realm of speculative fiction, exploring the moral complexities of pre-emptive justice without actual implementation or real-world application.”

 

I don’t necessarily disagree with the synopsis drawn up by the AI platform if the justice system for the ERPO works like it is supposed to.  Here is the process as the legislation is drawn up. 

 


 Just like everything else that is introduced to the American public, we will have to see where this type of national legislation takes us.

 

Stay strong and live your life!

7 views0 comments

Recent Posts

See All

Comments


bottom of page