“Trump Administration is calling on every State to adopt Extreme Risk Protection Orders (ERPOs)”
The White House ^ | March 12, 2018 | The White House
Posted on 3/13/2018, 12:25:23 PM by NobleFree
[…] President Trump’s Administration is calling on every State to adopt Extreme Risk Protection Orders (ERPOs).
The President is directing the Department of Justice to provide technical assistance to States, at their request, on establishing and implementing ERPOs.
ERPOs allow law enforcement, with approval from a court, to remove firearms from individuals who are a demonstrated threat to themselves or others and temporarily to prevent individuals from purchasing new firearms.
ERPOs should be carefully tailored to ensure the due process rights of law-abiding citizens are protected. […]
(Excerpt) Read more at whitehouse.gov …
Option 1 $5.00 USD
Option 2 $10.00 USD
Option 3 $20.00 USD
Option 4 $50.00 USD
Option 5 $100.00 USD
Option 6 $200.00 USD
Or donate by Credit card via Authorize.Net:
Authorize.net is the company we use and have been using for over 15 years to process all of our credit card transactions.
Or by mail to: Free Republic, LLC – PO Box 9771 – Fresno, CA 93794
Hopefully, we’ll have our normal CC system up and running again soon. Thank you very much for your loyal support!
And this will be run like FISA courts… where the one suspected has ZERO opportunity at defending themselves – and the evidence presented doesn’t (apparently) have to be vetted or even honest…
Are there protections in place to protect us from abusers of the 1st, 5th, or other constitutional amendments as well?
Again, the only people the justice system is good at dealing with are the ones that can’t afford to defend themselves from it.
Can you imagine having to hire a lawyer to prove you are NOT a threat?
What would this permanently do to your ability to get and hold a job, to be able to take care of your kids?
This is a national version of CPS.
This is a very bad idea.
They’ll start with permit holders first.
It is way too early to speculate on the details of this, but have fun!
“with approval from a court”
That’s O.K. IF it means the person whom the ERPO is to be executed against is in the court hearing on the ERPO and has the right, with counsel, to defend themselves against the ERPO.
I can see a modified form of that as O.K. also, if the initial ERPO is without representation by and for the person who the ERPO is against, but is by law for a brief period only (days, not weeks) pending an ERPO full hearing as I first stated.
Otherwise, I am against ERPO orders where the person whom the ERPO is against is unable to first defend themselves, in court, BEFORE the ERPO can permanently take affect.
He is making it a states rights issue. And thus it is a state responsibility. Some states will get it right, others will be California.
WE can trust the government to NOT abuse a power like this, cant we?