Gun Owners Caucus explainers

[jdege]

I've not be able to find the BCA's new form online.

What do we do if it's not out before Aug 1?

[Uffdaphil]

Thanks Bryan. The imminent threat clause looks like it would cover anyone for the duration of a riot.

[xd ED]

Thanks Bryan. The imminent threat clause looks like it would cover anyone for the duration of a riot.

That seems like a reasonable interpretation. But lest one forgets, we live in the land of mostly peaceful protests.

[bstrawse]

I've not be able to find the BCA's new form online.

What do we do if it's not out before Aug 1?

They'll get a legal demand from us on August 1 and we'll go to court if they don't issue it immediately.

It's government - they'll publish it at 4:59PM on August 1st.

Bryan

[bstrawse]

Thanks Bryan. The imminent threat clause looks like it would cover anyone for the duration of a riot.

I'm not sure I'd read it that way. An imminent threat of death or great bodily harm has very specific meaning - and I don't think the general threat of a riot qualifies for that.

[usnret]

I can see a lot of lawyers getting rich off of the Red Flag laws!

[grimbeaver]

So am I reading this right? Per Sec. 6. [624.7175] TRANSFER OF FIREARMS. Subsection (a):

... If the respondent elects to transfer the respondent's firearms to a law enforcement agency, the agency must accept the transfer. The transfer may be permanent or temporary...

...If a respondent permanently transfers the respondent's firearms to a law enforcement agency, the agency must compensate the respondent at fair market value and may not charge the respondent any processing or other fees.

So respondent has the option of forcing the law enforcement agency to accept a permanent transfer and pay fair market value should they not want their firearms back?

[jdege]

So respondent has the option of forcing the law enforcement agency to accept a permanent transfer and pay fair market value should they not want their firearms back?

Could I use this to rid myself of some safe queens?

[xd ED]

So respondent has the option of forcing the law enforcement agency to accept a permanent transfer and pay fair market value should they not want their firearms back?

Could I use this to rid myself of some safe queens?

Probably an ’all-or-nothing’ deal; unlike some urban ‘buy-back’ thing.

[bstrawse]

So respondent has the option of forcing the law enforcement agency to accept a permanent transfer and pay fair market value should they not want their firearms back?

Could I use this to rid myself of some safe queens?

If an "extreme risk protection order" is served against you - yes. But not otherwise.
b