2aguy
Diamond Member
- Jul 19, 2014
- 111,977
- 52,255
- 2,290
Laws like this are why pro 2nd amendment supporters don't trust the "good intentions" of the gun grabbers. Everyone thinks that the dangerously mentally ill should not have access to guns...however...the anti gunners have now shown they can't be trusted to implement this without their reflexive anti gun control issues kicking in and going over the line...this article points out how far over the line they went...
CPRC on CNN Notes on California s new gun violence restraining orders - Crime Prevention Research Center
CPRC on CNN Notes on California s new gun violence restraining orders - Crime Prevention Research Center
California has long allowed police who believe that someone represents a danger to themselves or others to take the person in for a psychiatric evaluation with a police psychiatrist. With that evaluation, a person could be held for 72-hours. After the Elliot Rodger’s killings earlier this year, California’s Governor Jerry Brown signed into law on Tuesday, September 30th that makes significant changes. The irony is that deputy sheriff officers had gone to Rodger’s home but did not believe that Rodger posed a danger to himself or others.
The law that was thus motivated by Rodger’s case would not have prevented it. Three of the people that Rodger killed were killed with knives. Taking away his guns would thus not have stopped those deaths. In addition, given that Rodger was planning his attack for 2.5 year it seems plausible that he would have obtained his guns in other ways. All this raises the question: If you really believe someone is a threat to themselves or others, why not involuntarily commit the individual.
This now allows the restraining order to be imposed without input of a psychiatrist or other trained mental health professional. It also lowers the standard of evidence from “clear and convincing” to the much lower “reasonable cause.” “Reasonable cause” doesn’t even require that the court decide that a problem is likely, but merely possible.
2) The hearings can now take place without the presence of the person for whom there is concern — it also makes the person immediately subject to misdemeanor penalties. So here is the problem: a decision can be reached without your knowledge or ability to defend yourself and then if the police go to serve you with the restraining order and find that you have a single bullet in your possession you are guilty of a misdemeanor — facing up to a year in prison.