Attritional strategy: Washington state wants to apply ERPOs to minors, prove you have no firearms in the family home

Just another way for the gun grabbers to confiscate guns from law-abiding citizens.

From MyNorthwest.com: Prosecutors in Washington are looking to expand the state’s Red Flag laws to include minors.

Red Flag laws – or Extreme Risk Protection Orders (ERPOS) – are civil orders that allow judges to temporarily suspend a person’s gun rights, even if they haven’t committed a crime, when they exhibit violent behavior that suggests they pose a risk to themselves or others.

Washington was among the first of five states to pass a Red Flag law when voters overwhelmingly approved I-1491 in 2016. Another eight states passed similar laws this year after the Parkland shooting, and four more states are considering them now.

The laws vary by state as far as who can petition the court for the civil orders, with some only allowing law enforcement to file for them, while others allow family members, roommates, people who share children, and some medical professionals to petition the courts.

In Washington, police and family members can petition the courts for an emergency 14-day order to take away a person’s guns. That can be followed with a one-year ban if the court is convinced the pattern of behavior shows the person is a risk to themselves or others.

State law is silent on whether minors can be the subject of an ERPO, but there is an effort to change that.

For the past several months, a legislative task force made up of police, mental health experts, school shooting survivors, the ACLU, and others has been meeting to develop strategies to prevent mass shootings, and it recently released a list of 25 recommendations.

Among the recommendations, clarifying state law to make clear ERPOs can apply to minors.

Prosecutor Kimberly Wyatt with King County’s Regional Domestic Violence Firearms Unit – the only specialized unit in the state that helps other police agencies statewide and family members with ERPOs – believes the orders should apply to juveniles.

“We’ve had that issue come up multiple times, and we’ve been asked around the state by other law enforcement agencies that are struggling with the same issue. To date, I don’t know of any that have been filed yet against juveniles, but we have one particular case where we are making that recommendation to law enforcement right now,” Wyatt said.

In this case, they are working with a school resource officer at a school where a student under 18 is facing charges for a crime, requiring he not have access to weapons to determine if they need an Extreme Risk Protection Order.

“We would file the ERPO against the juvenile because the father has access to firearms in the home, and the father is not being cooperative with law enforcement to confirm that the firearms are out of the home,” Wyatt said.

She said police had tried several times to confirm with the father where the guns are located, but he refuses to comply.

Wyatt said using the ERPO would not be about taking away the father’s firearms rights.

We’re trying to say, ‘Dad lawfully can possess those guns,’ and we would hope that most parents have given law enforcement reassurances where the firearms are. But in this particular case, the father has declined to give any of those reassurances. So we would say that the juvenile could not be in that home with access to firearms. If dad wants to keep the firearms in the home and not share the information, you know that puts him in a difficult position,” Wyatt said.

If the ERPO was served on the child in this case, the dad would then have to choose between proving to law enforcement where the guns are so they know they’re not in the house, or having the child live elsewhere.

Wyatt says overall, they are seeing a lot of success with ERPOs, including another case where they served one to an 18-year-old student in Seattle, who police came to talk to regarding a drug issue and were allowed to search his bag. When school officials and law enforcement searched the student’s bag, they found a loaded gun with the safety off in the backpack.

Wyatt said that on top of the criminal issues there, that the 18-year-old showed extremely negligent behavior with a firearm. That ultimately was why they filed an ERPO against the student, to ensure he could no longer legally buy guns currently legally available.

Those are just some of the examples Wyatt gave lawmakers earlier this month to highlight the importance of ERPOs, and the urgent need to clarify the state law on their use in juvenile cases, as the work group recommended.

The work group also recommended more promotion of the existence of ERPOs and their uses to both law enforcement and the public, and that a second violation of an Extreme Risk Protection Order leads to the permanent loss of a person’s firearms rights.

DCG

Better than Drudge Report. Check out Whatfinger News, the Internet’s conservative frontpage founded by ex-military!

