But if there is insufficient evidence of imminent danger to himself/others or of the commission of a crime to so justify depriving a person of his liberty, then there is similarly insufficient evidence to justify depriving the person of other fundamental constitutional rights. “Red Flag” laws suffer from this basic constitutional flaw.

Suggestion for the PDT 2.0 admin:

Any state having “red flag” laws that do not provide for (1) a paid legal defense for anyone whose guns are sought to be seized, and (2) mandatory statutory damages against all involved (including the judge who signs the RFO) if the RFO is subsequently determined to have been improperly issued or maintained, is ineligible for federal anti-crime revenue sharing grants.

Justification would be, “this Administration has determined that such laws are unconstitutional under the Second Amendment and the due process clause, and accordingly federal anti-crime funds will not be provided to jurisdictions that have them.”

Well, if a single finger is a Level 1 I got a ‘Level 1 bird’ for them unless I bring out the ‘double barrel level 1 bird’ with using a finger on each hand.

Just as silly to prosecute someone for holding it and making “swoosh” sounds.

I haz a question about that. Is a “two finger” gun gesture considered a Level 2, and a “single finger” a Level 1? Asking for a young friend…

I remember that case. To this day I can still not figure out how a child’s finger is dubbed a “level 2 lookalike firearm” or what the heck the invented contrived term “level 2 lookalike firearm” actually means.