No, I didn’t know the red flag laws and that he signed a bill for it. But it makes sense that his legislature would sign it. He performed resistance to signing for three months, to indicate how strongly he does not want to take away guns. But ultimately he signed this Republican Gun Law because it serves their cause well. It leaves open WHO can have guns, and allows his police force to take guns away from “those people” who are “too dangerous” to have them. That ability to interpret the ambiguity of the law often means black Americans can have their guns take away, because to whites like him the words “criminal”, “dangerous,” “thug,” evokes black Americans. It could be latinos, or “bad hombres,” but again, the interpretation is made local, so that Cubans can keep their guns. With this red flag law, he has maintained the core supremacist belief that every (white) man is allowed and encourage to have a gun but then signaled he as the state can give police, parole board, judges can use the power of the red flag laws to take away guns from those “not worthy,” the “criminals” or “thugs.” It makes sense he signed the law. I doubt he’ll want to remove it. And if president he could pull the same act, letting the federal government through some centrist coalition pass the red flag law he is “against” but then grudgingly signs it into law, fulfilling his real objective.
Super, thanks much for providing me with today’s profound insight I had no idea about. I have to think this one over for a while now.