According to guns.com, Gov. Kate Brown of Oregon approved a piece of gun legislation this week that establishes Extreme Risk Protection (ERP) Orders, that forces subjects to surrender their firearms.
The law allows police, or a member of a subjects family or house hold, to file a petition with the court that could lead to an order stripping an individual’s Second Amendment rights if it is believed that they pose an imminent risk to themselves or others.
Brown said in the story that the new Extreme Risk Protection Orders the “best way to ensure that a person who is at risk of harming themselves or others is identified, while still ensuring their rights are protected by a court review.”
The law establishes a process for obtaining the orders, which will be issued by a judge in civil court. The subject will be prohibited from possessing or buying firearms or ammunition for one year, the story says and must surrender any firearms they own, or they may be stored with a third party fur the duration of the order.
Once a judge issues an ERP order, the subject has 30 days to request a hearing to keep their firearms, which then must be held within 21 days, the story says.
Another aspect of the bill has riled gun rights supporters. Once an order is issued, it also grants police enforcing that order the power to search for and seize guns that were not willingly surrendered or stored somewhere else.
The fact remains, the signing of this law could very realistically lead to situations where armed police officers are forced to go to private citizens homes to seize their firearms, which could result in violent confrontations, especially since the citizens in question are likely disturbed in some way because of the nature of the of the ERP orders.
To mitigate the chances of these orders being used for any reason other than their intended purpose, there are penalties in place. Anyone discovered filing a fake order could be imprisoned for up to a year, and/or pay a fine of up to $6,250.
Second Amendment groups have spoken out strongly against the process, saying it doesn’t provide enough structure for those deemed at risk to receive any kind of assistance or counseling. There are also no provisions for taking a person deemed to be dangerous into custody. The gun rights groups also say there are due process concerns, according to the story.
“By allowing a law enforcement officer, family member, or household member to seek the ERPO, SB 719A would allow people who are not mental health professionals, who may be mistaken, and who may only have minimal contact with the respondent to file a petition with the court and testify on the respondent’s state of mind.”