Early in my investigative career, during a surveillance on Detroit’s west side near the Redford border, a target of my investigation opened fire on me at close range. Lucky for me, urban thugs rarely have firearms training. They learn to shoot from movies. This individual fired several times at me, missing me completely before speeding away in his vehicle. 

I was unarmed at the time. I realized immediately that if I was going to operate in Detroit, I needed to carry a firearm. Why? Murphy’s Law. Anything that can go wrong will. The need for law-abiding residents to own their own firearms seems obvious, if not moral. Never again would I be caught unready. 

Now, however, our elected leaders are coming for our guns. Our girl-boss power column—led by Gov. Gretchen Whitmer and a group of legislators including State Sen. Mallory McMorrow and State Rep. Kelly Breen—signed into law an Extreme Risk Protection Order package of new gun laws, taken together and ostensibly known as “red flag” laws, that went into effect Feb. 13. The new laws were part of a larger set of regulations aimed at gun dealers and gun owners and targeted specifically to enhance background checks and increase safe storage of firearms in private residences.  

A deep reading of the red flag law package indicates legal gun owners’ rights of due process have been fired into the burning sun. Under the new rules—written in barely intelligible legalese boilerplate—a coterie of individuals that includes, but is not limited to, family members, friends, ex-wives, ex-partners, doctors, psychologists, local police, prosecutors, neighbors, and pretty much anyone else within a 100-mile radius, can petition a local or state court to have a legal gun owner’s firearms removed without notification. This is to be enforced by local police or sheriffs’ departments. The gun owner is given a 14-day window of opportunity after the removal to plead their case and challenge the removal.

The constitutional problems within the new red flag laws for legal gun owners are legion and quite chilling once second- and third-order effects are considered. An aggrieved ex-spouse or ex-partner could use the new law as a means to inflict retribution on the legal gun owner, find a politically liberal prosecutor or court anywhere in the state willing to use the new laws, and drag a gun owner before a judge. Next thing you know, you’ll have gun removals based on political parties. 

Consider the following issues that remain vague within the new laws:

• The legal gun owner doesn’t have to commit a crime or even state they intend to commit a crime. 
• Those seeking removal of a gun owners’ firearms can “forum shop” for a friendly circuit court judge anywhere in the state, regardless of where the gun owner resides. 
• No medical or psychological evaluation by a certified professional is required.
• The court may use a gun owner’s personal politics or opinions about government to meet the preponderance of evidence standard—scary given how our current two-tiered justice system has become weaponized against conservatives. 

Rep. Breen is one of the key framers of the new red flag laws. When asked if a gun owner’s politics could be a factor in making determinations for removal, she stated only that “checks and balances” would be applied. 

Several sheriffs departments within the state have signaled their intention to ignore the laws out of constitutional and safety concerns, and multiple police departments have stated hesitation in enforcing a removal order from an unknowing gun owner. 

Attorney General Dana Nessel, ever combative, made aggressive statements regarding local jurisdictional concerns and stated she will find a way to enforce the ERPO statewide. Undaunted, Rep. Breen has stated Democrats in Lansing intend to introduce several broader gun laws, including additional waits and bans on extended magazines and “assault rifles.”

For Michigan residents, the news is quite remarkable. Crime in the suburbs has dramatically risen since the Summer of Floyd. Police are far less likely to stop and frisk suspicious persons and have reduced traffic enforcement. Property crime is less of a priority for local progressive prosecutors, and social workers are now responding to 911 calls in many Michigan cities. 

More recently, Jewish people have been the target of violent crime throughout southeastern Metro Detroit after the Oct. 7 Hamas attack on Israel, culminating with the violent murder of Samantha Woll on the doorstep of her Detroit home. A reasonable person would think that personal security and safety is at a premium in the current moment, but given current progressive victim-oppressor politics, maybe an unarmed and weak population is what sophisticated liberal elites imagine for us.  

When I was shot at and had nothing to fire back with, I was a potential victim. That feeling of weakness and helplessness was revolting, alien, and jarring. I’m not hardwired to be an oppressor, but I’ll never allow myself to be a victim.  

The girl bosses seem intent on disarming law-abiding Michigan residents, but those same ladies live in affluent, well-policed subdivisions far away from the working poor areas. Luxury beliefs. Aiming to achieve utopia with well-meaning laws, they know nothing of what it’s like to get shot at. They imagine that guns are held only by white conservative men with red hats yelling, “This is MAGA Country!” But the reality is quite different.  

J.Z. Delorean is a writer for Michigan Enjoyer and has been a Metro Detroit-based professional investigator for 22 years. Follow him on X @Stainless31.