Tangle - Red flag laws.

Episode Date: June 2, 2022

Members of the Senate are working together to adopt a set of red flag laws or create incentives for states to adopt them, as well as more expansive background checks. Though they vary in kind, 19 states already have red flag laws in the U.S. They are also sometimes called extreme risk protection orders (ERPO), gun violence restraining orders, or severe threat orders of protection. Today, we take a look at how these laws function and whether there is evidence they work.You can read today's podcast here.You can subscribe to Tangle by clicking here or drop something in our tip jar by clicking here.Our podcast is written by Isaac Saul and produced by Trevor Eichhorn. Music for the podcast was produced by Diet 75. Today’s episode was edited by Zosha Warpeha.Our newsletter is edited by Bailey Saul, Sean Brady, Ari Weitzman, and produced in conjunction with Tangle’s social media manager Magdalena Bokowa, who also created our logo.--- Send in a voice message: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/tanglenews/message Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Based on Charles Yu's award-winning book, Interior Chinatown follows the story of Willis Wu, a background character trapped in a police procedural who dreams about a world beyond Chinatown. When he inadvertently becomes a witness to a crime, Willis begins to unravel a criminal web, his family's buried history, and what it feels like to be in the spotlight. Interior Chinatown is streaming November 19th, only on Disney+. The flu remains a serious disease. Last season, over 102,000 influenza cases have been reported across Canada, which is Chinatown is streaming November 19th, only on Disney+. yourself from the flu. It's the first cell-based flu vaccine authorized in Canada for ages six months and older, and it may be available for free in your province. Side effects and allergic reactions can occur, and 100% protection is not guaranteed. Learn more at flucellvax.ca.

From executive producer Isaac Saul, this is Tangle. Good morning, good afternoon, and good evening, and welcome to the Tangle podcast, the place where you get views from across the political spectrum, some independent thinking without all that hysterical nonsense you find everywhere else. I'm your host, Isaac Saul, and on today's episode, we are going to be talking about red flag laws, some of the debate happening in Congress, and, you know, what we should do about gun control and all that good stuff. Real quick, before we jump in, I need to pause and acknowledge some good news for once. It's been a kind of crazy, horrible couple of weeks. This week, Tangle broke 35,000 readers on our free

mailing list, 6,000 paying subscribers. This podcast now has close to 300,000 downloads and listens, along with avoiding burnout and managing stress and trying to infuse some rational dialogue into our politics. I'm a big fan of celebrating milestones, so I just wanted to say thank you. It has been almost three years since I started this project. To hit this sort of 35,000 and 6,000 milestone in the same week is truly amazing. When I sent the first newsletter to 50 friends and family, I did not imagine it was ever going to turn into this. I didn't imagine I would ever have a huge politically diverse readership in all 50 states, over 50 countries outside the U.S. and tons of notable folks in the political world consuming

our content every day. I didn't imagine it would turn into a podcast, which I am thrilled about. And best of all, there's a growing team here at Tangle, which is really cool. So amazingly, it feels reasonable to dream about a world where we have a million readers and tens of thousands of paying subscribers. It's truly a dream come true. So thank you. And of course, if you are not yet a subscriber, if you're not yet a member, please, I encourage you to go do that. ReadTangled.com slash membership. 99% of

our revenue comes from that. I know we run some ads on the podcast, but we don't make a ton of money off them. If you are interested in supporting this work, ReadTangled.com slash membership is the best way to do it. In exchange, subscribers and members get Friday editions of our newsletter, which include personal essays, transcriptions of interviews that we do on the podcast, deep dives, reader requested content, original reporting. 99% of Tangle subscribers renew their membership every month and throughout the year because they enjoy the content so much and they want to keep supporting our work. So that's a testament to how good the life is when you're a subscriber. ReadTangle.com slash membership. All right, everybody, let's jump into it with some quick hits. First up, the Biden administration canceled

