AnonymousSource: Office of Rep. Salud Carbajal
[On Tuesday], Rep. Salud Carbajal and Senator Dianne Feinstein reintroduced the Extreme Risk Protection Order Act. The legislation was introduced by Rep. Salud Carbajal (D-CA) and co-led by Rep. Julia Brownley (D-CA), Rep. Don Beyer (D-VA), and Rep. Debbie Dingell (D-MI). Senator Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) introduced companion legislation in the Senate.
The Extreme Risk Protection Order Act establishes a new grant program to encourage states to adopt “red flag” laws, which allow family members or law enforcement officials to petition a judge to temporarily disarm an individual in crisis if they pose a threat to themselves or others. If enacted, states who adopt these preventative measures would be eligible for federal funding to help pay for implementation and processing.
“I lost my older sister to suicide with a firearm at a young age and then, in 2014, our community experienced horrible tragedy when a gunman killed six students in Isla Vista. What I’ve learned since is that temporarily preventing people from having a gun while in a state of crisis, and giving our law enforcement the right tools to address dangerous behaviors, saves live,” said Rep. Salud Carbajal. “As lawmakers, we have a responsibility to honor the victims and survivors of gun violence with action. Extreme risk protection orders have saved lives in California and this legislation will help other states implement this lifesaving policy.”
“Extreme risk protection orders save lives by keeping guns out of the hands of people who are a threat to themselves or others,” said Senator Feinstein. “California has shown that these laws work. Our commonsense bill would help more states enact similar laws that respect due process rights while giving families and law enforcement a way to remove guns from dangerous individuals.”
In 2014, a gunman in Isla Vista exhibited warning signs on social media before embarking on a deadly massacre which took the lives of six students. The gunman’s mother warned local law about the gunman’s behavior, but they were powerless to keep firearms out of his hands. Following the shooting, California passed a red flag law allowing family and law enforcement to petition a judge for an extreme risk protection order in order to prevent similar tragedies.
“My son Chris is dead — shot and killed in Isla Vista, California May 23, 2014 — a college student twenty years old. His killer had a long history of serious mental health issues, three handguns and more than 500 rounds of ammunition. Motivated by misogyny he intended to kill as many people as he could. There were warning signs,” said Richard Martinez, Gun Violence Survivor and Outreach Associate with Everytown for Gun Safety. “I applaud Rep. Carbajal for introducing the Extreme Risk Protection Order Act. We know ERPO laws save lives. Congress must act to prevent more senseless tragedy. Not one more.”
“This important public safety legislation would provide an incentive for the states to adopt Gun Violence Restraining Orders or similar legislation through grant funding,” said Joyce Dudley, District Attorney for Santa Barbara County. “I firmly believe if California had this law, years ago hundreds of lives would not have been destroyed and with the passage of this law thousands of lives can be saved.”
“Extreme risk protection orders are one of the most important tools to help prevent tragedies involving firearms. In 19 states and the District of Columbia, extreme risk laws are working and allowing family members and law enforcement to temporarily disarm someone at risk of harming themselves or others while protecting due process rights. This procedure should be available in every state across the country,” said Adzi Vokhiwa, Giffords Federal Affairs Director. “We applaud Senator Feinstein and Congressman Carbajal for introducing this legislation to help more states enact and implement extreme risk laws and save lives from gun suicides and homicides.”
“After the horrific 2013 Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting, we knew that we had to act so this tragedy would never happen again. That’s why the Coalition to Stop Gun Violence convened a working group that issued models for the first modern Extreme Risk Protection Order,” said Josh Horwitz, executive director of the Coalition to Stop Gun Violence. “ERPO laws are already saving lives in 19 states and the District of Columbia, and I am grateful that gun violence prevention champions like Senator Feinstein and Representative Carbajal are working hard to protect our communities and address this public health crisis. ERPO laws work to prevent gun violence in its many tragic forms—from death by gun suicide, domestic violence, violence on a community level, to mass shootings. The Extreme Risk Protection Order Act will save lives on a national scale, and CSGV is proud to endorse this legislation.”
Red flag laws are an evidence-backed policy and has garnered bipartisan support, including from former President Donald Trump. The bill also preserves due process rights by requiring family members or law enforcement to petition a judge in order to temporarily disarm an individual in crisis.
Representative Carbajal and Senator Feinstein first introduced the Extreme Risk Protection Order Act in the 115th Congress and have reintroduced every Congress since. Additional information can be found here. Full bill text is available here. A recording of the press conference held on 5.25.21 is available here.
