It’s often been said that gun control is really about people control. Understanding this, the megalomania gun control advocates exhibit in their never-ending pursuit to control others displays a zealotry often associated with religious fundamentalism. It should come as little surprise then that gun control supporters are now trying to enlist clergy into their fight against natural rights, by encouraging religious leaders to promote and utilize red flag gun confiscation orders.
In September, the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health’s Center for Gun Violence Solutions published a tract titled “Extreme Risk Protection Orders: A Clergy Resource Guide” (extreme risk protection orders are the gun control advocates’ preferred term for red flag gun confiscation orders). The document was authored alongside groups including Faiths United to Prevent Gun Violence, Faith Leaders for Ending Gun Violence, and Jewish Women International.
Another author was the Presbyterian Office of Public Witness, which the document described as “the public policy information and advocacy office for the General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church (USA).” The progressive PCUSA currently hosts the guide on its website. Texas Democratic U.S. Senate candidate James Talarico, who has put his version of religion at the forefront of his campaign, trained at a PCUSA seminary.
Astute gun rights supporters will know that the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health bears the name of billionaire gun control financier Michael Bloomberg. For his part, Bloomberg appears to believe he can dictate terms to the divine.
In a 2014 interview with the New York Times announcing the creation and financing of anti-gun group Everytown for Gun Safety, Bloomberg expressed confidence that his efforts to direct the lives of other people would earn him his eternal reward. The piece noted,
Pointing to his work on gun safety, obesity and smoking cessation, [Bloomberg] said with a grin: “I am telling you if there is a God, when I get to heaven I’m not stopping to be interviewed. I am heading straight in. I have earned my place in heaven. It’s not even close.”
The guide seeks to inject gun control directly into the clergy-congregant relationship. The document encourages faith leaders to leverage the trust their congregants place in them, noting, “faith leaders are often trusted confidants. You may be among the first to hear when someone is experiencing crisis…”
Of course, the danger that a pastor may work to have the government strip a person of a fundamental right based on a private conversation will prompt some congregants to forego potentially beneficial pastoral services entirely. As with veterans who responded to the Department of Veterans Affairs’ now-ended efforts to unconstitutionally strip beneficiaries of Second Amendment rights by foregoing services or withholding information from bureaucrats and health professionals, if a “confidant” won’t keep a confidence trust erodes.
In a section titled “Recognizing Warning Signs,” the guide provides purported “Examples of Behaviors That May Indicate Elevated Risk of Harm to Self and/or Others.” The authors claim that one such “warning sign” is the mere exercise of the Second Amendment right. The document lists as a “warning sign,” “Recent acquisition of firearms or large amounts of ammunition.” Other supposed “warning signs” include “Giving away valued possessions” and “Significant recent loss (e.g., job, relationship, death of a loved one) with escalating distress.”
In political fashion, the document also has a gun control messaging guide complete with suggested phrases that clergy can use to sell their flock on gun confiscation. Such branding efforts are nothing new for gun control advocates, as evidenced by the notorious 2012 communications firm-produced “Preventing Gun Violence Through Effective Messaging.” Still, a reasonable person might find devising gun control talking points for religious clergy to be particularly cynical and crass.
NRA-ILA opposes red flag gun confiscation order laws because they are unconstitutional.
Due process is vital to protect all fundamental rights. As enacted in multiple states, red flag gun confiscation laws grant the government the authority to seize a person’s firearms ex parte. These confiscation orders are issued without a hearing or other opportunity for the target of the order to be heard and present evidence. Moreover, this type of legislation typically permits the government to seize firearms based on weak and nebulous standards of evidence.
The U.S. Supreme Court cast doubt on the validity of red flag laws, which deny an individual meaningful due process before suspending their rights, in their 9-0 ruling in U.S. v. Hemani (2026). In striking the blanket federal firearm prohibition for “unlawful user[s]… of any controlled substance,” the Court emphasized the necessity for due process prior to even a temporary suspension of Second Amendment rights.
Further, aside from due process concerns, the U.S. Supreme Court decision in New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen (2022) suggested that red flag gun confiscation orders are unconstitutional. Justice Clarence Thomas’s opinion made clear that for a firearm regulation to pass constitutional muster it must fit within the text, history, and tradition of the Second Amendment right. Specifically, the opinion noted,
[w]hen the Second Amendment’s plain text covers an individual’s conduct, the Constitution presumptively protects that conduct. The government must then justify its regulation by demonstrating that it is consistent with the Nation’s historical tradition of firearm regulation. Only then may a court conclude that the individual’s conduct falls outside the Second Amendment’s “unqualified command.”
That poses a problem for red flag gun confiscation law backers, who are eager to stress the “innovative” nature of the gun control measure.
It is important that gun rights supporters are informed of the myriad avenues by which well-funded gun controllers seek to undermine their fundamental rights. Sadly, civilian disarmament advocates’ worldly pursuit of control appears to have pervaded even some houses of worship.
More Like This From Around The NRA
