Keeping an eye out for "Red Flag" legislation

This forum is for general legislative discussions not specific to any given legislative session. It will remain open.

Moderator: carlson1

Post Reply

Topic author
O.F.Fascist
Member
Posts in topic: 1
Posts: 113
Joined: Mon Mar 06, 2006 2:04 am
Location: Corpus Christi, TX, United States of America

Keeping an eye out for "Red Flag" legislation

#1

Post by O.F.Fascist » Tue May 08, 2018 6:53 pm

I saw this today, that atleast part of the ACLU has spoken out against such legislation.

http://www.riaclu.org/news/post/aclu-of ... egislation
The ACLU of Rhode Island today issued a fourteen-page analysis that expresses “great concern” about pending state legislation that would allow family members and law enforcement officers to petition a judge to issue an “extreme risk protective order” (ERPO) against an individual who legally owns firearms but who is alleged to pose a “significant danger of causing personal injury to self or others.” This so-called “red flag” legislation follows the tragic shooting of students at a Parkland, Florida high school last month.

While recognizing the bill’s laudable goal, the ACLU’s analysis expressed concern about “the breadth of this legislation, its impact on civil liberties, and the precedent it sets for the use of coercive measures against individuals not because they are alleged to have committed any crime, but because somebody believes they might, someday, commit one.”

The ACLU analysis notes that the court order authorized by the legislation could be issued without any indication that the person poses an imminent threat to others, and without any evidence that he or she ever committed, or has even threatened to commit, an act of violence with a firearm. Further, the court decision would be made at a hearing where the person would not be entitled to appointed counsel. Under the legislation, a court order would require the confiscation for at least a year of any firearms lawfully owned by the person, place the burden on him or her to prove that they should be returned after that time, potentially subject him or her to a coerced mental health evaluation, and give police broad authority to search their property for firearms.
I'm glad in Texas our legislature isn't meeting this year but with this nonsense going around and having NRA support, I'm sure someone will propose something similar next year.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7sNiklO506A

I'm a lifetime member and will stay active but the NRA is not getting any more of my cash until we are able to get some more no-compromise types onto the board of directors.

Post Reply

Return to “General Legislative Discussions”