As one of the law abiding gun owners living in District 46 (also CC'd to the chair of the Judiciary Committee), I wish to strenuously protest the advancement of LB58. This bill will not provide any additional protection to those in danger from someone seeking to do harm to another, it will only serve to erode the civil liberties of those practicing their rights, as protected by the second amendment and by our own state Constitution.
For people with mental health issues, there are already adequate laws in place that simply need to be properly enforced. If you are truly concerned for people's safety, why would merely taking guns away provide any protection? If an individual wishes to do harm to another, all they need is a car, a hammer, a knife, a piece of 2x4 or even just their fists.
Firearms are just a tool, and yes, in the hands of a psychotic individual, they are a dangerous tool. However, they are just one tool. A deranged or enraged individual doesn't care if you take away one means for them to inflict harm, they will simply find another way.
On the other hand, this bill - besides being useless for the purpose it purports to convey - will only serve to make life more difficult for the law abiding citizen. There is no protection under the law with a bill like this. There is no 'innocent until proven guilty', despite our system of justice being entirely based around that principle. Instead, there is a presumption of guilt, where you must then prove your innocence. This is completely opposite of what our legal system represents, and at least one individual has already lost their life because of bills like this. That there hasn't been more incidents, is the true miracle.
https://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/constitution/item/30567-law-abiding-gun-owner-killed-during-red-flag-confiscation-raid
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/maryland-officers-serving-red-flag-gun-removal-order-fatally-shoot-armed-man/
These bills are dangerous, not only because of the possibility of future incidents such as this, but because they directly erode the God-given rights of the law abiding. Virtually anyone can bring up a claim - false or otherwise - and there's all likelihood that a judge will order the firearm removal. What judge wants to say that they chose to ignore a claim, only to have the accused potentially do something later? This is done without the accused being present, and the removal order is made without the accused having even committed a crime. That you can't see the inherent dangers in that, is the part that scares me the most about this bill.
As a law abiding citizen who lives in your district, I implore you to shelf this bill, for the safety of the law abiding gun owners and for the security of the Constitution you swore to uphold.
Hi Byron,
Even though we disagree on this legislation, I read your note, and really appreciate you reaching out.
Adam