$5.8 billion in student loan debt for former students of the now-defunct Corinthian colleges, the largest one-time discharge of student debt ever. Number two, a gunman opened fire inside a Tulsa, Oklahoma medical building, killing at least four people before shooting himself. Number three, John Hinckley Jr., who tried to assassinate former President Ronald Reagan in 1981, was released from court-ordered psychiatric supervision today and will be free from all remaining restrictions on June 18th. Number four, the U.S. says it will send advanced rocket systems to Ukraine as part of a $700 million military aid package. Number five, the United States will

airlift more baby formula from abroad as shortages continue to grow worse across the country. Red flag laws is kind of the term that's been used to describe any kind of a law that enables someone who sees a problem with a friend or a family member or someone they know and thinks, you know what, this person might be dangerous to themselves or others and they have a weapon. The group of bipartisan senators held informal talks today to try to find some common ground on gun safety. Let us begin with that bipartisan group of senators led by Democrat Chris Murphy and Republican John Cornyn of Texas. That group will hold a remote meeting today in hopes of reaching a framework, at least for gun reform. Senator Cornyn said yesterday many gun issues should be discussed at the state level, but said background checks, mental health and red flag laws are things Congress can't address.

Since the shootings in Buffalo, New York and Uvalde, Texas, members of Congress have been discussing legislation to address gun control. The talks began with a bipartisan group of senators led by Chris Murphy, the Democrat from Connecticut, and John Cornyn, the Republican from Texas. Now, House Democrats say they are considering eight gun-related bills they're calling the Protecting Our Kids Act. The House Democrats' legislation is unlikely to gain any traction in the Senate, but this is what the bill is contained as proposed, according to Punch Bull News. Raise the purchasing age for semi-automatic rifles from 18 to 21. Ban the import, sale, manufacture, transfer, or possession of high-capacity ammunition magazines, although

existing magazines are grandfathered in. Require existing bump stocks be registered under the National Firearms Act and bar the manufacture, sale, or possession of new bump stocks for civilian use. Amend the definition of ghost guns to require background checks on all sales, as the ATF is trying to do through rulemaking, beef up federal criminal penalties for gun trafficking and straw purchases, and establish new requirements for storing guns at home, especially with minors present, while providing tax credits for storage devices. Separately, members of the Senate are working together to adopt a set of red flag laws or create incentives for states to adopt them, as well as more expansive background checks.

Though they vary in kind, 19 states already have red flag laws in the U.S. They're also sometimes called extreme risk protection orders, ERPO, gun violence restraining orders, or severe threat orders of protection. So how do they work? Generally speaking, red flag laws allow local police, family members, school officials, or prosecutors to petition a court to confiscate someone's weapon if they appear to be a risk to themselves or others. Laws vary in how the charges are processed, who can report someone, and whether the guns can be confiscated immediately or if there needs to be a hearing of some kind beforehand. But they often involve bringing a petition to a judge who authorizes or doesn't law enforcement to confiscate someone's firearms

for days, weeks, months, or in some cases, years. Republican Senator Lindsey Graham from South Carolina and Democratic Senator Richard Blumenthal from Connecticut have been in talks about red flag legislation. They first drafted a red flag bill in 2019 and say they are now updating it in an attempt to win over wider support in the Senate. Graham and Blumenthal told CBS their discussions are making progress on Wednesday. According to CBS, the two are working on provisions to allow proper due process and judicial review for confiscation that is acceptable to Republicans, but not so ineffective that the bill loses support from Democrats.

Meanwhile, President Biden has said Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell is rational and had expressed hopes he would lead his caucus to passing something. Other senators involved in the talks include Democrats Joe Manchin from West Virginia, Kyrsten Sinema from Arizona, and Martin Heinrich from New Mexico, as well as Republican Susan Collins from Maine, Pat Toomey from Pennsylvania, and Bill Cassidy from Louisiana. For the purposes of today's piece, we're going to focus on red flag laws, since that looks like the kind of legislative solution that has the best shot of becoming law in the near future.

