New worry for gun owners: Gun Violence Restraining Order

[gryphon]

In the wake of the Elliot Rodger killings, there is a call for a new law, one that allows judges to issue a Gun Violence Restraining Order.

One has already been introduced in California.  This is bad, and if it gets a toehold could spread elsewhere via Demanding Moms, Bloomberg, and their ilk.

AB 1014 (Skinner):

• Creates shall-issue "Gun Violence Restraining Orders" ("GVRO") and "Firearm Seizure Warrants" issued by anti-gun California courts.
• Will lead to the persecution of an entire class of law-abiding Californians...and it might lead to even worse.
• Second Amendment rights would be stripped away on as little as hearsay.
• Would establish that evidence for a GVRO includes "recent acquisition of firearms or other deadly weapons."

Reread those last two bullets.  This law invites abuse by feuding family members, neighbors, and others.  How many judges wouldn’t sign a “gun violence restraining order” and risk being “that guy” who let a spree killer go? Under the new bill, as it’s being discussed, a judge would deem an individual too dangerous to own or buy firearms – but not too dangerous enough to lock up.

Can you imagine what might happen to law-abiding gun owners with anti-gun family or friends? 

[jgillmanjr]

http://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id=201320140AB1014&search_keywords=

[gryphon]

Thanks.  I had just pulled down this link:

http://legiscan.com/CA/text/AB1014/2013

New GVRO stuff is in italics in both links. 

[SteveS]

While these proposed laws are pretty bad, I would note that in MI you can get an ex parte PPO that prohibits the other party from possessing firearms. 

[jgillmanjr]

While these proposed laws are pretty bad, I would note that in MI you can get an ex parte PPO that prohibits the other party from possessing firearms.

Actually, that reminded me of something I've been meaning to ask (or learn whenever my sorry ass finally goes to law school) - what is the case law that addresses these ex parte PPOs and not violating due process in re things like prohibiting firearms possession by the served party?

Seriously, *someone* has had to have challenged the firearms prohibition requirement after someone just slapped you with one of these.

[gryphon]

Well, since Steve mentioned it, you can contest the ex-parte PPO and have it dismissed for cause, right?  Where in this new proposed law can you do that?  I don't see it.

[Jeff]

Well, since Steve mentioned it, you can contest the ex-parte PPO and have it dismissed for cause, right?  Where in this new proposed law can you do that?  I don't see it.

I don't think that it would matter in my county if you got one dismissed.  They would have in their heads that you did something wrong and you would just have to hope it was long enough ago that they didn't consider it a big deal anymore.

[jgillmanjr]

Well, since Steve mentioned it, you can contest the ex-parte PPO and have it dismissed for cause, right?  Where in this new proposed law can you do that?  I don't see it.

Dan,

He's referring to Michigan in re the PPO stuff.

http://legislature.mi.gov/doc.aspx?mcl-600-2950

600.2950(1)(e) is what spells out the prohibition of purchase or possession of firearms.

Now the interesting thing (and Steve, please let me know if I'm reading into this too much) is this:

(4) The court shall issue a personal protection order under this section if the court determines that there is reasonable cause to believe that the individual to be restrained or enjoined may commit 1 or more of the acts listed in subsection (1). In determining whether reasonable cause exists, the court shall consider all of the following:

(a) Testimony, documents, or other evidence offered in support of the request for a personal protection order.

(b) Whether the individual to be restrained or enjoined has previously committed or threatened to commit 1 or more of the acts listed in subsection (1).

Well, that happens to include purchasing or possessing a firearm. Basically, if we take a strict interpretation of the statute (again, this is where Steve hopefully tells me I'm reading too much into this), it's saying that the PPO shall be issued if the court determines that there is reasonable cause to believe that the individual to be restrained is going to purchase or possess a firearm.

Let that sink in for a minute.

Steve, please tell me there's some case law that negates my concern here...

But yes, you can subsequently contest the PPO.

[gryphon]

Dan,

He's referring to Michigan in re the PPO stuff.

I know, but I was pointing out that you can contest the MI PPO, but I see no provision in the proposed CA bill allowing same.

[TheQ]

PPOs are granted ex-parte and later revoked routinely. I know one open carrier that had 5 or 6 from ex-girlfriends. All were quickly repealed when he challenged then.

[CV67PAT]

True story

[SD40VE]

PPOs are granted ex-parte and later revoked routinely. I know one open carrier that had 5 or 6 from ex-girlfriends. All were quickly repealed when he challenged then.

this open carrier happened to be named phil? 

