Tronster wrote:Looking through the details of the bill there appears to be no specific type of proof required, so it looks like just a convincing verbal account under oath is sufficient. May or may not give advanced notice of seizure (depending on severity of 'evidence' given). Must relinquish guns to LE or FFL, either of which can charge you a "reasonable" fee for storage. If given to an FFL, they must perform a background check (and fee's I'm sure) before giving guns back. Burden of evidence to seize firearms is lower than burden of evidence to get them back.
Yea this whole thing stinks to high heaven and ripe for abuse. You're right to just defeat it than try to fix all the issues in this dumpster fire of a bill.
https://www.revisor.mn.gov/bills/text.p ... n_number=0Line 5.9 requires an affadavit under oath with "specific facts and circumstances
forming a basis to allege that an extreme risk protection order should be granted"
Line 8.1 requires a preponderance of the evidence "At the hearing, the petitioner must prove by a preponderance
of the evidence that the respondent poses a significant danger of bodily injury to self or
other persons by possessing a firearm."
Starting at line 8.4: " In determining whether to grant the order after a hearing, the court shall consider
evidence of the following, whether or not the petitioner has provided evidence of the same:
new text end
new text begin (1) a history of threats or acts of violence by the respondent directed toward the
respondent's self or another person;
new text end
new text begin (2) the history of use, attempted use, or threatened use of physical force by the respondent
against another person;
new text end
new text begin (3) a violation of any court order including, but not limited to, orders issued under
sections 624.7161 to 624.7168, or chapter 260C or 518B;
new text end
new text begin (4) a prior arrest for a felony offense;
new text end
new text begin (5) a conviction or prior arrest for a violent misdemeanor offense, for a stalking offense
under section 609.749, or for domestic assault under section 609.2242;
new text end
new text begin (6) a conviction for an offense of cruelty to animals under chapter 343;
new text end
new text begin (7) the unlawful and reckless use, display, or brandishing of a firearm by the respondent;
and
new text end
new text begin (8) evidence of controlled substances or alcohol abuse factored against countervailing
evidence of recovery from abuse of controlled substances or alcohol.
new text end
new text begin (c) In determining whether to grant the order after a hearing, the court may consider any
other evidence that bears on whether the respondent poses a danger to the respondent's self
or others."
The burdens of proof and type of evidence the court can use is specified in the bill.
Again, the bill is crap, we are opposed, and we're going to try and kill it.