You are correct, sir! 2019 the Laird Law saw significant improvement. Officer Laird’s Mom testified in support of the change. The mad moms and the every town generic DB testified against of course.If I'm not mistaken, there was some added protections for gun owners last year dealing with some concerns of Lairds law.
What added protections were given? Has there been any signs of abuse of this law?
If im remembering correctly a member of this forum got red flagged.
The language was strengthened. "Emotionally unstable" (which is not a diagnosis, but a broad term covering many areas) was removed, as was "could be a risk in the future". "Is an imminent threat to themselves or others" and "suicidal" is stronger language. Also established time-frames when this has to be in front of a judge, as well as making the State prove someone should not possess firearms, opposed to the individual proving they are competent.
Can any of us say we won't possibly be a danger in the future? That's a hard NO, and that's why it's not in the law anymore.
Frank,
My guess is that a strong majority of us would like to see the state hospitals come back to life rather than having to use the conventional criminal justice system as a backstop with limited utility in addressing people who are mentally deficient as opposed to deliberately choosing criminal behavior through a rational albeit morally and ethically bankrupt thought process.
If they were to return as actual hospitals, rather than just warehouses where we “store” those you describe, perhaps, but “One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest” was not just a figment of a writer’s imagination. Those facilities were not what we today think of as hospitals.
Exactly. If said person is so dangerous why are they left on the street to go grab another firearm and do the deed anyway? If not a firearm a knife. If a person is determined to do something bad they will find a way to do it.
These sound like good improvements. I'm glad to see something related to damage, it doesn't take much damage to lower the value of a lot of firearms by hundreds of dollars, maybe more. I can't put my support behind any red flag law though if there aren't severe repercussions for false reporting. If there isn't there needs to be language in place on getting your property returned expediently or places like IMPD will just stall and hold on to your property, especially if you don't have the means or connections to fight them.
I said severe repercussions lol. Five days is acceptable, what happens if they don't do it in that time period?
Yes, it would make more sense to take the person, not the firearm, into custody. Unfortunately, as others have stated, there are no facilities for said persons to be taken to for treatment. Right now if a person is subject to an Immediate Detention because they are a danger to themselves or others, they are only held for a maximum of 72 hours. Most are released almost immediately because no matter what LE gives as the reason for the detention, the person can speak to a mental health "professional" and be released almost immediately if they are able to convince said professional that they aren't a danger to themselves or others. I know that the object is not the problem, but when you can't separate the person from the object, you have to separate the object from the person until a hearing is held to determine if the person is truly not a danger.
Severe enough to me would be to account for the fact that being caught up in this could ruin someone's life. I know in my civilian and military job (with security clearance) this would not go over very well. Even if later on it was determined to be false nobody will ever look at you the same. I don't see anywhere in the particular law unless I missed it that there were repercussions for false reporting unless you are just referencing general false reporting repercussions. I would hope that at the ground level a false reporting or a vindictive he said she said situation would be quickly sorted out before it went any further. The civil liability angle is a joke. How many average joe's can really afford a lawyer to go after someone and in the end a loser that makes a false complaint is likely not going to have anything to go after anyway. It's likely unrealistic that a normal upstanding person would ever find themselves involved in anything like this but I think that's where peoples apprehension is at.