[TheQ]

this open carrier happened to be named phil? 

No. He'll remain nameless though those who have been around know who I am talking about.

I've never had a PPO.

[SD40VE]

must be that one guy. i think i recall a convo over dinner in flint lol

[part deux]

Long before I had owned a firearm, a now exwife totally lied after receiving "guidance" from her attorney for file a PPO.  What saved me, before my attorney could ever get involved, she couldn't keep her stories straight and the prosecutor refused to proceed and the PPO went away.

Really opened my eyes to how fast things could get ugly based on lies.

[gryphon]

I wonder why her attorney told her to file for a PPO.

[part deux]

I'm guessing to gain an advantage in what should have been a simple divorce.  Her attorney was pulling all kinds of {revenue producing} stunts that had my attorney shaking his head.  Even the PPO was one of the strangest things I'd ever heard of, it was written for ONE DAY.  Not sure if that was an error or intentional.

I finally tired of the crap and told my attorney take off the damn gloves and get control.  He called me a couple of days later and said you're going to get a bill for Currier services.  After he explained why, I congratulated him on great job.  Her attorney wanted to do interrogatories, so he beat her to the punch   Settlement conference was the most fun in the whole damn thing, we owned a plane with another partner.  The had a ridiculous value set, thinking the plane meant more to me (and the partner) and wouldn't let it go.  I called their bluff, and suggested we call the partner right then and there... I already knew what he would say, because we had discussed the possibility of selling before this!  They folded and accepted the appraisal I had already had done.  Best part, they kinda forgot about an asset I knew about... that one hurt

[Pond Scum]

PPOs are granted ex-parte and later revoked routinely. I know one open carrier that had 5 or 6 from ex-girlfriends.......

If he had 5 or 6 girlfriends isn't that just asking for trouble?   

[jgillmanjr]

I'm guessing to gain an advantage in what should have been a simple divorce.  Her attorney was pulling all kinds of {revenue producing} stunts that had my attorney shaking his head.  Even the PPO was one of the strangest things I'd ever heard of, it was written for ONE DAY.  Not sure if that was an error or intentional.

I finally tired of the crap and told my attorney take off the damn gloves and get control.  He called me a couple of days later and said you're going to get a bill for Currier services.  After he explained why, I congratulated him on great job.  Her attorney wanted to do interrogatories, so he beat her to the punch   Settlement conference was the most fun in the whole damn thing, we owned a plane with another partner.  The had a ridiculous value set, thinking the plane meant more to me (and the partner) and wouldn't let it go.  I called their bluff, and suggested we call the partner right then and there... I already knew what he would say, because we had discussed the possibility of selling before this!  They folded and accepted the appraisal I had already had done.  Best part, they kinda forgot about an asset I knew about... that one hurt

You got my curiosity now...

What model aircraft?

I only have my Private Pilot with a whopping 100 hours total time (5 of those RW in OH-58A/Cs), rest of the time is pretty much 150/152s

[part deux]

Mooney M20C.

I had about 1,000 hours in that one airplane, right around 1050 total.  Instructor friend of mine went flying with me one day and strongly recommend that I go get my commercial IN ANOTHER AIRPLANE   He said you and this plane are like one, but those skills would not serve me well in another airplane.

I raced in about 20 races, speed category I was almost always 1st, 2nd, or 3rd.  Michigan Air Race, which was a proficiency race, I had something like six 6th place finishes.

Traveled all over the midwest for my employer, I was lucky they let me fly, and several vacation trips to WI, NY, and FL.  Screwed up on one FL trip, it was just after I had installed bladder tanks and gained 6 gallons of fuel.  With a little more time on those tanks, I would have made the trip from PTK to PGD non stop.  BLAZING 90 kt tailwind at 12k feet.  I had a screaming GS and sipping fuel.

I used to love to go out when it was 1/2-200.  Loved the challenge.

Came really close to buying another Mooney C in December, literally had my Flight Physical scheduled when I realized it was the day before my colonoscopy... which almost killed me.  Friend of mine knows of a beautiful babied 231 with an owner kinda desperate to sell, but we're too far apart on price, and I'm rethinking the whole throwing money into the air again.

About two years after the divorce, every time I flew the plane, I was throwing 500-1,000 at fixing something.  The plane went from being zero unexpected maintenance to incredibly expensive.  Sold it to a guy in NJ who ended up totaling it in a fairly mild cross wind.  My guess from reading the accident report, he came in to hot, tried to force it on the ground, and lost control.  Mooney's do not land before they are ready.  You're along for the ride and you better have the speed nailed.