Author Topic: NRA Chris W. Cox- Risk Protection Orders  (Read 1215 times)

MechAg94

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 33,622
NRA Chris W. Cox- Risk Protection Orders
« on: May 21, 2018, 09:27:37 AM »
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7sNiklO506A

This is a video from Chris Cox of the NRA supporting state level laws allowing courts to issue Risk Protection Orders.  It isn't new, but I didn't realize the NRA was pushing for this.  I get the impression the "due process" will be an afterthought literally. 

If actually done, they should also include liability on the person applying for the order as well as the judge issuing it.  I can't think of any other way to make sure this is only done when absolutely necessary.  Better to just not do it.
“It is much more important to kill bad bills than to pass good ones.”  ― Calvin Coolidge

Perd Hapley

  • Superstar of the Internet
  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 61,333
  • My prepositions are on/in
Re: NRA Chris W. Cox- Risk Protection Orders
« Reply #1 on: May 21, 2018, 09:29:42 AM »
David French was flogging this idea, after Parkland.
"Doggies are angel babies!" -- my wife

Hawkmoon

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 27,199
Re: NRA Chris W. Cox- Risk Protection Orders
« Reply #2 on: May 21, 2018, 05:45:37 PM »
Connecticut recently adopted such a law, and due process doesn't even enter into it. If anyone requests a restraining order against you, the cops show up and take your guns. You aren't even entitled to know that someone has requested the order, so you have NO opportunity to appear in court to fight it. Your "due process" is all after the fact -- once your guns have been taken away, you get to hire a lawyer to try and get them back.

Kneejerk reaction that, as usual, mostly opens the door to abuse and victimization of innocent, law-abiding citizens while doing little or nothing to accomplish the stated goal.
- - - - - - - - - - - - -
100% Politically Incorrect by Design

MillCreek

  • Skippy The Wonder Dog
  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 19,964
  • APS Risk Manager
Re: NRA Chris W. Cox- Risk Protection Orders
« Reply #3 on: May 21, 2018, 06:00:23 PM »
We now have this in Washington, and it does provide for due process, although in some cases the court can issue an ex parte order.

http://app.leg.wa.gov/rcw/default.aspx?cite=7.94
_____________
Regards,
MillCreek
Snohomish County, WA  USA


Quote from: Angel Eyes on August 09, 2018, 01:56:15 AM
You are one lousy risk manager.

Hawkmoon

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 27,199
Re: NRA Chris W. Cox- Risk Protection Orders
« Reply #4 on: May 21, 2018, 07:30:09 PM »
The Connecticut law is specifically an ex parte law. It was intended as such, promoted as such, and adopted as such. It's absolutely ripe for abuse. IMHO, anyone in Connecticut who gets into a relationship today is nuts.
- - - - - - - - - - - - -
100% Politically Incorrect by Design

Andiron

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 3,930
Re: NRA Chris W. Cox- Risk Protection Orders
« Reply #5 on: May 21, 2018, 07:59:11 PM »
When I bought my life membership, I didn't know I was trading off my 5th amendment rights for the 2nd.
"Leftism destroys everything good." -  Ron

There is no fixing stupid. But, you can line it up in front of a wall and offer it a last smoke.

There is no such thing as a "transgender" person.  Only mental illness that should be discouraged.

brimic

  • friends
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 14,270
Re: NRA Chris W. Cox- Risk Protection Orders
« Reply #6 on: May 22, 2018, 11:49:04 AM »
This is exactly how gun confiscation will be carried out, and its being supported by the quislings at the NRA.
"now you see that evil will always triumph, because good is dumb" -Dark Helmet

"AK47's belong in the hands of soldiers mexican drug cartels"-
Barack Obama

freakazoid

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 6,243
Re: NRA Chris W. Cox- Risk Protection Orders
« Reply #7 on: May 23, 2018, 06:02:12 AM »
Tim of MAC goes into this a bit, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FtI8K6TvSQk
"so I ended up getting the above because I didn't want to make a whole production of sticking something between my knees and cranking. To me, the cranking on mine is pretty effortless, at least on the coarse setting. Maybe if someone has arthritis or something, it would be more difficult for them." - Ben

"I see a rager at least once a week." - brimic

slugcatcher

  • friend
  • Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 370
Re: NRA Chris W. Cox- Risk Protection Orders
« Reply #8 on: May 23, 2018, 08:52:46 AM »
NRA comments from the youtube link.