We'll take a look at some arguments from the right and left, and then my take. Alright, first up, we'll start with what the right is saying. The right is divided on national red flag laws, though most oppose them. Some warn about due process or suggest state red flag laws could work, while national ones won't. Others argue that red flag laws are the best solution we've got. In Reason, Jacob Sullen said there is still little evidence red flag laws work and lots of reason to believe innocent people will have their rights violated. New York's law, which took effect in 2019, allows a long list of people to seek such orders. Potential petitioners include

police officers, prosecutors, blood relatives, in-laws, current and former spouses, current and former housemates, current and former girlfriends or boyfriends, people who have produced a child with a respondent, and school administrators or their designees, such as teachers, coaches, and guidance counselors. The school personnel covered by the law can report a former student if he graduated within the previous six months, Solem said. Judges may consider any evidence, and respondents have no right to legal representation if they cannot afford it, nor do they have a civil cause of action against petitioners who lie, a potentially significant problem in light of all the people who are allowed to file a petition. The lack of such a deterrent increases the risk that an in-law, cousin, ex-spouse,

ex-girlfriend, or former housemate with a grudge will abuse this process. The very concept of red flags assumes that experts can reliably distinguish between harmless oddballs and future murderers. But there is little basis for that assumption, Solom added. A 2012 study that the Department of Defense commissioned after the 2009 mass shooting at Fort Hood in Texas includes an appendix titled Prediction, Why It Won't Work. The appendix observes that, quote, low base rate events with high consequences pose a management challenge. In the case of a targeted violence, for example, there may be pre-existing behavior markers that are specifiable. But while such markers may be sensitive, they are of low specificity

and thus carry the baggage of an unavoidable false alarm rate, which limits feasibility of prediction intervention strategies. In other words, even if certain red flags are common among mass shooters, almost none of the people who display those signs are bent on murderous violence. The National Review editorial board said say no to national red flag laws. We have urged states to consider such laws. If carefully crafted, they can provide law enforcement and families a tool to potentially prevent a disturbed person from acquiring firearms to carry out a devastating attack, the editor said. But the federal level is a different matter. First of all, our constitutional system expressly separates the responsibilities of the

federal government and the responsibilities of the states, and absent an amendment that empowers it do so, the federal government lacks any authority to remove legally owned firearms from individuals whom it suspects may be dangerous at some point in the future. If one squints, one can find in the Commerce Clause certain powers to regulate the transportation, importation, and interstate sale of firearms. One cannot find the power to superintend their possession, under no circumstances should that power be claimed. Legalities aside, it would be a mistake for the federal government to try to create and administer a red flag system itself, it added. If such laws are to work effectively, it will be because the government that administers them inspires confidence and is close and accessible to the people availing themselves of the laws.

There's far too much distance between the federal government and the citizenry for this to work at a national level. There is a reason that Florida's red flag law, which was passed after the 2018 Parkland shooting, is run on a county-by-county basis and administered by local police. And that reason is that, in this matter, local is better. The FBI is not set up to execute such a system, and the federal courts are not set up to adjudicate it. And, even if they were, Americans would be right to oppose elevating yet another question to the national level. David French said we should pass and enforce red flag laws now. The idea is simple. If a person exhibits behavior indicating that they might be a threat to themselves or others, such as suicidal

ideation or violent fantasies. A member of his family, a school official, or a police officer can go to court to secure an order that permits police to seize his weapons and prohibit him from purchasing any additional weapons so long as the order lasts, French said. A well-drafted red flag law should contain abundant procedural safeguards, including imposing a burden of proof on the petitioner, hearing requirements, and a default expiration date unless the order is renewed through a clear showing of continued need. But its potential effectiveness is crystal clear.

It's not enough just to pass a red flag law. We have to educate citizens and police about their existence and scope. Laws don't enforce themselves. Tragically, it appears that New York's red flag law could have stopped the Buffalo mass shooting, he said. I know the objections. I know that red flag laws implicate a core constitutional right. I also know that poorly drafted laws are subject to abuse. But our constitutional structure permits emergency and temporary deprivations of even core liberty interests upon sufficient showing of need, with sufficient due process. Restraining orders and other forms of domestic violence prevention orders can often block parents and spouses, even from their own families, upon a showing

of an imminent threat. All right, that is it for what the right is saying, which brings us to what the left is saying. The left mostly supports red flag laws, arguing there is evidence they work. Many contend they can limit both suicides and mass shootings. Some argue they are a far stronger proposal than anything else Republicans would support. Some argue they are a far stronger proposal than anything else Republicans would support. In the Washington Post, Lizette Alvarez said Florida's red flag law could help nationally. Based on Charles Yu's award-winning book, Interior Chinatown follows the story of Willis Wu, a background character trapped in a police procedural who dreams about a world beyond Chinatown. When he inadvertently becomes a witness to a crime,

