HB 1033: Red Flag Law

Misty
November 24th, 2024
No Comments

The Arkansas Red Flag Law (House Bill 1033) by Representative Andrew Collins aims to establish a legal mechanism for temporarily restricting access to firearms for individuals deemed to pose an imminent risk of harm to themselves or others. Key elements of the bill include:

1. Creation of Extreme Risk Protection Orders (ERPOs):

Law enforcement officers may seek an ERPO by submitting sworn affidavits to a district or circuit court judge, establishing probable cause that an individual poses a risk of imminent personal injury and possesses firearms.
Judges can issue ERPOs and warrants, authorizing law enforcement to seize firearms from the individual in question.

2. Legal Process and Safeguards:

An independent investigation is required before officers can apply for an ERPO, ensuring no reasonable alternatives are available to prevent harm.
Hearings must be held within three days (excluding weekends/holidays) after firearm seizure to determine whether to return the firearms or extend the restriction (up to one year).
The state must provide clear and convincing evidence to justify continued restrictions.

3. Return or Transfer of Firearms:

If the individual is no longer deemed a risk, their firearms must be returned.
Firearms can also be voluntarily forfeited or legally transferred to eligible individuals who meet specific requirements and ensure the original owner does not regain access.

4. Penalties for False Reporting and Violations:

Filing a false report to obtain an ERPO is a felony if it leads to firearm seizure or significant investigation costs.
An eligible person who knowingly allows the restricted individual access to firearms can face a misdemeanor.

5. Additional Provisions:

Courts can notify law enforcement or prosecutors if an individual may need mental health or medical services based on ERPO findings.
Restricted individuals can petition for the early return of firearms but are limited to two petitions within a 12-month period.

Amendments to Existing Law:

Updates the state’s firearms possession laws to include individuals subject to ERPOs under the Red Flag Law.
Establishes penalties for falsely reporting criminal conduct related to the law.

Explain It Like I'm 5

The Arkansas Red Flag Law allows law enforcement to request an Extreme Risk Protection Order (ERPO) from a judge if they believe someone poses a serious threat to themselves or others. If the judge grants the order, the person's firearms can be temporarily removed. This is intended to reduce the risk of violence or self-harm.

The law includes a process for a court hearing, typically within three days, to determine if the order should be extended or if the firearms should be returned. The guns can be held for up to a year, but the person has the right to appeal the decision. The law also encourages individuals under an ERPO to seek mental health support.

Additionally, penalties are in place for anyone who knowingly files a false accusation to obtain an ERPO, making it illegal to misuse the system.

Opposing Viewpoint

Opponents of Red Flag Laws (also known as Extreme Risk Protection Orders or ERPOs) often raise several concerns:

Due Process and Civil Liberties: Critics argue that Red Flag Laws can violate individuals' constitutional rights, especially the Second Amendment (the right to bear arms). They claim that temporarily removing firearms without a criminal conviction can be seen as a violation of due process, as it involves taking action before any formal trial or hearing of the person's guilt or innocence.
Potential for Abuse: Opponents fear that these laws can be abused. They worry that people could use them to target individuals for personal reasons, such as in domestic disputes, or out of political or social disagreements. The possibility of false accusations leading to gun confiscation is a major concern.
Lack of Clear Standards: Some argue that Red Flag Laws give too much discretion to law enforcement or family members without clear, objective standards. What constitutes a "dangerous" person could be subjective, leading to inconsistencies or overreach.
Ineffectiveness in Preventing Violence: Some critics argue that Red Flag Laws are ineffective at preventing mass shootings or violence. They contend that people intent on harm may find other ways to obtain weapons, even if their firearms are temporarily taken away. Others believe that the focus should be on addressing underlying causes like mental health rather than restricting gun ownership.
Impact on Mental Health: Critics also worry that Red Flag Laws could stigmatize individuals who are struggling with mental health issues, potentially discouraging them from seeking help due to fear of losing their firearms or facing legal consequences.
Slippery Slope Concerns: There is a fear that Red Flag Laws might be a stepping stone to more restrictive gun control measures. Opponents worry that if ERPOs are accepted, they could pave the way for broader limitations on gun ownership.

In summary, while proponents see Red Flag Laws as a tool for protecting public safety, opponents argue they could infringe on individual rights, lead to misuse, and not effectively address the root causes of violence.