OPINION:
It was reported that the Justice Department is deliberating a proposal to block transgender people from buying firearms.
A Justice Department spokesman stated the department is “reviewing ways to ensure that mentally ill individuals suffering from gender dysphoria are unable to obtain firearms while they are unstable and unwell,” per The Daily Wire. “Under Attorney General Bondi’s leadership, this Department of Justice is actively considering a range of options to prevent mentally unstable individuals from committing acts of violence, especially at schools.”
The proposal stems from the recent spate of transgender people carrying out mass casualty incidents, most recently the Aug. 27 massacre at Annunciation Catholic School in Minneapolis, where a man legally named Robin Westman shot into a church while schoolchildren were praying, killing two and wounding more than 20 others.
There are three ways of considering this. The first is that it’s a remarkable troll that will result in the left defending gun rights — and don’t think they won’t. After all, these are the lawmakers who flew to El Salvador for margaritas with “Maryland dad”/human trafficker Kilmar Abrego Garcia. The second is that it’s a serious policy proposal that will infringe on Second Amendment rights, a deeply concerning issue that won’t make it through the courts.
The third is that the Justice Department is only “deliberating,” meaning it hasn’t proposed anything yet. If that’s the case, this may be nothing more than a trial balloon to ascertain public support or opposition to such a measure, but it is still concerning that it’s even been suggested.
There already exist court processes to adjudicate people as mentally unfit. Recently, Democrats and some Republicans have argued in favor of red flag laws as the means to this end, a way that sacrifices due process — the right to defend oneself before a judge in advance of a penalty rendered — as a trade-off for expedient disarmament.
Constitutional rights should never be a casualty of legal expediency. The process exists for a reason: to safeguard against abuse, something in which our Founders were well-versed after defeating the British.
The American Psychiatric Association does not classify gender dysphoria as a mental illness and considers it only a “diagnosis.” In prior years, transsexualism was considered a mental illness. Classifying transgenderism as a mental illness is one thing; taking the additional step of using it as a justification for deprivation of rights is a step further.
Determining mental defectiveness is done by an individual, not on a group basis. The Biden administration declared that “White supremacy” was the biggest threat to the security of the United States. Suppose we universally declare White Americans an immediate threat and, should the Justice Department implement this proposal, future Democratic administrations use it as the basis to disarm them?
Young Black males involved in gang activity are major drivers of crime in cities like Chicago. Suppose the Justice Department disarms all young Black men as a precaution, citing this precedent?
Eliminating due process for the innocent won’t force people close to killers — such as Westman’s mother (who knew enough in advance of her son’s instability that she allowed him to change his name as a minor), or the family of the Sandy Hook killer, or the family of the Parkland killer — to act. All it does is open the door to the blanket weaponization of mental illness by making suspects of everyone, including postpartum mothers and combat veterans, and making them eligible for disarmament.
It will also dissuade people from seeking mental health treatments for fear of being stigmatized as potential mass murderers. Additionally, it promotes a grotesque misunderstanding of mental illness. Most mentally ill people are dangerous only to themselves. It’s not a comforting realization, but when you’re using the threat of mass carnage as justification for potentially removing the rights of citizens, it’s a legitimate point, and there is a precedent for abuse.
In 2015, the Obama administration sought to ban Social Security beneficiaries from legally purchasing firearms if they required assistance to manage their affairs, a move that also targeted combat veterans.
Anti-Second Amendment advocates are quick to argue that the mental diminishment of those who used fiduciaries, but not of people like the Nashville transgender killer, Aubrey Hale, the Club Q transgender killer, Anderson Aldrich, in Colorado Springs or the STEM school transgender killer from Highlands Ranch in Colorado. All these people, it was later discovered, exhibited violent tendencies before their crimes.
Democrats have long vilified gun owners and weaponized mental health as a way to disarm millions of Americans. Their push for abolishing due process created the environment required to even consider such a proposal.
Sometimes getting what you asked for is a terrifying thing.
• Dana Loesch is the host of the No. 1 nationally syndicated weekday talk program, “Dana Show,” a bestselling author and a Second Amendment advocate. She lives in Dallas.
Please read our comment policy before commenting.