"The NRA’s position on emergency risk protection orders (ERPOs) has recently been mischaracterized by some who haven't taken the time to understand our position, including the anti-gun mainstream media and organizations that purport to support the Second Amendment.  Many of the individuals mischaracterizing our position are using misinformation to simply attack the NRA.

The NRA fights for the constitutional freedoms, including the due process rights, of all law-abiding Americans, every day in Congress, the statehouses and the courts.  Our record on this is clear.  Due process of law is a bedrock of our constitutional freedoms.  Without it, we would cease to exist as a free country.

All fifty states currently have civil commitment procedures and many lack basic due process protections.   This is unacceptable.  The NRA believes that no one should be deprived of a fundamental right without due process of law.

Some have raised the issue of current ERPO laws in California, Oregon and other states, suggesting that the NRA supports those laws.  This is false.  The NRA strongly opposed these laws because they do not protect due process rights.  We will continue to oppose confiscation schemes such as these.

In addition, the NRA opposes any effort to create a federal ERPO law, in which federal agents would be tasked with seizing firearms after a hearing in federal court.  As states consider ERPO laws, the NRA will continue to push for the inclusion of strong due process protections. 

The NRA believes that any effort should be structured to fully protect the Second Amendment rights of law-abiding citizens while preventing truly dangerous individuals from accessing firearms.

The requirements of an ERPO process that the NRA can support should include the following:

• The process should include criminal penalties for those who bring false or frivolous charges.

• An order should only be granted when a judge makes the determination, by clear and convincing evidence, that the person poses a significant risk of danger to themselves or others.


• The process should require the judge to make a determination of whether the person meets the state standard for involuntary commitment.  Where the standard for involuntary commitment is met, this should be the course of action taken.

• If an ERPO is granted, the person should receive community-based mental health treatment as a condition of the ERPO.

• Any ex parte proceeding should include admitting the individual for treatment.

• A person’s Second Amendment rights should only be temporarily deprived after a hearing before a judge, in which the person has notice of the hearing and is given an opportunity to offer evidence on his or her behalf.

• There should be a mechanism in place for the return of firearms upon termination of an ERPO, when a person is ordered to relinquish their firearms as a condition of the order.

• The ERPO process should allow an individual to challenge or terminate the order, with full due process protections in place.

• The process should allow firearms to be retained by law-abiding third parties, local law enforcement, or a federally licensed firearms dealer when an individual is ordered to relinquish such firearms as a condition of the ERPO.  The individual must also have the ability to sell his or her firearms in a reasonable time without violating the order.

Again, the NRA will continue to oppose any proposal that does not fully protect due process rights.  We will only support an ERPO process that strongly protects both Second Amendment rights and due process rights at the same time."

MechAg94

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 33,622
Re: NRA Chris W. Cox- Risk Protection Orders
« Reply #9 on: May 23, 2018, 10:07:37 AM »
That looks like a good list of requirements.  Chris Cox didn't mention any of that in his video which is on the NRA Youtube channel.  They need to take that down and replace it with one mentioning those points.  The one that is there sounds a little like they support the anti-gun efforts for gun seizure and uses similar "make our kids safe" language.  The requirements/limitations were not even mentioned, just a vague reference to "due process" which sounds like the "after the fact" due process the gun grabbers want.

The MAC youtube video is what I saw that made me go look for the Chris Cox video.  He is not a fan of the NRA, but Chris Cox isn't making the NRA look good with a video like that.  

