The Screwed Up Way People Look at Red Flag Laws

Red flag laws are something we’ve talked a lot about. There are multiple problems with them, including both Second Amendment concerns and due process concerns. I just can’t see how anyone could consider them constitutional in the first place.

But a number of states have them.

And what we typically find is that the justification for these laws existing is how often they’re used. I knew they’d do it this way from the start, as I’m sure many of you did, but they still did it and continue to do it.

What bugs me even more, though, is how a lack of it being used is taken as absolutely nothing but a problem.

Use of Nevada’s “red flag” law — which allows police and family members to petition a court to temporarily take away an individual’s firearms — has more than quadrupled since The Nevada Independent reported limited use of the law in 2022.

Public records obtained by The Indy show that as of January 2025, 61 “red flag” or extreme risk protection orders were added to the state’s criminal record keeping database. The law has been used more frequently every year — five orders were filed in 2021, while 27 were filed in 2024.

Nevada still lags behind most of the 19 other states that have adopted similar red flag laws, which typically see between 50 to 100 orders filed per year — though the filing frequency is variable based on the size of the state and how long their laws have been in place. 

But the law may be used more in the future. Nevada Attorney General Aaron Ford’s office announced a $400,000 grant in October 2022 to train and promote the “red flag” law to police, as well as offer subgrants to community organizations that provide resources for families looking to help family members in crisis. The grant was funded by federal American Rescue Plan dollars.

The office cited The Indy’s reporting in its press release announcing the grant, and stated that it was “important to train law enforcement and make Nevada families aware of this crucial tool, which can help stop shootings before they start.”

Now, I get that they’re not using it as much as other states, but what no one seems to be asking is why? The assumption is that authorities are just unaware of the law or how to use it, but that’s still just an assumption. Nothing in this story seems to suggest any real research into why it hasn’t been used more often. They just decide that a lack of knowledge must be the problem.

But while the United States is one nation, we’re really 50 nations under a single umbrella, in a lot of ways. What plagues one state isn’t necessarily a problem in another state. Is Nevada just not “needing” to use the law as often?

Even if red flag laws were the bee’s knees and had no constitutional problems associated with them at all, I think it’s stupid to just assume a lack of use simply has to be the result of police officers and others being unaware of the law.

But it’s a gun control law, which means the narrative can never be questioned, even though there are some serious questions that need to be answered about them.

The media is just not curious about anything anymore, unless it benefits the narrative.

And they wonder why no one trusts them anymore.