BREAKING: ACLU Makes SHOCK Announcement About Gun Confiscation… NO ONE Saw This Coming


The next chapter of the Parkland, Florida, school shooting saga has begun. Anti-gun interest groups and politicians have used the Parkland shooting to launch what, until recently, they regarded as a distant dream — a wave of state legislation authorizing the confiscation of firearms, Breitbart reported.

These gun confiscation measures grossly violate the due process and Second Amendment rights of lawful gun owners. The constitutional problems are as follows:


The seizure of guns without any hearing at all. The laws all contain an “ex parte” provision that allows the state to temporarily seize a person’s guns without even notifying the gun owner or giving him a chance to be heard. This is the quintessential denial of due process. The Fourth Amendment makes clear that a person cannot be denied of liberty (to exercise one’s constitutional right to bear arms) without due process of law. This confiscation is “temporary,” but it can easily lead to long-term or permanent confiscation.

    1. Based on the testimony of one unrelated person. The confiscation order can be based on the testimony of only one person claiming that the gun owner poses a risk to the safety of himself or others. The law deceptively says that it has to be the testimony of a “family member.” But “family member” is defined to include “former dating partners” and anyone who has ever lived with the defendant. So a jilted former boyfriend or girlfriend, or even a roommate from years ago, could easily set in motion the disarming of a lawful gun owner.
    2. Using a very low standard of proof. The standard for obtaining an ex parte order against a gun owner is absurdly low – one need only show “reasonable cause” to believe that the person may pose a risk. That’s even lower than the “probable cause” standard for obtaining a search warrant. In addition, the judge is forced to rush his decision and issue the confiscation order on the same day of the ex parte hearing. Within two weeks of the ex parte hearing, a hearing with the gun owner present must occur; the purpose is to put in place a long-term confiscation order. But even at that hearing, the standard of proof is far below the “beyond a reasonable doubt” standard used in criminal trials. Rather, it need only be shown by “a preponderance of evidence” that the person poses a risk of injury to self or others. What kind of evidence? Things like the “reckless storage” of firearms and drinking habits can be considered. If you keep a handgun in the bedside table and drink beer regularly, you may in trouble.
    3. Shifting the burden of proof to the gun owner. The long-term confiscation order lasts up to a year, but may be renewed indefinitely. Once it is in place, it becomes very difficult to remove. To have the confiscation order lifted, the gun owner must prove he does not pose a threat to himself or others. Proving a negative is nearly impossible. Adding insult to injury, the bill even authorizes local law enforcement to charge the gun owner a storage fee for confiscating and storing his guns.
take our poll - story continues below

Whom do you consider to be the most corrupt Democrat Politician?

  • Whom do you consider to be the most corrupt Democrat Politician?  

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.
Completing this poll grants you access to AFF updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to this site's Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.

Silent and swift, , anti-firearm Bill, “gun confiscation bills” have been filed by liberal politicians in states across the country.


The NRA response:

“This law would be ripe for abuse by individuals that disagree with the Second Amendment, and the mere insinuation that gun ownership makes you a danger to yourself or others is offensive and insulting,”


In a stunning move, even the ACLU opposes these Bills, per

“[W]e have concerns that the initiative has inadequate due process procedures. Further, these deficient due process procedures could set a bad precedent for other criminal justice processes.”

In total, more than a dozen states are now considering similar gun confiscation laws. Even red states like Kansas, where SB 431 has been submitted, are considering them. On Thursday, Ohio’s Republican Governor John Kasich jumped on the bandwagon and called for a similar law in his state.  Breitbart

The insanity is already starting, I was with friends and family on Saturday and a few of the guys decided to go to the local Walmart because they needed .22LR.  When the 18 year old clerk got the 2 “bricks” of .22 ammo from behind the locked counter, she then asked the two men purchasing, “Is this for a rifle or handgun?”

I immediately interjected and why does that even matter and under what law are you allowed to ask?  I kept smiling because it was clear the 18 year old female clerk had no idea and she apologized and said that, “Walmart’s new policy says we have to ask this question on any and all ammo, if you say “rifle” then you have to be 18 but if you say “handgun” then you have to be 21.”   She went on to say Walmart is creating a policy where it is 21 across the board for every ammo purchase regardless.

The young female Walmart employee told us that she hates asking that question and she has already been yelled at by several customers, as if this is her fault.  She also told us that she feels like a hypocrite because she knows it is not the actual law but just a Walmart “policy” and she doesn’t know how to respond to angry customers.

As reported by AFF News, Walmart, the largest U.S. retailer, joined Dick’s Sporting Goods in raising the minimum age to purchase firearms to 21 after the massacre at a Florida high school that has reopened a fierce debate over gun control in America.

It is already beginning and our rights are being tread on, we cannot simply remain silent or just wish the whole thing would just vanish because it causes stress.  Shall not be infringed upon, is being targeted and you will only retain the rights you are willing to protect!

Chris “Badger” Thomas is a Veteran who served our country as an Army Combat Medic.



FOLLOW us on Facebook at Nation In Distress!

Please like and share on Facebook and Twitter!

Facebook Has Banned Us!

The leftists at Facebook decided they didn’t like our message, so they removed our page and are censoring us. Help us fight back and subscribe to our newsletter so that you can stay up-to-date with everything Facebook doesn’t want you to see!

Disqus Comments