If someone is suffering from mental health problems that make them a danger to themselves or to others, why on earth would we only confiscate their guns? That might stop gun violence, but it wont do much to address other forms of violence. Back in 2001, a man killed five people by driving his car down Del Playa. He was ruled legally insane and sentenced to 60 years in a mental institution. Despite concerns that he could be dangerous to the community, he was released in 2012. I think our approach to dealing with mental health is woefully inadequate. This proposed red flag law may help prevent mentally ill people from using guns, but it will do nothing to prevent them from committing acts of violence or to provide them with the care they need.
Good. The second amendment is the right to a well-regulated militia, not the right for a nut job to walk into a gun store and buy the ability to quickly kill large numbers of people.
Sales are way up in 2021, nearly 16 million guns sold in the first four months of the year. Last year about 40 million guns were sold, and this year is on track to exceed that by a substantial margin. This makes sense given the political changes and widespread rioting and civil unrest that have taken place recently. A big portion of these sales are first time buyers. It’s really encouraging to see more and more people take an interest in firearm ownership.
Sure Chipper with almost 400,000,000 guns in the US already, people need more guns due to the “widespread rioting and civil unrest.” Most gun ownership is driven by NRA, the gun industry’s lobbing group, scare tactics. The modern GOP and the rightwing press with Fox News in the lead, push and amplify that message. And the body count keeps on growing. Do you feel safer?
Yes, I feel a lot safer. Remember, when there is danger and seconds count, the police are only minutes away. Without a gun, you and your family are helpless. With a gun, you have a lot more options. Every responsible and mentally fit person should own a weapon and take the time to learn how to use and handle it safely and effectively.
Yet she still more class and brains than you do.
It won’t prevent violence without guns so why bother? Is that whataboutism, or what?
Sadly, she should retire IMMEDIATELY, says a liberal.
Thinking that guns protect your family just shows that you don’t pay attention to evidence and data. Epidemiological studies show that a firearm in the house is much more likely to cause injury or death to someone in the household than to serve any useful purpose.
The 2nd amendment is a complete anachronism, and these days is just an excuse for gun worship. Just as there are limits on 1st amendment rights to prevent abuse, the 2nd amendment needs rational limits. Sportsmen who hunt and target shoot will survive just fine without large magazine capacity and semiautomatic operation.
The second amendment pertains to a “well-regulated militia”, and was formulated in a time when the colonists were opposed to a standing army. The rough equivalent today is the National Guard. The Founders’ view of “citizen” was that it was a white male property owner. Most of us have matured past that view, just as we should for firearms.
Firepower has a time dimension. We should ban all semiautomatic firearms, allowing only bolt-action long arms (rifles and shotguns) with a minimum barrel length of 32 inches, and fixed box magazines loaded by a stripper clip.
Handguns would be limited to a minimum barrel length of 6 inches, and be single-action revolvers, or be single-action with fixed-box magazines loaded by stripper clip.
All magazine/revolver capacities should be limited to 5 rounds maximum. Sound suppressors should be forbidden. No legitimate hunters or target shooters would be the least bit inconvenienced by such restrictions, and mass shootings would be much more difficult.
Combined with severe mandatory penalties for mere possession of nonconforming weapons, and required training and licensing of firearms owners, we could eventually greatly reduce gun deaths, much as the more civilized countries of the world have already done. Since our country is awash in firearms, it will take a long time, but eventually sanity would prevail over the current stupidity.
There should be strongly enforced restrictions and high taxes on ammunition, and all propellants, casings, primers, and projectiles should be required to have batch-numbered identifying marks or embedded nanoparticles to aid in post-crime investigations. Reloading equipment and supplies should be strictly limited and closely monitored for compliance. Use of lead projectiles should be eliminated. We should also consider reducing the power of firearms by limiting them to brass rimfire cartridges and/or restricting the bore pressures and diameters. Looking toward the future, guided projectiles should be banned, and duly licensed firearms should incorporate biometric devices that disable them if they are not being wielded by the registered owner. People who wanted to keep existing, but nonconforming firearms would have to modify them to comply or render them nonfunctional, or trade them in for a conforming weapon.
Every gun injury is reported by hospitals almost without exception. When one tells police they just chased off a criminal, the cops say, “Good job. ” No stats recorded.
Gramp was in his 80’s living alone on the farm when the 3 am banging on the door was a drunk threatening to kill if the tractor was not used to extricate his car from the ditch. Gramp pulled his Stainless S&W 357 from his bathrobe and the guy backed off until police arrived much later. The event was simply recorded as a DUI accident. Statistics are often magic smoke and mirrors.
Why doesn’t Salud do anything to help the people involving the pandemic?
The background check system is broken. The world’s most famous crack head was able to lie about his drug use on the government form and buy a gun. Everyone found out but he still got a pass on that felony. Democrats also passed on a law trying to prosecute illegals that try to buy a gun. Making more laws while not enforcing current laws is madness !
