How ERPO Laws Should Be
Lot’s of interesting conversations going around lately about a variety of topics.
One of them that keeps being brought up is: “If we were forced to swallow Red Flag Laws,” pause, to be realistic, that’s what it’s looking like, “how would you want them to be?”
If we’re being realistic, a dude saying he’d shoot someone for mugging him publicly is going to get reported by someone holding a grudge against him. That’s the reality of Red Flag Laws, because most don’t require any proof to make a claim.
So, to appease the “How would you have them?” crowd that’s always willing to surrender, here’s my answer.
- Actual tangible proof.
A person making posts online about wanting to overthrow the government isn’t tangible proof. Photograph proof of them plotting to pull of an attack is.
-Side Note: Conspiracy to commit an act of terror is already a chargeable offense; meaning red flag laws in this case would have done nothing that something else already took care of…if it was used.
- Upon an ERPO being served, the individual receiving doesn’t surrender anything. When they get served, that’s all that is happening. They’re being summoned by the court to appear for an accusation that they’re a danger to themselves or others.
Again, let me be clear. The individual being accused does not surrender any property upon being served to appear in court.
- The accuser has to appear in court on the same date at the same time. If the accuser does not appear in court it’s an immediate felony charge, they receive no less than 10 years in prison and a possible $250,000 fine; the same punishment for lying on a NICS Background check.Beyond the accuser having charges pressed against them, the case should immediately be dropped by the judge, and I would go as far as to say that 50% of the $250,000 fine should be payable to the accused as reparations for damages done to their character.
- If the accuser shows up and the claims are proven to be false, the accuser has to forfeit property or money equaling the sum of their home(s) and vehicle(s).
Just getting served an ERPO can be very damaging to an individual’s character and standing in their community. This can lead to loss of work, the requirement to move in order to find work, and more. Proper reparations have to be made to the individual being falsely accused.
- Was the individual found to have committed an actual victim based crime, or found to be plotting one? No? The case gets immediately dismissed and #4 applies.
5.2. Potential crimes discovered during the ERPO case are to be dismissed. Whether they had drug paraphernalia, illegal firearms, or other. The inquiry was made into whether or not they were a danger to themselves, others, or had committed a victim based crime that would disqualify them from firearm ownership. Illegal firearms ownership, drug paraphernalia, and other victim-less crimes do not fall under: “a danger to themselves, others, or had committed a victim based crime that would disqualify them from firearm ownership”.
These things are also to fall under double jeopardy, protecting the accused from authority figures attempting to arrest them for the things dismissed during the ERPO hearing (if a search warrant was issued for the accused’s property)
- Protections from politically biased judges. If a judge is found to have ruled based on politics and not on the case itself, the judge is to have their license to practice law revoked for life and they are to be sentenced to no less than 15 years in jail. We do not have room in this country for politically motivated judges. We should have a zero tolerance policy for politically bias judges when it comes to ERPO cases and the punishments need to be hefty.
At no point along the process should the accused forfeit their property before their day in court due to the words of another individual. At no point along the process should the accused forfeit their property before it has been proven that they’ve committed a victim based crime warranting the seizure of their firearms and jail time.
The current ERPO or Red Flag Laws offer zero protections for the accused, and there are zero protections for gun owners safeguarding them from false claims. As things stand, multiple Constitutional and unalienable rights are being broken with the implementation of these laws, and the fact that anyone can “rationally” say that’s okay shows the decaying state of our society.