Willis begins to unravel a criminal web, his family's buried history, and what it feels like to be in the spotlight. Interior Chinatown is streaming November 19th, only on Disney+. The flu remains a serious disease. Last season, over 102,000 influenza cases have been reported across Canada,

which is nearly double the historic average of 52,000 cases. What can you do this flu season? Talk to your pharmacist or doctor about getting a flu shot. Consider FluCellVax Quad and help protect yourself from the flu. It's the first cell-based flu vaccine authorized in Canada for ages six months and older, and it may be available for free in your province. Side effects and allergic reactions can occur, and 100% protection is not guaranteed. Learn more at FluCellVax.ca. It is useful that the laws on specific behavior is the person stockpiling firearms while planning a shooting, has the person made alarming statements or social media posts, rather than simply on mental illness, which is relatively common and seldom leads to violence.

The laws modeled after domestic violence orders of protection are not foolproof. More funding for red flag laws is needed to raise awareness among residents and help inform and train police departments. Fort Lauderdale detective Christopher Carita says the law has saved many lives. He remembers one case in which a mother had noticed her son's rage and drove him to a doctor. The young man was hospitalized after he told the doctor he wanted to, quote, kill some people, as Corita recalled. That's when the police unit became involved. We learned he had already purchased an AK-47 pistol known as a Draco, and it was being held at a gun store in a three-day wait period, so he hadn't received it yet, Corita told me.

Corita's unit secured an extreme risk protection order and worked with his family, Alvarez said. Two months later, the man tried to buy another gun, but the order flagged him and a background check blocked the sale. The man benefited from counseling and the buffer provided by the red flag law had allowed his anger to subside, Corita said. He is now back with his family, working and living his life. Bloomberg's editorial board said red flag laws can make a difference. They aren't infallible. Nothing could be in a country awash with guns. But more than half of mass shooters exhibited clear warning signs before committing their crimes, which makes such laws

worthwhile, the editor said. When it comes to gun control, the combination of efficacy and feasibility is rare. Policymakers should seize the moment. Opponents of red flag laws call them unfair because they lack due process. In truth, they're no more burdensome than traditional domestic protection laws found in all 50 states. No one's guns are taken away without a judge's approval. If a temporary seizure is approved, another hearing is convened within weeks to allow the recipient of the order to offer a defense. In turn, the reporting parties must make their case for extending the order. The

process isn't foolproof, but given the stakes, it's surely a fair one. A more pressing concern is whether such laws really work. They're now in the books in 19 states, but they're relatively new, so it's hard to be sure just yet. Still, the research so far is encouraging, the editor said. In Connecticut, which enacted one of the first red flag laws, a study estimated that one life has been saved for every 10 to 20 protection orders issued. A California study looked at 21 orders issued against individuals who'd made mass shooting threats and found no violence subsequently attributed to any of them. The police need to be trained to apply such orders, and the general public needs to be made aware. Legal ambiguities also need to be cleared up. The Buffalo shooter

was a minor at the time of his mental health evaluation and hence forbidden to buy a gun in any case. Perhaps the authorities thought the red flag law was therefore irrelevant. In Slate, Alex Yablone said the GOP's only answer to school shootings, a good guy with a gun, doesn't actually help. Last year, a group of public health scholars published a study in the Journal of the American Medical Association examining 133 school shootings from 1980 to 2019. An armed guard was present in about a quarter of the incidents in the study. Those schools actually suffered death rates nearly three times higher than the schools without armed guards. Similarly, in a 2020 review of gun policy research by the RAND Corporation

think tank, found no evidence that the presence of more guns had any effect on gun violence. Criminologists at Texas State University found that unarmed staff or the shooters themselves are far more likely to bring a school shooting to an end than someone with a gun returning fire. Good guys with guns fail to stop bad guys with guns in the moment because mass shootings are rare, surprising, and unpredictable events, Yablon wrote. Red flag laws are effective because mass shooters are, by contrast, pretty predictable. They almost always display clear warning signs they are a danger to society and themselves. The Evaldi shooter was no exception. According to friends, he engaged in self-harm, shot a BB gun at strangers, and expressed a desire to kill. He also posted frequently on social media about his desire for

