{"id":66364,"date":"2021-03-30T17:19:29","date_gmt":"2021-03-30T23:19:29","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/milesfortis.com\/?p=66364"},"modified":"2021-03-30T17:19:29","modified_gmt":"2021-03-30T23:19:29","slug":"66364","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/milesfortis.com\/?p=66364","title":{"rendered":""},"content":{"rendered":"

Rahm Emanuel: Hey, Let\u2019s Strip Gun Owners of Due-Process Rights<\/a><\/p>\n

The former Chicago mayor\u2019s big idea is not new \u2014 and not constitutional, either.<\/span><\/p>\n

I<\/span>n<\/span>\u00a0another case of\u00a0poll-driven confirmation bias<\/a>, Democrats have overestimated the popularity of their gun-control efforts as another House bill is\u00a0reportedly<\/a>\u00a0\u201cdead on arrival\u201d in the Senate.<\/p>\n

Alas, the bill didn\u2019t stall because of the\u00a0infamous filibuster<\/a>\u00a0\u2014 though demanding a 60-vote threshold for legislation predominately aimed at red states shut out of the lawmaking process would be entirely legitimate \u2014 but because moderate Democrats like Joe Manchin and Jon Tester would likely have a difficult time supporting the House efforts. Manchin, who wrote a more modest \u201cuniversal background check bill\u201d a few years ago, represents a state where an estimated\u00a054 percent of households have guns<\/a>. In Montana, the number is over 52 percent.<\/p>\n

But Democrat Rahm Emanuel\u00a0has an idea<\/a>. The only way his party can pass gun-control legislation, he argued on ABC\u2019s\u00a0This Week<\/em> on Sunday, is by focusing less on firearms and more on people. He reasons Democrats should compromise with Republicans by focusing on \u201ccriminals,\u201d \u201cmental health,\u201d and the No-Fly List.<\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

Why the former mayor of crime-ridden Chicago believes that ignoring gunowners\u2019 First, Fourth, Fifth, and Sixth Amendment rights in an effort to strip them of their Second Amendment rights is any kind of compromise remains a great mystery.<\/span><\/p>\n

First, Emanuel says anyone with a \u201cdomestic-violence record\u201d should be \u201cbanned from buying a gun.\u201d This is an excellent idea. Also, it is already the law. Owning a gun after a domestic-violence conviction is\u00a0illegal<\/a>\u00a0under federal law \u2014 and under numerous state laws. It is legal for the police to take guns when there is \u201creasonable fear of bodily injury\u201d to the partner or child.\u00a0 These regulations are occasionally abused by law enforcement but, at a minimum, there exists a rudimentary due process, rather than arbitrary gun confiscation. We can only deduce, then, that Emanuel means guns should be confiscated from those merely\u00a0accused<\/em>\u00a0of domestic violence by another party.<\/p>\n