If passed, angry and vengeful family members would have a field day with this! It’s just more “feel good” but useless legislation from politicians who have much more important issues to deal with.
Red Flag Laws are a violation of the 2nd Amendment AND the 4th Amendment against unreasonable search and seizure. I know what you’re thinking. “But Red Flag laws only apply to evil gun owners.” Listen Sunshine, if you’re an American you are automatically a gun owner. Why? Because when some malicious person tells the police you have a gun collection with thousands of rounds of ammo and are a threat to yourself and the community, those police aren’t going to bother checking the California gun purchase records. They’re not going to send a patrol car over and politely ask for your non-existent gun. They’re not going to call and ask if you support Moms Demand Action. They’re not even going to see if you voted Democrat. They’re going to assume you’re a criminal who got a hold of one of the millions of unregistered or stolen guns in this country. They’re going to show up at your house at 3 AM with a SWAT team to confiscate your guns. You will know when they breach the door. If you resist in any way – like say stumble out of your darkened bedroom in your undies with a black object that will turn out to be the cell phone you’re trying to call 911 on – they will probably gun you down. Either you, your dog, your spouse, mistress, room mate, or anyone else unlucky to be there.
Modern militarized police are equipped and trained to “shoot til the threat is over.” This is why so many post revolver era police shootings seem so brutal. Because the average officer will empty half a 15 round magazine into a suspect (deserving or not) til the suspect drops and stops moving. If there are two or more officers you’ll need a closed coffin. Or they may show up at another family’s house by mistake and shoot them instead. Yes, that has happened on MULTIPLE occasions. The fun part is the person who called them on you – a co-worker, an ex-spouse or girlfriend, etc. will not be held liable. And we know it takes video evidence, a nationwide pandemic driven panic, media saturation, and opportunistic politicians at every level to hold the police accountable.
I guess the next thing you’ll say is “but only a limited number of people can call a Red Flag on someone.” But the Red Flag laws are more about politicians pretending they’re doing something useful by harassing “evil gun owners.” That list of people who can call the police WILL expand.
Bottom line: As long as the Bill of Rights is valid and you’re an American, you’re assumed armed and dangerous in the eyes of police and the political elites of both parties. You might as well be.
This is accurate in our country today. I don’t know how to acknowledge that while disagreeing with what you put forth. This is not my life, nor anyone I know, nor my neighborhood. But I’m privileged.
I tried writing a response and got too deep into social issues and philosophy.
America will not change, as America will never be able to lower the number of weapons owned. We’ll always be what we are now.
Just wish I could read history books 50 years after my death! Oh well.
This is just nutty deflection. Stop the gun worship in this country and make many of the guns that are legal now illegal… and a lot harder for people to get them. Win-win for basically everyone…except a couple of people who watched RED DAWN a few too many times…
To whoever downvoted me, why haven’t you downvoted my post about people telling me what to think? The post that addresses “Listen Sunshine, if you’re an American you are automatically a gun owner.” (you may have done so by the time this post appears.)
All I wish is that you take some time to reflect on the political disagreement. What if your political party asked you to agree with something you disagree with? Would you go along for the sake of going along?
No due process, no red flag, period.
Fundamental rights may only be suspended pursuant to probable cause of a crime having been committed, or clear and convincing evidence that one is imminent. Allegations, even sworn, are not evidence absent credible substantiation, and due process demands that a respondent have the opportunity in person to face all accusers, refute allegations, cross-examine witnesses and present witnesses/evidence in one’s own behalf, BEFORE an order may be granted.
None of that happens under the current iteration of “red flag” laws, and without those constitutionally-guaranteed protections in place, such orders are unconstitutional.
Yeah, to hell with the Constitution, right?
Listen, Bozo – you can’t do that stuff. People have the right to keep and bear arms in common use that are suitable for militia purposes. That’s keep and BEAR.
“Held:
1.
(f) … United States v. Miller, 307 U. S. 174, does not limit the right to keep and bear arms to militia purposes, but rather limits the type of weapon to which the right applies to those used by the militia, i.e., those in common use for lawful purposes. Pp. 47-54.” – D.C. v. Heller (2008)
You may not like it, but fundamental rights aren’t up for debate. They are inviolable.
“We know of no other enumerated constitutional right whose core protection has been subjected to a freestanding ‘interest-balancing’ approach. The very enumeration of the right takes out of the hands of government … the power to decide on a case-by-case basis whether the right is really worth insisting upon. . . The Second Amendment is no different. Like the First, it is the very product of an interest-balancing by the people[.]” – D.C. v. Heller (2008)
“[T]he enshrinement of constitutional rights necessarily takes certain policy choices off the table.” – D.C. v. Heller (2008)
or a Black Market truck full.