guns. If Texas had the appropriate legal machinery in place, the people in the shooter's life who had been so alarmed by his behavior might have had an opportunity to act before it was too late. Alright, that is it for what the right and the left are saying, which brings us to my take. So, just last week a reader asked me what I thought about red flag laws and why I didn't touch on them in my initial piece on Uvalde. I said that I saw the pros and cons pretty clearly and that since I had no definitive position, I didn't think it was worth addressing quite yet. After another week of getting to read how these arguments play out, I think my position is a bit clearer. For starters, I just want to reiterate what I already wrote. I think the most important pressing issue is creating more friction in gun sales. My suggestion was something that more

closely resembles how we handle cars, which is to require licensing, training, and registration. I've yet to hear a compelling argument as to why this solution lacks merit, and given that I don't know a single person who feels the government is overly burdensome about how they restrict someone's ability to drive, I don't really buy the argument that such a system would be outside the bounds of the Second Amendment. But there is obviously a big gaping hole in that idea. What about the 400 million guns already on the street? On the surface, I think red flag laws are a good answer to that problem. As I've said over and over when these shootings happen, I often think about levels of responsibility. At the top is the shooter themselves, which goes without saying.

Next, usually, are the people who I think bear some responsibility for not flagging a potential shooter's behavior or supporting a person in crisis. That's family, friends, teachers, etc. Then, it's the institution's job, the courts, local police, and healthcare facilities usually, to act on those warnings and protect the community. When any one of these layers fails, there is often also reasonable blame in the loose laws that make it so easy for a potential shooter to get a gun. I like the concept of red flag laws because they shore up the first and second layers here. They make it harder for a person who has a gun to do something bad with it, and they make it easier for family, friends, and teachers to work with the police and authorities, act on suspicion someone

may be a threat to themselves or others with the force of the law behind them. We know pretty assuredly that mass shooters usually show signs and often don't intend to survive their events. If, for example, I had a friend who I knew was in crisis, had made threats about taking their own lives or the life of someone else, and I also knew they owned a gun, I'd feel a lot better if I lived in a state where there were clear guidelines about what I could do to separate that friend from their weapon. Given that more than half of all gun deaths in the US are suicide, it's also worth pointing out that these laws don't just protect the lives of other people in public spaces, they can also protect the lives of gun owners themselves. In fact, much of the research on red flag laws shows that the most demonstrable impact is related to suicides. It's hard for me to comprehend how this is anything but a huge net positive. Even the argument that the research isn't definitive yet strikes me as odd. If the results are neutral to positive, let's expand the program and keep

studying it to see what happens, especially given the common sense reasoning and anecdotal proof it's doing some good. Will there be costs? Of course. I'm sure some people will attempt to abuse the system, perhaps by falsifying reports to punish someone they have a grudge against. The solution, though, is not to bail on the idea. It's to put in place serious repercussions for falsifying such reports and as much due process as possible. It's to put in place serious repercussions for falsifying such reports and as much due process as possible. It's to ensure there's a healthy and timely due process. Florida's model seems like a strong one for any American town, and in more liberal states, there could be a more robust system. Either way, I imagine situations where the law is abused will

be far rarer than scenarios where guns are taken from someone who poses a legitimate threat. Finally, to the National Review editor's point, I agree that federal legislation Congress may pass should be focused on compelling states to adopt these laws, not trying to run some huge program from D.C. The more local, the better. So would this be my priority? Probably not. But I do think if we follow existing models that appear effective, there are ways to implement red flag laws that reduce gun violence and self-harm while also ensuring the system isn't abused. A quick note, if you are having thoughts of suicide, please call the National Suicide Prevention Lifeline at 1-800-273-8255. That's 1-800-273-TALK or go to speakingofsuicide.com slash resources for a list

of additional resources. If you're interested in what you can do about a loved one who is severely depressed, there is a link to resources in today's newsletter. All right, next up is our reader question for the day. This one is from Manuel in Australia. Manuel said, I believe that politics are extremely polarized in an unhealthy way, but at the same time, I support politicians like Bernie Sanders and AOC that are considered quote unquote far left. I love Tangle and I read the Blindspot report to try and stick to balanced media sources. Is that all for nothing if I'm advocating for a candidate that some people would consider extremist? So I love this question because it comes from someone who's clearly thinking about

