Red flag laws, also known as Extreme Risk Protection Orders (ERPOs), have long been controversial. They allow law enforcement, medical professionals, or family members to petition a judge to temporarily confiscate firearms from individuals deemed a risk to themselves or others. While supporters argue these laws help prevent tragedies, opponents warn of government overreach and violations of constitutional rights.
Recent cases in Michigan have reignited the debate, particularly when it comes to children triggering firearm confiscations from their parents’ homes. A 6-year-old boy is now the youngest person to be named in an ERPO in Michigan, raising concerns about whether red flag laws are being applied fairly or being misused.
A recent report from Washington Gun Law’s William Kirk reveals a disturbing pattern: law enforcement is securing red flag orders against minors, then using those orders to confiscate all firearms in the household. This raises a critical concern – are these laws truly about public safety, or have they become a tool for widespread firearm confiscation with little oversight?
A Six-Year-Old Under a Red Flag Order
According to Beth LeBlanc of the Detroit News, a 6-year-old in Northville Township became the subject of a red flag order after reportedly expressing a mental health crisis and stating that he had access to firearms. Law enforcement officers investigated the claim, only to find that all firearms had already been removed from the home before their arrival.
This case raises an important question: If there were no accessible firearms, was the confiscation necessary, or was this an overreach of government power?
Deputy Chief Matthew MacKenzie of the Northville Township Police Department confirmed that in such cases, ERPOs are issued in the child’s name, which means the child is legally barred from possessing firearms. However, because minors cannot own guns, this often leads to firearms being confiscated from their parents or guardians.
Young Children and Red Flag Confiscations
The 6-year-old’s case isn’t the only one involving minors. According to Michigan State Police records obtained by The Detroit News, other red flag cases have involved:
- An 8-year-old in Alger County who made repeated threats to kill individuals and physically attacked school staff and a school resource officer.
- A 10-year-old in Northville Township who allegedly threatened to shoot another student and claimed to have access to unsecured firearms in his home.
While mental health and safety concerns must be taken seriously, these cases highlight a significant gray area: Are ERPOs being used to address legitimate risks, or are they being applied too broadly, punishing parents for the statements of children?
Michigan’s Unique Approach to Red Flag Laws
One major distinction in Michigan’s red flag law is its specific application to minors, as noted by State Sen. Mallory McMorrow, a sponsor of the bill. Unlike many states where red flag laws primarily target adults, Michigan’s law allows courts to issue ERPOs based on statements or behavior from children.
Sen. McMorrow defended the law, stating, “I don’t think mental health issues or violence issues judge by age.”
However, Tom Lambert, legislative director for Michigan Open Carry, pointed out a major flaw: Firearms are being taken from parents who are not the ones named in the order.
This means a law-abiding gun owner can lose their firearms simply because their child made a statement – whether truthful or not – about gun access.
The Growing Number of Red Flag Cases
Between February 13, 2024, and February 6, 2025, Michigan law enforcement used red flag laws to secure 321 ERPOs, with 303 still active, according to Michigan State Police data.
Some key findings from The Detroit News review of the data include:
- 66% of cases (212 petitions) cited mental health issues as a reason for firearm confiscation.
- 30% (96 cases) referenced past or current threats of self-harm or suicide.
- Only 7 cases involved minors, but those cases have raised some of the most serious legal questions.
These numbers suggest that red flag laws are being used broadly, often targeting individuals with mental health struggles – whether or not they have committed any crime.
Red Flagging Children to Disarm Parents
William Kirk, president of Washington Gun Law, has raised new concerns over how Michigan’s red flag laws are being applied. His investigation found that in multiple cases, including those of children as young as six, the state has issued Extreme Risk Protection Orders (ERPOs) not because the child had access to firearms, but because their parents were legal gun owners.
Kirk explains that once an ERPO is granted against a minor, law enforcement seizes all firearms in the household – effectively using the child as a legal loophole to disarm the parents. The most troubling aspect is that there is often no direct evidence that these children had access to unsecured firearms in the first place.
Instead, authorities act on statements made by the child, which may be exaggerated, misinterpreted, or even taken out of context.
A System Designed for Easy Confiscation
Kirk highlights a pattern in how these red flag cases unfold. According to a Detroit Free Press review, Michigan courts overwhelmingly grant these orders, often without the parents being notified until police arrive at their door.
