Gun Control & RKBA

mel: Red flag laws are extremely dicey. See Caniglia v. Strom and before you comment about a right wing Supreme Court, this was a 9-0 decision.

Since you used a trumpian defense - my argument is all over the internet, go look - I decided to take your advice, since I was unfamiliar, & 'see' caniglia v strom. What I see, thru your smoke and mirrors, is a judgement for a warrantless search & firearm confiscation which resulted in a 9-0 scotus ruling that remanded the decision, not a decision that the 2ndA was being violated (despite typical rightwing spin). This would not pertain to searches done WITH warrants, but if there was extreme risk as deemed by on scene police, then firearms could be confiscated. You would rather let a raving person alone with guns because you did not have a warrant? The wife had called the police complaining her husband had threatened her, later recanting to some degree.

2015, Edward Caniglia and his wife, Kim Caniglia, had an argument in their home.. Caniglia .. retrieved a handgun. The gun was unloaded .. Mrs Caniglia said something to the effect of, "shoot me now and get it over with .. she was concerned that her husband may commit suicide. . Caniglia said that he agreed to be taken to a nearby hospital for psychiatric evaluation .. The officers, accompanied by Mrs. Caniglia, seized the two guns, magazines for the guns, and ammunition... both Mrs. Caniglia and Caniglia attempted to retrieve the guns.. Caniglia filed suit against the police .. Caniglia alleged that the defendants had violated Caniglia's 2nd Amendment and 4th Amendment rights and that they had violated state law by seizing his firearms, ammunition, and person. The police returned the guns to Caniglia without a court order in December 2015.
U.S. Court of Appeals 1st Circuit affirmed - holding that the police officers' actions did not exceed the scope of their responsibilities..
In a unanimous opinion, the {supreme court} vacated the Court of Appeals 1st Circuit's ruling and remanded the case for further proceedings, holding that neither the holding nor logic of Cady (1972) justifies such warrantless searches and seizures in the home. https://ballotpedia.org/Caniglia_v._Strom

kavanaugh, 1921 scotus ruling: I join the Court’s opinion in full. I write separately to underscore and elaborate on THE CHIEF JUSTICE’s point that the Court’s decision does not prevent police officers from taking reasonable steps to assist those who are inside
a home and in need of aid.... 4th Amendment protects the “right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures.” As the constitutional text establishes, the “ultimate touchstone of the 4th Amendment is reasonableness. .. But drawing on common-law analogies and a commonsense appraisal of what is “reasonable,” the Court has recognized various situations where a warrant is not required”

This was not a decision on the validity of red flag laws, if you clear away mel's smoky mirrors.