their role in the discourse, even though you don't even live in America and you're trying to get out of your bubble. So my answer is no, I don't think you are part of the problem, but that comes with some caveats. My goal with Tangle is not to moderate people. My goal is to make sure at the very least we understand the best arguments from the other side. So no, I don't think it's a problem when people support politicians who are considered far left or far right. I think it's a problem when people support those politicians without engaging other ideas and more specifically without engaging ideas about why the politicians they support may not be worthy of that support. So put differently, it's okay to support someone other people view as more fringe, but only if you have really given the time and introspection to evaluate whether that person is worthy of your support. If you haven't,

then I think it's a huge problem. And frankly, I think if you spend a lot of time evaluating the policies and positions of Bernie or AOC or any far-right politician, you'll begin to see that they may have reasonable views in some areas and unreasonable views in others. Zooming even further out, I would just say this. You're better off not supporting any politicians, but instead try and form an ideology about what things you think the country should value and what role the government has in that. In today's politics, I think we are far too obsessed with individual politicians to the point of indulging in personality cults, which leaves people twisting themselves into knots to defend them even when they're wrong. Try to form an ideology and value system. Make sure you're questioning it regularly. Keep engaging a wide set of political views,

and then you can vote or support people who you think best represent where you land. Then you can vote or support people who you think best represent where you land. All right, next up is our story that matters for the day. This one is about blue cities and red states who say they will not enforce abortion bans or won't make enforcing them a priority. That's according to a new Axios story. Local officials in states like Texas, Tennessee, Georgia, and North Carolina, including city council members and prosecutors and district attorneys, have said they won't make enforcement a priority or won't enforce the bans at all. In Louisiana, District Attorney Jason

Roger Williams said he will not shift priority from tackling shootings, rapes, and carjackings to investigating the choices women make with regard to their own bodies. The pushback could play out in the same way sanctuary cities have, which don't aid in enforcing federal immigration laws. Axios has the story. There's a link to it in today's newsletter. All right, next up is our numbers section. The number of suicides reduced by every 10 to 20 red flag orders that are issued is 1, according to the Violence Prevention Research Program at UC Davis Health. The percentage of orders that were approved by a judge in Oregon, according to one researcher,

was 90%. In New York, the number of extreme risk protection orders, the ERPO, used to confiscate a weapon every month is 18. In 2019, the percentage of Americans who said they strongly or somewhat support laws that allow the police to seek a court order to temporarily take away guns if they feel a gun owner may harm themselves or others is 70%. The percentage who said they strongly or somewhat oppose such a law was 17%. All right, and last but not least our Have a Nice Day story. This one is about Vicky Omodu, who made a startling discovery when she brought home her new couch from Craigslist. $36,000 in cash. The money was stuffed inside one of the cushions, and Omodu decided to immediately alert the previous owner and return the cash. When the family who had given her the couch

was alerted, they explained that it had belonged to a deceased member of their family and they had actually found other money, just hundreds of dollars, hidden around the house. As a thank you for her honesty, they gave her $2,200 and bought her a new refrigerator. ABC7 has the story. There's a link to it in today's newsletter. All right, everybody, that is it for the podcast. Like I said at the top, if you want to hear from us tomorrow, you need to subscribe. ReadTangle.com slash membership. Otherwise, we'll be right back here on Monday.

Same time. Have a good one. Peace. Music for the podcast was produced by Diet 75. For more from Tangle, subscribe to our newsletter or check out our content archives at www.readtangle.com. Thanks for watching! who dreams about a world beyond Chinatown. When he inadvertently becomes a witness to a crime, Willis begins to unravel a criminal web, his family's buried history, and what it feels like to be in the spotlight. Interior Chinatown is streaming November 19th, only on Disney+.

The flu remains a serious disease. Last season, over 102,000 influenza cases have been reported across Canada, which is nearly double the historic average of 52,000 cases. What can you do this flu season? Talk to your pharmacist or doctor about getting a flu shot. Thank you.