Lansing – HB 4138 – 4140 were introduced in the Michigan House of Representatives last week. The bills would repeal Michigan’s new Extreme Risk Protection Order (ERPO) law, sometimes referred to as a “Red Flag Law.”
The red flag law is designed to allow law enforcement to temporarily remove firearms from those that have become a threat to themselves or others. The measures are effective at preventing suicide, mass shootings, and are often used in cases of domestic violence.
“There is no doubt about it – the first year of Michigan’s extreme risk protection orders law has saved lives,” said Sen. Mallory McMorrow (D-Royal Oak), who was the primary sponsor of the enacting legislation.
McMorrow added: “ERPOs provide a tool for loved ones and law enforcement to temporarily remove firearms from someone who’s an immediate risk to themselves or others. And in just the first year, it has been successfully used in a situation where a law enforcement officer was suicidal, in the removal of firearms from the home of a 10-year-old child threatening to shoot his classmates and a husband threatening to kill his wife in the midst of a separation.
“And it’s not just about that moment of intervention. Royal Oak’s police chief recently noted that his department utilized the new ERPO law to remove firearms from a harrowing situation right in our own community. A resident with a history of CTE had barricaded himself into the home with his wife and children, having stockpiled weapons and ammunition, in the midst of a mental health crisis.
“After de-escalating the situation and removing firearms – preventing a dangerous situation from potentially becoming deadly – Oakland County’s co-responder program has now paired this response with mental health professionals, and this resident is now in active mental health treatment. These are lives worth saving, and lives that would be at risk if Republicans repealed Michigan’s ERPO law.”
The Michigan State Court Administrator Office recently released their report on the first year of the law, and demonstrated its life-saving effect. 287 firearms were removed from dangerous situations, which surely saved dozens of lives. No false applications were filed, and no subject of an order refused to turn over their weapons. In addition to the successful petitions, 92 petitions were denied. This demonstrates that the system is working – judges are carefully weighing each situation and only removing firearms when it is warranted by strong evidence. Even some initial opponents of the law are now using it to safeguard their communities.
31 individuals who were subject to an ERPO were later charged with a crime, including assaulting an officer, criminal sexual conduct, assault and domestic violence. This means ERPO’s are being used to remove firearms from potentially dangerous criminals while they go to trial. This prevents dangerous crimes from escalating and keeps all of us safe.
“Many members of our congregations have lost their loved ones to the tragedy of firearm suicide,” said Bishop of the Episcopal Diocese of Michigan Bonnie A. Perry.
Perry added: “Had this law been in place, their family members would still be alive. Repealing this law would take away their chance to save their spouse, their sibling, their child from suicide. That would be cruel, callous, and dangerous.”
“When someone is in danger of suicide, the most important thing we can do is make the situation safer,” said Christin Perry, a local clinical therapist and responsible gun owner.
Perry added: “By taking the gun out of the equation, we get the time and space we need to help that person access mental health resources. If we can get past that point of crisis, we can often save a life.”
“Michigan’s extreme risk protection order law is saving lives,” said State Senator Stephanie Chang (D-Detroit), chair of the Senate Committee on Civil Rights, Judiciary and Public Safety.
Chang adeed: “Our law enforcement leaders and community members have seen the impact on reducing suicide and domestic violence. I am proud of the work that the legislature did last term to address gun violence, and we absolutely should continue to use this important tool, not repeal it.”
