You erroneously brought up the 4th amendment as relevant not me. You bring up yhe 6th amendment then admit it is not relevant
I didn't say it was irrelevant. I said it's but one factor in the issue. You interpret what I say to suit your own position while ignoring anything that goes against it.
Due process is the issue;
Five main issues prevail:
1.The seizure of guns without any form of due process.
2. They are based on the testimony of one unrelated person (who need only be someone harboring a grudge).
3. The burden of proof is absurdly low (much leeway to reason No. 2).
4. They shift the burden of proof to the gun owner, rather than the accuser.
5. Even if the accused manages to clear their name, it will require a lot of time and money to regain their firearms, rendering them without defense for an indefinite period of time.
Red Flag Laws Violate Due Process
The Constitution mandates that no one shall be "deprived of life, liberty or property without due process of law."
Seizing the property of individuals who have been convicted of no crime violates this provision. Gun control advocates claim due process is not violated because people whose firearms are taken can appeal to courts to reclaim their property. However, as economist Raheem Williams has observed, “this backward process would imply that the Second Amendment is a privilege, not a right.”
Depriving individuals of a clearly established, constitutionally-guaranteed right in the absence of criminal charges or trial is an affront to civil liberties.
Too bad you don’t apply that standard to your proffered examples,
You say that don't take stories or claims on face value, yet you claim that it's fine to seize private property purely on the claims of people on the basis of what they may have only heard said.
That is a double standard. Nor is it a matter of justice to presume guilt on the subjective impression of someone who may be mistaken or making a malicious accusation. Which comes back to due process .
