News started last fall that Tennessee Republican Steve Dickerson (Nashville) would sponsor firearms confiscation legislation (also known as a “Red Flag” law). He did in fact file it with, so far, only Democrat sponsors. (Senate Bill 1178 and House Bill 1446)
The original firearms confiscation legislation was a horrible idea from a constitutional rights perspective, a due process perspective and even from a so-called “Republican” perspective. It was substantively three (3) pages of communist theory “Big State” rights infringement.
The original legislation was set for hearing in the Senate Judiciary committee on March 26, 2019. Just hours before it was set to be heard in that committee, a proposed amendment was filed (drafting code 004663 see below). Perhaps as a result of that filing, the hearing on this bill was “rolled” or continued to Tuesday, April 2, 2019.
The amendment was not just a “technical fix” to correct errors in the bill. No. The amendment evidences that the original 3 page bill was just more Legislative shenanigans to keep from public information the true, more devious and dangerous provisions of what the sponsors and supporters really wanted to do. The amended bill is 19 pages – 16 pages of new and even more draconian constitutional infringements and due process violations.
The new bill, for example, allows any blood relative – even if they have never had any contact with the individual in question; or other family members; or someone who had even a singular sexual occasion; or someone who is a law enforcement officer or even a law enforcement agency to file the petition for the “extreme risk protection order”.
The new bill allows the petition to be filed in counties or locations even if the individual against whom it is brought has never, ever been in that county.
The new bill allows for “ex parte” orders to be granted – that is, the orders can be granted without no advance notice whatsoever to the individual.
The new bill prohibits an individual who has been wrongfully the victim of such a petition from ever seeking attorney’s fees or their costs. It also provides no remedies or sanctions if the process is abused for “tactical” reasons perhaps in a divorce or custody matter.
The new bill provides that the court consider such things as a) whether in the last 12 months the individual has engaged in any “act or threat of violence” (perhaps a facebook post or some act not even directed toward the petitioner); b) evidence that the individual has “recurring” mental health issues (perhaps depression from a recent death or job loss); c) whether the individual has ever – ever engaged in any “unlawful or reckless use, display or brandishing of a firearm”; d) whether the individual has ever – ever had any “abuse” or a controlled substance or alcohol; e) whether the individual has any “recent acquisition of firearms or ammunition”; or f) anything else that might be relevant.
The new bill allows the court, whether or not the order is issued, to order the individual to undergo a mental health evaluation and/or a chemical dependency evaluation.
The new bill contains dispossession mandates that would clearly violate the 1934 National Firearms Act and fails to take many other unique considerations into account. For example, the bill fails to address what happens if the individual is or works for a federal firearms licensee, is a responsible party on a federal firearms license, is employed in a position that involves use or possession; is in the military; is in law enforcement; is a judge; is a legislator; and/or is or works for one of Tennessee’s many firearms or ammunition manufacturers.
The bill requires that local law enforcement take possession of all firearms and ammunition and authorizes law enforcement to obtain search warrants to look for firearms and ammunition.
For comparison purposes, we have also prepared a “redlined” copy of the amended bill’s changes.
It is critical that the personal visits, calls and emails continue to put a stop to this dangerous legislation and abuse of stewardship authority. And, in addition to the legislators who need to be hearing how much you oppose this legislation and its infringements on your rights, you also need to be calling and “sharing your thoughts” with others who may be “supporting” it including your local sheriff, your local chief of police, your local district attorney, and even your local judges. If these additional “interested parties” hear from you, they might be less inclined to think that the “public” would obviously support what they may deem to be “reasonable” infringements on everyone’s fundamental rights … in the name of safety.
The contact information for the committee members is:
| Mike Bell (Chair) | sen.mike.bell@capitol.tn.gov | (615) 741-1946 |
| Lundberg, Jon | sen.jon.lundberg@capitol.tn.gov | (615) 741-5761 |
| White, Dawn | sen.dawn.white@capitol.tn.gov | (615) 741-6853 |
| Bowling, Janice | sen.janice.bowling@capitol.tn.gov | (615) 741-6694 |
| Gardenhire, Todd | sen.todd.gardenhire@capitol.tn.gov | (615) 741-6682 |
| Kyle, Sara | sen.sara.kyle@capitol.tn.gov | (615) 741-4167 |
| Roberts, Kerry | sen.kerry.roberts@capitol.tn.gov | (615) 741-4499 |
| Robinson, Katrina | sen.katrina.robinson@capitol.tn.gov | (615) 741-2509 |
| Stevens, John | sen.john.stevens@capitol.tn.gov | (615) 741-4576 |
Sorry, comments are closed for this post.