Quote:
Florida shooting could revive bills to take guns from potentially dangerous owners
By Tyler Scott • Feb 20, 2018
State lawmakers might soon consider bills that would let courts temporarily take guns away from gun owners they considered to be dangerous to other people or themselves.
The bills were introduced to the legislature last summer by Rep. Robert Wittenberg, D-Huntington Woods. Wittenberg’s bills (HBs 4706 and 4707) have languished in a legislative committee ever since. But after the mass shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Florida, where 17 people were killed, Wittenberg is urging his colleagues to consider a legislative effort that he says would help prevent future tragedies if it becomes law.
“If we had this in place in Florida, law enforcement would be able to take that person's weapon away,” Wittenberg said Tuesday on Michigan Radio’s Stateside program. “And we wouldn’t be having this conversation right now because we wouldn’t have lost 17 lives.”
Wittenberg’s bills call for allowing family members or law enforcement to ask a judge to temporarily take away any guns owned by a person who poses a threat to other people, or themselves. The bills call such a request an “Extreme Risk Protection Order.” According to a press release from the introduction of the bills to the legislature last June, the courts could only take someone’s guns away for up to a year under such an order.
Wittenberg says there would be penalties for anyone who filed frivolous requests. The process for an Extreme Risk Protection Order would be a court hearing, where evidence and testimony would be heard for the courts to consider what threat a gun owner owner posed.
“We don’t take this lightly, but we know this is a way to prevent these tragedies from happening,” Wittenberg said.
Rep. Jim Runestad, R-White Lake, chairs the House Judiciary Committee, where the bills would be considered. Wittenberg says he talked to Runestad Monday, and he’s “cautiously optimistic” the bills could get a hearing. Runestad’s office didn’t immediately return a request for comment.
“I had a conversation with Rep. Runestad yesterday, and he said he’s willing to read it and take a look,” Wittenberg said.
Five states reportedly have similar laws, sometimes called “red flag” laws: California, Connecticut, Washington and Indiana. Some nationally prominent Republicans like Jeb Bush and Marco Rubio are now expressing support for similar legislation at the state government level in states.....
Wittenberg ignores the Rancho Tehama Elementary School shooting case where the shooter had actually been subject to a firearms removal order:
Quote:
California shooting gunman was 'paranoid,' DA says
By Faith Karimi and Dakin Andone, CNN - Updated 3:36 PM ET, Thu November 16, 2017
<skip to....>
Shooter was ordered to surrender firearms
As part of the protective order, Neal was ordered to surrender his firearms to authorities and was not allowed to purchase additional weapons, though Assistant Sheriff Phil Johnston said at a press conference Wednesday he didn't know whether Neal had surrendered the weapons.
But authorities have said that Neal illegally manufactured the guns that he used during the Tuesday morning shooting. According to Johnston, handguns recovered by police were not registered to Neal.
Johnston said Neal "was not law enforcement friendly." Authorities had responded to his house several times when neighbors complained of shots being fired from the property.
Neal's sister, Sheridan Orr, told CNN's Sara Sidner that her brother had struggled with mental health issues for years. Her mother saw a noticeable decline in his mental health about a year ago, Orr said, and the family had tried to get him help.....
While this shooter made his own rifle receivers, he also possessed handguns at the time of his rampage - after the ERPO - which were not home made.