Another comment from the video that reflects my thoughts.
Quote
So, take the guns first, due process second is what I heard. Despicable
“It is much more important to kill bad bills than to pass good ones.”  ― Calvin Coolidge

slugcatcher

  • friend
  • Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 370
Re: NRA Chris W. Cox- Risk Protection Orders
« Reply #10 on: May 24, 2018, 08:32:52 AM »
I agree.  You would think the NRA would do a better job of getting the message out clearly.  At least take the time to edit the video with more detailed information.

Pb

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 4,887
Re: NRA Chris W. Cox- Risk Protection Orders
« Reply #11 on: May 24, 2018, 09:32:34 AM »
The fact is, all this stuff about "instant background checks" and "risk protection orders" is all a bunch of nonsense. Any of this stuff is easily bypassed by doing a private purchase.  In my state you could probably easily come up with a gun in a few hours if you had a few hundred dollars access to Armslist without going through any kind of check at all.

Why is the NRA pretending any of this stuff would accomplishes anything?  The NRA says it opposes regulations on private sales- as do I- and private sales negate all of these things.

And regulations on private sales are unenforceable without gun registration... which brings up the obvious threat of eventual confiscation.

MechAg94

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 33,622
Re: NRA Chris W. Cox- Risk Protection Orders
« Reply #12 on: May 24, 2018, 09:38:46 AM »
You could say that about every form of gun control.  None of it has prevented criminals from obtaining guns.  A few of those laws make it more difficult or increase penalties, but don't prevent it. 

....but that isn't the point anyway.  It isn't about the criminals.  Gun controllers don't care about that.  They just care about Control.  Can't control the masses if they are armed.   
“It is much more important to kill bad bills than to pass good ones.”  ― Calvin Coolidge

Pb

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 4,887
Re: NRA Chris W. Cox- Risk Protection Orders
« Reply #13 on: May 24, 2018, 10:13:45 AM »
You could say that about every form of gun control.  None of it has prevented criminals from obtaining guns.  A few of those laws make it more difficult or increase penalties, but don't prevent it. 

....but that isn't the point anyway.  It isn't about the criminals.  Gun controllers don't care about that.  They just care about Control.  Can't control the masses if they are armed.   

Yes!

So is the NRA just pushing this garbage for PR purposes? 

brimic

  • friends
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 14,270
Re: NRA Chris W. Cox- Risk Protection Orders
« Reply #14 on: May 24, 2018, 01:55:40 PM »
Remember, the NRA was vaguely for banning bump stocks before they were vaguely against it.
"now you see that evil will always triumph, because good is dumb" -Dark Helmet

"AK47's belong in the hands of soldiers mexican drug cartels"-
Barack Obama

MechAg94

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 33,622
Re: NRA Chris W. Cox- Risk Protection Orders
« Reply #15 on: May 24, 2018, 03:15:03 PM »
So is the NRA just pushing this garbage for PR purposes? 
I really don't know.  All those things slugcatcher posted were in the youtube video comments.  IMO, the video would have made more sense if Chris Cox had gone through all those protections and made it like the NRA was demanding any bill include that.  However, that isn't what he did.  Instead, Chris Cox makes himself look like a paid D.C. guy who is working for the NRA, but doesn't really support gun rights. 
“It is much more important to kill bad bills than to pass good ones.”  ― Calvin Coolidge

Pb

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 4,887
Re: NRA Chris W. Cox- Risk Protection Orders
« Reply #16 on: May 25, 2018, 09:34:15 AM »
I really don't know.  All those things slugcatcher posted were in the youtube video comments.  IMO, the video would have made more sense if Chris Cox had gone through all those protections and made it like the NRA was demanding any bill include that.  However, that isn't what he did.  Instead, Chris Cox makes himself look like a paid D.C. guy who is working for the NRA, but doesn't really support gun rights. 

Christ Cox supposedly owns and shoots machine guns as a hobby.

MechAg94

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 33,622
Re: NRA Chris W. Cox- Risk Protection Orders
« Reply #17 on: May 25, 2018, 10:56:15 AM »
Christ Cox supposedly owns and shoots machine guns as a hobby.
.....but he sucks at making NRA videos (at least based on this one).  Bad writers?
“It is much more important to kill bad bills than to pass good ones.”  ― Calvin Coolidge