Guess what? There’s no penalty for people to make false claims, and it violates the 4th and 5th Amendment
It will now be legal to ask a judge in N.J. to take someone’s guns away
…
1. What does the law actually do?
The law (A1217) is officially called the “Extreme Risk Protective Order Act of 2018.”
It allows family members or those who live in the same household to submit an application to state Superior Court showing why a judge should issue an “extreme risk protective order” to keep guns away from someone “who poses a danger of causing bodily injury†to themselves or others by purchasing or possessing a gun or ammunition.
It also allows law enforcement to petition the court.
People who are neither family or a law enforcement officer can ask a law enforcement agency to file a petition.
The judge can then issue the order if they find the person “poses a significant risk of personal injury to himself or others by possessing a firearm.†That will bar the person from owning, buying, possessing, or receiving any firearms during the period the order is in effect.
The law also allows the judge to issue a warrant to seize a person’s firearms if they’ve been issued an order.
I’ll say it again, I’m not against a properly crafted Red Flag law, because, let’s face it, some people really shouldn’t be allowed to have firearms. But, this law isn’t it. It gets close, but, like most, is more about finding ways to take people’s guns away rather than protecting their Rights
3. How can the person get their guns back?
A person has 45 days to file an appeal once an order is granted. They can also seek to have the order terminated at any time after the order goes into effect.
If a law enforcement agency has “probable cause†to believe that a person continues to pose “a significant risk” after one year, the agency may request another order. A judge may also issue another order.
So, they can arbitrarily take away someone’s firearms, their property, their 2nd Amendment Right, and it’s up to the Citizen to prove them wrong. This violates, again, the 4th and 5th (no due process) Amendments, and, though this is not an actual criminal prosecution, the 6th allows for confronting witness in legal proceedings. This doesn’t seem to allow that.
Scott Bach, executive director of the Association of New Jersey Rifle & Pistol Clubs, said the law “allows confiscation of legally owned property without advance due process, based on false claims of third parties, and‎ with no penalty for making false allegations against someone.â€
“It is a tyrant’s dream, and a citizen’s nightmare,†Bach added.
How much abuse can there be without penalties for false claims. Yes, other laws could be used, but, they could take forever to adjudicate, which is a big problem when someone’s Rights are crushed with a sledgehammer. This whole thing flips the Rights of Citizens on their head.
From the comment section
CommonSenseProgressive: Every person you know that possesses guns is an extreme risk to themselves or others. Report everyone as a risk and we can get guns removed from our communities.
It may just be one comment, but, you see how it can go very wrong?
Want to see how this law can be abused? Simply look at the laws that allow CPS to investigate and/or remove children from homes simply on the word of someone with no repercussions to those making false claims.
Just wait until people who don’t even have guns start getting their homes ransacked by police. This is obviously going to be the new way that contested divorces will use the state to harass their ex and neighbors will get the police to raid the house down the block that no one likes. A great way to get police to finally respond about those crack houses in your area. A gun can be hidden anywhere. No telling what the search might turn up. Drugs, building code violations, MAGA hats.
That’s exactly what it’s about, Professor. Plus, in-your-face gun confiscation renamed (as leftists are apt to do) “forfeiture”. The left has been pushing the envelope on forfeiture ever since RICO. Bear in mind it’s the communists who wave Red Flags.
The Fourteenth Amendment, which incorporated the Bill of Rights to include state action, states than no one’s rights may be suspended or taken away without due process of law. The trouble is, this law does set up a legal process under which someone’s rights can be taken away, and the wrong federal judge can easily state that the due process requirement has been met, even if it isn’t the same one as in criminal cases. Because the victim of a red flag complaint is not subject to imprisonment, this is not a criminal action.
Under civil actions, torts, while a person’s life and liberty cannot be forfeit, his property certainly can be, and the standard of proof in a civil case is much lower, preponderance of the evidence, not guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. In most civil cases, the jury need not be unanimous, with 9-3 frequently being sufficient to reach a decision.
While I get what you are saying as far as the procedures go, the fact of the matter is that there is no due process at all when the person against whom the action is being taken is not aware of nor cannot contest the taking(s) until after the guns have been seized.
If someone shows up at your door with a search warrant you have the right to challenge that warrant before the search proceeds. Not so with “red flags.” It is “guilty until we say you are.”
Someone eventually will die over this stupidity.
[…] that, along with further restrictions, such as the ridiculous “red flag” laws — see The Pirate’s Cove for an excellent article on those — but in the most important function citizens have, to choose the government which will write […]
[…] One thing that needs to happen: anyone who makes a red flag complaint must identify himself, and be liable for the weapons owner’s legal fees if his complaint is found to be unjustified. ________________________________ Related Article: William Teach, The Pirate’s Cove: “NJ’s Red Flag Law Goes Into Effect Today” […]