6a I asked Senator Thom Tillis why he voted along with the Democrats for the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act. I eventually received a lengthy boiler-plate reply. The wording is designed to sound good and convincing. But I found in it something that any critical thinker should find disturbing, if not downright frightening.

What guardrails does this legislation put in place to protect due process for law-abiding North Carolinians?

Here is a paragraph from that lengthy response:

"I am very concerned about protecting and preserving our constitutional rights, which is why I fought to ensure strong due process protections were included in this legislation. For states that choose to use crisis intervention order programs, the legislation requires strong due process and evidentiary protections to protect our constitutional rights and prevent abuse. That means new due process guardrails for states with existing crisis intervention order programs and for those that choose to implement new ones. This includes both pre- and post-deprivation due process rights that include notice, the right to an in-person hearing, unbiased adjudicators, knowledge of opposing evidence, right to present evidence, right to confront adverse witnesses, and the right to be represented by legal counsel. It requires heightened evidentiary standards to justify crisis intervention and requires penalties for those who attempt to abuse the program."

Well, this reads pretty reasonable and convincing, until you get to the bit “unbiased adjudicators.”

Let’s see, somebody that doesn’t like you complains to the police. They raid your house and confiscate your legally acquired (and licensed if applicable) firearms. So, you demand a hearing to get your guns back.

According to this document from Senator Tillis, your claim will be heard by “unbiased adjudicators.”

So, who is going to appoint these “unbiased adjudicators” and by what criteria will they be judged to be “unbiased?” Will the officials that select these “unbiased adjudicators.” be subject to an equivalent requirement that they also be unbiased? Let’s get down to the core of this: who is unbiased about anything these days?

Will someone that is a member of the NRA be excluded owing to prima facia bias? Will someone that owns firearms be excluded? Will only people that do not own firearms be considered? Given the various statistics on gun ownership in the USA, it is very likely that the pool of “unbiased” people eligible to be appointed as adjudicators will be constricted, and very likely among a minority of the citizens.

I asked Senator Tillis to answer these questions. I got no reply.

Draw your own conclusions from Senator Tillis’ nonresponse. I wonder if he even read the text of this bill. He’s got staffers that can write up an executive summary in a couple of paragraphs, but just how unbiased are they when it comes to picking and choosing what goes into the summary?

What really bothers me about this whole idea is that it echoes what went on in the former Soviet Union. Back in the day dissidents were denounced, hauled before tribunals, judged to be mentally deranged and committed to institutions.

This so-called Bipartisan Safer Communities Act impresses me in the way it sets up a mechanism to deal with anyone deemed to be “dangerous” by bypassing due process and subjecting anyone thought to be out of line to bureaucratic repression. What's next?

Of course, if Senator Tillis disagrees, he can answer my earlier questions. Unless of course he thinks I am being out of line by even asking them.

Gun violence is a symptom of a much bigger systemic problem. Good old “divide and conquer” politics is the bigger problem. Gun ownership is written into the U.S. Constitution, but our politicians seem to find it more of a nuisance than a guideline. Forget that " ... in order to form a more perfect union" bit. Instead of bringing this country together as Americans, they strive to emphasize class distinction and racial conflict. They are using COVID-19 to enforce top-down social control. And amid this, Senator Tillis and the rest of the senators and congressmen that foisted this bill on us expect “unbiased adjudicators” to right the wrongs.

— Leon A. Goldstein, Retired U.S. Army, Fayetteville resident