Attritional strategy: Washington state wants to apply ERPOs to minors, prove you have no firearms in the family home
5 (100%) 4 vote[s]

Please follow and like us:
error0
 

12
Leave a Reply

avatar
12 Comment authors
pigpen51SeumasCharles H SlateAnonymousLophatt Recent comment authors
  Subscribe  
Notify of
BilboQBaggins
Guest
BilboQBaggins

Is a prosecutor in Washington an elected official (Kimberly Wyatt) or an appointment? Shouldn’t the elected representatives of the people define each law they pass specifically and not leave it up to unelected bureaucrats. Just askin.

D3F1ANT
Guest
D3F1ANT

At some point, revolt is going to be the only avenue they leave open to gun owners…

Auntie Lulu
Guest
Auntie Lulu

Wow! This is really a “sticky wicket.” Once the father discloses the location of his firearms–they become ripe for confiscation, by and by. I feel no doubt that this father is in horrible anguish over this choice . . . your son OR your guns!

Alma
Member
Alma

Should I have a minor in my “DOMAIN”, no one, regardless of the law, comes into my house with such order. Should I have a minor with emotional behavior, I would seek the advise of a professional and I would secure the weapon to avoid dire consequences. The government has no business in my house or my child, we are not under the mandate of the state.

Pilot Dave
Guest
Pilot Dave

I have a few “guns in my home” – all in a fire proof, water proof vault. Law Enforcement has no business knowing this. They are NOT “accessible” to anyone else in my house, so this false flag of a Father not disclosing “location” to Police is a crock. NONE of the children who have done these horrific mass shootings had legal access to the guns they used – Sandy Hook is the best example – the lunatic killed his own Mom to gain access to steel her guns for the shootings in the “Gun Free Zone”… Time for all… Read more »

Fred Ward
Guest
Fred Ward

And government gets to decide what an “emergency” is. Apparently having a gun in your backpack constitutes one. Hmm.

Lophatt
Member
Lophatt

The state has no authority to suspend citizen’s Constitutionally protected rights. There is no “unless” provision anywhere in the Second Amendment. Government’s authorities are enumerated in the Constitution. Just as with the First Amendment and the concept of “prior restraint”, it is not legal to restrain someone’s speech simply because you are afraid they might say something you’d object to. In the same way, removing one’s ability to defend themselves simply because someone claims that they “might” use them in the commission of a crime is not authorized either. That is liking finding that someone checked a book out from… Read more »

Charles H Slate
Guest
Charles H Slate

I’ve posted this before on other sites: In 1890 the Superintendent of the US Naval War college was Capt. Alfred Thayer Mahan. His niche in history is that he authored a little book titled “The Influence of Seapower on History” which turned out to be very popular and influential within the ranks of professional naval officers. Kaiser Wilhelm II, who reportedly kept a copy on his bedside table and ordered that the officers of his Kreigsmarine read it. One of the topics Mahan discussed was the concept of a ‘fleet in being’. This was the idea that just the possession… Read more »

Seumas
Guest
Seumas

Note that this is also about child-grabbing as well, which is quite horrendous, given what we hear about CPS, and sex trafficking, etc. the thought might be to “punish” the gun owner and also gain another child to molest for the state, or otherwise disarm the family in general… of course it isn’t about the guns so much as it is about the control, because even if a person does fork over firearms they’ll likely be on a list as a “person of interest” or “potential threat” simply for the ownership thereof. I do recommend other readers here also keep… Read more »

pigpen51
Guest
pigpen51

I am a very strong supporter of all of our rights as enumerated by the Bill of Rights. I am especially supportive of the 2nd amendment, as I believe it is upon this God given right, that all other rights depend. I have never been militant about my support for the right to keep and bear arms. However, depending upon what your definition of militant is, I have begun to lean towards it. I say this because I can see the writing on the wall, in a manner of speaking. There is going to come a day, when the police… Read more »