If family members believe a gun-owning individual is a danger to themselves or someone else, police may acquire a temporary “gun violence” restraining order from a judge, KPCC public radio reported.
California Gov. Jerry Brown signed the law after the 2014 shooting by Elliot Rodger near the University of California, Santa Barbara. Rodger, 22, killed six people and injured 14.
Before his May 23 shooting spree, Rodger’s parents claim they expressed concern about their son’s mental state and chilling online diatribes about women.
In his last YouTube video before the shooting, Rodger stated in what appeared to be prepared remarks: “If I had it in my power, I would stop at nothing to reduce every single one of you to mountains of skulls and rivers of blood, and rightfully so.”
Police officers visited his apartment three weeks before the spree. Rodger’s therapist and mother had told authorities they were concerned about videos the man had posted online. But the officers – who never viewed Rodger’s videos – determined he wasn’t a threat to himself and, therefore, didn’t search his apartment or determine whether he owned guns.
“In the case of the Isla Vista shooter, Elliot Rodger, his mother was noticing that he was becoming more agitated and making these threats of violence, but there was little she could do and little the police could do,” said Democratic Assembly member Nancy Skinner of Berkeley, who introduced the bill in 2014 along with Santa Barbara Democrat Das Williams.
As of Friday, California’s new law would enable a judge to issue a restraining order against a gun owner based on accounts from family and police.
“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 Chief Michael Moore told KPCC. “It allows further examination of the person’s mental state.”
A gun owner may challenge the decision three weeks after the firearms are confiscated.
“It’s a short duration, and it allows for due process,” Moore contends.
The law also requires the California court to notify the Department of Justice when any gun violence restraining order has been issued, renewed, dissolved or terminated.
The state already bans citizens from owning firearms if they have committed violent crimes or were involuntarily committed to mental health facilities. Law-enforcement authorities are also permitted to confiscate guns if a licensed therapist says the owner is a danger to the safety of himself or others.
Moore told KPCC the new firearms restraining order is comparable to a domestic violence restraining order because no conviction is needed.
“It’s an opportunity for mental health professionals to provide an analysis of a person’s mental state,” he said, adding that he doesn’t expect “tremendous” use of the new restraining orders by authorities.
Meanwhile, gun-rights advocates are up in arms over the new law.
Sam Paredes, executive director of Gun Owners of California, told the Associated Press: “We don’t need another law to solve this problem. We think this just misses the mark and may create a situation where law-abiding gun owners are put in jeopardy.”
Charles H. Cunningham, a director with the NRA’s Institute for Legislative Action, wrote, “Without a doubt, AB 1014 is one of the most egregious violations of civil liberties ever introduced in the California Legislature.”
And in 2014, Dr. Jason Kissner, associate professor of criminology at California State University, Fresno, called the legislation “the most draconian and flagrantly unconstitutional bill in the state’s, and maybe even the nation’s, history.”
Kissner warned “victims of this proposed law might have no idea they have even been targeted until police show up at the door, conceivably in the middle of the night …”
The murder of Westchester socialite Lois Colley has revealed a booming black market in her rural area — for hay. Aerial view of the Colley’s North Salem propertyPhoto: Edmund J. CoppaTwo workers at her sprawling North Salem farm were arrested by State Police for stealing about $30,000 worth of the horse feed and reselling it while working for Colley, cops said Wednesday. Lois and Eugene Colley in June of 2015Photo: APAngel Parra Penafiel, 34, and Hugo Ramirez-Morales, 34, snatched the hay over three years while working for the 83-year-old woman and her McDonald’s-franchise-mogul husband, cops said. Cops uncovered the scheme while investigating the Nov. 9 murder — and the farmhands are now being questioned for information that authorities hope will lead to the killer, according to a police source. The men are not considered suspects in the slaying. It’s the latest twist in a case that has baffled cops and residents of the wealthy town, where Colley was pummeled to death in a laundry room of her sprawling estate. Investigators have questioned Colley’s former and current staffers, including those who may be linked to the crop crooks, police said. In New York, hay can be sold at upstate auctions for up to $150 per bale, farming experts said. Unlike livestock, farmers don’t tend to tag or brand hay, making it difficult for police to tell when it has been stolen, said Brian Waddingham, who runs a farming coalition in Iowa, where hay theft is rampant. “I can see why it’s attractive to a thief in New York. Anyone can load hay onto a truck in 20 minutes, drive it 50 miles and sell it at an auction — and nobody can prove it’s not theirs,” he said. Hay bale weighing 60 to 100 pounds sell for about $6 on the black market, he said. Large ones weighing 1,500 pounds can yield as much as $150. Alfalfa hay used to feed dairy cows is worth the most because it is packed with protein. Grass hay for horses is worth less, he said. Colley was married to Eugene Colley, the multimillionaire owner of roughly 100 McDonald’s. She was found beaten to death — possibly with a fire extinguisher — on the 300-acre Windswept Farm. There were no signs of forced entry, leading cops to believe she may have known the killer.
No comments:
Post a Comment