CA Allows gov to take guns based on word, starting Jan 1st

[jeffie7]

I can't believe this hasnt been posted yet, or maybe it has but the search keeps giving me a data base error.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/dec/29/california-gun-violence-restraining-order-law-goin/

Gun control legislation going into effect in California next week will allow authorities to seize a person’s weapons for 21 days if a judge determines there is potential for violence.

Proposed in the wake of a deadly May 2014 shooting rampage by Elliot Rodger, the bill provides family members with a means of having an emergency “gun violence restraining order” imposed against a loved one if they can convince a judge that this person’s possession of a firearm “poses an immediate and present danger of causing personal injury to himself, herself or another by having in his or her custody or control.”

“The law gives us a vehicle to cause the person to surrender their weapons, to have a time out, if you will,” Los Angeles Police Department Assistant Chief Michael Moore told a local NPR affiliate. “It allows further examination of the person’s mental state.”

“It’s a short duration and it allows for due process,” he said. “It’s an opportunity for mental health professionals to provide an analysis of a person’s mental state.”

Rodger, 22, killed six people and injured 14 others before taking his own life during a wave of attacks across Isla Vista near the campus of the University of California, Santa Barbara, that he carried out with two knives and three handguns that he legally purchased.

The rampage was prefaced by a video uploaded to YouTube of Rodger discussing his plans, as well as a 107,000-word manifesto, both of which were circulated minutes before he began killing.

“This is almost the kind of event that’s impossible to prevent and almost impossible to predict,” Janet Napolitano, the university’s president and a former homeland security secretary, said in the aftermath of Rodger’s ambush.

Twenty months later, implementation of the bill is expected to give family members a mechanism for having loved ones briefly lose access to their own, legally acquired weapons in hopes of stopping similar rampages.

“It’s the family members, it’s the people closest to the perpetrator, who are in the best position to notice red flags,” Wendy Patrick, a San Diego State University professor and lawyer, told San Diego’s CBS affiliate this week.

Second Amendment advocates have cried foul, however, and insist that legislation is not the answer in a state already ripe with gun rules that are more restrictive than most anywhere else in America.

“We don’t need another law to solve this problem,” Sam Paredes, executive director of Gun Owners of California, told The Associated Press. “We think this just misses the mark and may create a situation where law-abiding gun owners are put in jeopardy.”

 

[Melnic]

Assistant police chief is Michael Moore?
There lies the problem

 

[zoostation]

If I'm not mistaken anyone can go to a judge and file the ppw to have your guns removed under this law as well. So be careful if you piss someone off on Facebook if you live in Cali, or make your cat lady neighbor mad by mowing your grass too early on Saturday morning, or make your estranged relative angry by contesting his claims to the will of a loved one, or tell your ex you are filing for custody of the kids because of her drug problem.....and on and on it goes. All the fruits one can imagine of taking action without due process.

And I can almost bet something like this will be introduced in our General Assembly next month. They love to copy Cali.

 

[iH8DemLibz]

If I'm not mistaken anyone can go to a judge and file the ppw to have your guns removed under this law as well. So be careful if you piss someone off on Facebook if you live in Cali, or make your cat lady neighbor mad by mowing your grass too early on Saturday morning, or make your estranged relative angry by contesting his claims to the will of a loved one, or tell your ex you are filing for custody of the kids because of her drug problem.....and on and on it goes. All the fruits one can imagine of taking action without due process.

And I can almost bet something like this will be introduced in our General Assembly next month. They love to copy Cali.

And in many cases, the cost of a lawyer to get your guns back will exceed the value of the guns.

And good samaritan laws will be in place so the gun owner can't countersue for false reports and statements.

And a 1-800-USN-ITCH tip line for cash will make the law a thousand times more effective.

 

[Brooklyn]

One more reason to avoid taking to people..or rather liberals..

Sold.

 

[XCheckR]

Cant wait for the first lawsuit on this.....

 

[Vile Shadow]

If I'm not mistaken anyone can go to a judge and file the ppw to have your guns removed under this law as well. So be careful if you piss someone off on Facebook if you live in Cali, or make your cat lady neighbor mad by mowing your grass too early on Saturday morning, or make your estranged relative angry by contesting his claims to the will of a loved one, or tell your ex you are filing for custody of the kids because of her drug problem.....and on and on it goes. All the fruits one can imagine of taking action without due process.

And I can almost bet something like this will be introduced in our General Assembly next month. They love to copy Cali.

Sounds like the ol' bugus protective order routine.

I'm with Brooklyn. I hate people. They can't be trusted, ESPECIALLY on the left
coast.

 

[Tungsten]

If someone did file false or frivolous charges in order to confiscate your guns, could you then sue them for intentional infliction of emotional distress?

 

[AssMan]

If someone did file false or frivolous charges in order to confiscate your guns, could you then sue them for intentional infliction of emotional distress?

But then you're admitting that you are in emotional distress

 

[Vile Shadow]

If someone did file false or frivolous charges in order to confiscate your guns, could you then sue them for intentional infliction of emotional distress?

Probably not, with that "good samaritan" crapola.

What a misnomer that is.

 

[Brooklyn]

If someone did file false or frivolous charges in order to confiscate your guns, could you then sue them for intentional infliction of emotional distress?

Economic losses .. slander.. lots of fun..

 

[Combloc]

Once they get them, you'll pay hell trying to get them back guaranteed. Better to keep them whatever the cost.

 

[Brooklyn]

Once they get them, you'll pay hell trying to get them back guaranteed. Better to keep them whatever the cost.

Not an option.. due process does not apply here in fact.. there is no adversarial process from what I understand.

Direct violation of Hellers fundamental right language.

Buckle up..

 

[nedsurf]

Eagerly waiting for a legal challenge. Hopefully a nice neat little case will arise where the fact pattern is they play this card and do a 5150 (psych. hold), the state shrink finds them not a danger to themselves or others and releases within 72 hours but the state still holds the guns for the full 21 days.

 

[nedsurf]

Once they get them, you'll pay hell trying to get them back guaranteed. Better to keep them whatever the cost.

Not an option.. due process does not apply here in fact.. there is no adversarial process from what I understand.

Direct violation of Hellers fundamental right language.

Buckle up..

This too. Hoping there is some overzealous agency that slow walks the return of the property and someone goes for a Bivens/1983.

 

[5.56blaster]

Hope California falls into the sea.

 

[Jimmmy1111]

Coming to Maryland next

 

[iH8DemLibz]

Probably not, with that "good samaritan" crapola.

What a misnomer that is.

The "Good Samaritan" crapola is just my addition of tin foil hattery.

But I wouldn't put it past them.

 

[Brooklyn]

Hope California falls into the sea.

Hope is not a strategy..

Pandering to North Korea however ....

 

[Brooklyn]

The "Good Samaritan" crapola is just my addition of tin foil hattery.

But I wouldn't put it past them.

The snitch line I believe is coming on a national level. See Something-Say Something.

And get paid.

Does not cover bad faith...

Given the way liberals carry on...we will own a few before this is over.