In fact, nearly 62% of red flag orders in Michigan were granted ex parte, meaning the affected individuals had no chance to contest the order before their firearms were taken. This lack of due process is a major concern, as it allows authorities to remove guns from a household based solely on an allegation.
Kirk warns that this approach creates a dangerous precedent: If a child’s statement – whether truthful or not – can be used to strip an entire family of their Second Amendment rights, then the system has been designed for easy confiscation rather than genuine public safety.
Attorney Tom Grieve’s Warning: “This Could Affect Millions”
Attorney Tom Grieve, a former state prosecutor, has been raising concerns about how easily red flag laws can be abused. In a recent video, Grieve argues that the way Michigan is applying ERPOs could set a dangerous precedent for the rest of the country.
According to Grieve, children as young as six making statements about firearms should not be enough to trigger a full-scale government intervention in a household’s Second Amendment rights.
He also points out that in some cases, parents have proven their firearms were already secured, yet they still lost their guns under a red flag order.
The Slippery Slope: Could This Expand Nationwide?
Grieve warns that if Michigan’s approach spreads to other states, millions of lawful gun owners could lose their firearms simply because their child says something concerning at school.
He notes that many young children don’t fully understand the implications of their words and may:
- Repeat things they hear at home, on TV, or from other kids.
- Exaggerate or make things up in moments of distress.
- Express anger in extreme ways without any actual intent to act on it.
Should these words be enough to trigger firearm confiscations from law-abiding parents?
Are Judges Playing It Safe?
Another concern raised by Grieve is that judges may be issuing ERPOs too easily out of fear that failing to act could lead to public backlash if something bad happens later.
Much like doctors practice defensive medicine (ordering unnecessary tests to avoid lawsuits), judges may be issuing excessive ERPOs just to avoid being blamed for a future tragedy.
Grieve argues that this “defensive law” approach leads to unnecessary firearm confiscations and puts the burden of proof on innocent gun owners to fight for their rights in court.
University Campuses Also Using Red Flag Laws
Michigan’s red flag law has also been applied on college campuses. In July 2024, Michigan State University police filed an ERPO against a summer camp visitor who they believed had mental health issues and access to firearms.
While no crime was committed, the individual’s possession of guns on campus violated university policy, leading to an ERPO that lasted until a mental health evaluation determined they were “low risk.”
Similarly, in September 2024, University of Michigan police filed an ERPO against a patient at UM Hospital who had firearms in his car and allegedly made threats.
This expansion of red flag orders into university settings raises another question: Are these orders being used to prevent legitimate threats, or are they being applied too broadly?
The Bigger Picture: Safety vs. Rights
At its core, the red flag law debate revolves around a fundamental conflict between public safety and constitutional rights.
- Supporters argue ERPOs prevent gun violence and suicides, particularly in cases involving mental health crises.
- Opponents warn that the system is too easy to abuse and is leading to gun confiscations based on questionable evidence.
The Michigan cases, particularly involving young children triggering ERPOs against their parents, highlight the need for clearer legal safeguards. If hearsay from a child can result in an ERPO, where is the line between protecting public safety and violating due process?
Where Do We Go From Here?
The debate over Michigan’s red flag laws has grown more intense as new evidence suggests that minors are being used as a backdoor method for disarming their families.
Reports from both The Detroit News and Washington Gun Law show a troubling trend: children making concerning statements – whether serious, exaggerated, or misunderstood – are leading to red flag orders that strip legal gun owners of their firearms without warning. With over 60% of Michigan’s ERPOs being granted ex parte, many affected families never even get the chance to defend themselves before law enforcement arrives to confiscate their property.
As the debate continues, gun owners across the U.S. should pay attention. Michigan’s approach could soon become the model for red flag enforcement nationwide – for better or for worse.
A former park ranger and wildlife conservationist, Lisa’s passion for survival started with her deep connection to nature. Raised on a small farm in northern Wisconsin, she learned how to grow her own food, raise livestock, and live off the land. Lisa writes about homesteading, natural remedies, and survival strategies. Whether it’s canning vegetables or setting up a rainwater harvesting system, Lisa’s goal is to help others live more sustainably and prepare for the unexpected.