(07-31-2018, 11:52 PM)Sneakers Wrote:

(07-31-2018, 04:49 PM)NYC4jags Wrote: All a person has to do is avoid being in a situation wherein a member of law enforcement, and subsequently a court of law are convinced you are a danger to yourself or others.  Is that too much to ask of a person owning firearms?  Of anyone?

In certain situations, yes, that is too much to ask, even of a person who doesn't own firearms.  Any angry/jilted/jealous ex-wife/girlfriend can walk into a police station or court, sign an affidavit claiming that you physically abused and/or threatened her and obtain a temporary, ex parte, restraining order.  Sadly, this all to often occurs in attempts to gain leverage in divorce and custody battles.  

Under this new law, the respondent shall then bear the burden of essentially proving by "...clear and convincing evidence..." that the allegation is false, before the court will vacate the order.  In a he said/she said scenario, there is often no way to definitively prove or disprove such claims and the courts tend to err on the side of caution, so...………...

That is applicable only after a full risk protection order is issued. Before that, there is a hearing where the respondent could potentially rebut the evidence provided. In cases where a temporary ex parte risk protection order was issued, that order automatically ends and a hearing for a full risk protection order is held. Please read subsections (3) and (4) carefully.  And this law specifically states that a false statement is a third degree felony, so hopefully that will eliminate most false claims against a respondent.

---