- Dec 18, 2013
- 136,684
- 28,011
- 2,180
- Thread starter
- #61
Why do we need a law to add it? Seems like common sense!I’m good with that!Possibly. I think along with ERPO, better ability to share information among local and federal l.e. and schools and mental health providers is crucial. If a student is expelled for violent behavior, why CAN'T that be a flag on a federal background check? I'm not talking about a three day suspension for fisticuffs. An expulsion for violent/threatening behavior is a seriously red flag, though. It might not be reason to disallow a gun purchase (especially after ten years or something) but it should be a piece of the puzzle that the background check provides.BTW, Oops--it's PROTECTION order, not Prevention order.Wtf is that?Extreme Risk Prevention Order
Extreme Risk Protection Order
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
An Extreme Risk Protection Order (EPRO), also known as a red flag law, is a gun control law that permits police or family members, with a judge's permission, to take firearms from people who may present a danger to others or themselves. The firearm owner may not reacquire the firearm(s) unless they can show that there is no risk in their possession of them.[1]
As of November 2017, California, Connecticut, Oregon, and Washington have this law. Prompted by a number of mass shootings, 32 ERPO bills are now being considered in the legislatures of 19 states as well as Washington, D.C.[2]
In opposition to EPROs, the National Rifle Association said in a statement that the ERPO "strips the accused of their Second Amendment rights [and] would be issued by a judge based on the brief statement of the petitioner."[2]
So a law that the NRA opposes might have actually prevented this shooting? Or at the very least severely impeded this killer from having the means to carry out the crime?