Public Protection Orders for Confiscation of Firearms - Senator Daylin Leach

[WhiteFeather]

since this another one of Senator Daylin Leach's gun control effort you can bet this will be mis-used against you if enacted into law


Session of 2017 - 2018 Regular Session

MEMORANDUM

Posted:
February 20, 2018 08:51 AM
From:
Senator Daylin Leach
To:
All Senate members
Subject:
Public Protection Orders for Confiscation of Firearms

In the wake of the mass shooting in Parkland, Florida, I will soon introduce legislation to allow citizens to obtain from a court a public protection order when they see evidence of a threat to public safety.

After mass shootings like the one in Parkland, we often learn that there were many warning signs prior to the shooter acting. We hear of threatening or violent social media activity, expressions of admiration for other mass shooters, and threats to bring guns to a school or other public place. People rightfully wonder why someone behaving like that has access to firearms.

My new bill will empower Pennsylvanians who see something he or she considers threatening by granting them the legal standing to petition a judge to issue a public protection order. The order would separate the respondent from his or her firearms on a temporary basis.

The petitioner would have the burden of showing, by a preponderance of the evidence, that words or actions of a respondent create a reasonable belief that the respondent is a danger to the community. This burden could be met by direct testimony, letters, social media activity, or other evidence that, considering the totality of the circumstances, establishes a risk of violence.

These petitions would be decided by a neutral judge. The respondent would have the opportunity to be heard, the right to counsel, the right to cross-examine witnesses, and the right to present evidence on his or her behalf.

Under this protocol, the only issue before the court would be the confiscation of firearms. There would be no other criminal or civil penalties. The court would be empowered to impose certain conditions, such as counseling, anger management training, and a psychological evaluation. However, those conditions would only relate to a respondent’s possession of his or her firearms. Failure to comply with such conditions would not result in any other criminal or civil punishment.

Should the court order the confiscation of a respondent’s firearms, the respondent could at any time petition the court for the return of their firearms. He or she would be given the opportunity to offer evidence of compliance with any court-ordered requirements and may present other evidence establishing that his or her firearms should be returned.

My proposed legislation was first suggested by a mother who lost her child in the mass shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Connecticut. Similar policies, sometimes known as “extreme risk protection orders” or “red flag laws,” have already been enacted in Washington, California, Connecticut, Oregon, Indiana, and Texas, and is being considered in 19 other states.

Please join me in supporting this important legislation. If you have questions, please don’t hesitate to contact me.

[bogey1]

Reminds me of swat-ing.

[philadelphia patriot]

Can the person who has their firearms temporarily removed, but later receives them back due to lack of evidence or intent or the order is withdrawn, sue and have the accuser charged of making a false report and infringing on constitutional rights?

[nijwnfi]

This could be so easily abused. Biased Judges and "People who feel threatened" = bad combination.

[esh21167]

Grasping at straws.

[alpacaheat]

Reminds me of swat-ing.

That WILL be the result of this law if passed. The Anti's will form a whole department dedicated to SWATTING PA residents.

Won't bill ever. Won't pass.

[PHL9mm]

Guilty until proven innocent. The death of due process.

[ArcticSplash]

No, random members of the public should not be allowed to fire public protection orders against each other for Twitter butthurt.

Daylin Leach blocked me on social media for my complaints over him dodging questions over grabbing asses and harassing his staffers.



I am willing to look at PERSONAL gun violence protection orders that limit the petitioners to family/guardians who live with a dependent. The dependent must be a minor or must be a disabled dependent under the age of 24. The petitioner whether it's the parents or guardian must submit the child's medical records and a psychiatric evaluation or a summary from a mental health provider that indicates that emotional and violent instability is present.

IF a judge grants an order, the suspension is to the age of 24. Not one day after. It cannot be extended.

A social worker cannot file this petition on behalf of anyone. No member of government can. Only a family member or the guardian of the child can submit it.

Once the minor reaches the age of majority, he can petition the court to have it expunged citing a mental evaluation or any other evidence that the parent fabricated records, and he already has the ability to sue the parent under PA's Dragonetti Act.


ADULTS already have the option to call the police and report Terroristic Threats, which is punishable to the point of making you a prohibited possessor, and you can use a standard PFA against someone who is being charged or has been convicted of making Terroristic Threats.



Fuck Daylin Leach.

[Jhaydeno]

Her proposal feels threatening to my rights. Will the police come grab her and toss her in the pokey?

We certainly know that liberal Pa judges don't push personal agendas, and the police always give you back your guns... Right? What could possibly go wrong?!?!

[alpacaheat]

Her proposal feels threatening to my rights.

^ Hold on, Daylin is a woman? I always assumed it was a man's name.