Q&A – How often Has Florida’s Risk Protection Order Been Misused?

Q&A of the Day – How often Has Florida’s Risk Protection Order Been Misused? 

Each day I feature a listener question sent by one of these methods.  

Email: brianmudd@iheartmedia.com  

Gettr, Parler & Twitter: @brianmuddradio  

iHeartRadio: Use the Talkback feature – the microphone button on our station’s page in the iHeart app.     

Today’s entry: Submitted via talkback 

Bottom Line: In general, I do, in fact, I bet most people would be surprised by the most common eventual outcome of Florida’s risk protection, or red flag, orders. I’ll break down what’s happened with them over the now four years in which they’ve been in place in Florida. During the course of the gun control debate of late I’ve once again cited my support of Florida’s 2018 Marjory Stoneman Douglas Act. The law which introduced stringent gun control measures in our state in addition to ushering in the first round of school security measures. In doing so I’ve also heard from many listeners who are concerned about the use of risk protection orders. I understand the concern and its true overreach with use of orders is possible. A lot’s happened in four years. We have many new Floridians who may not be aware of the law as well. So first, let’s reset. Here’s what changed specific to gun control in Florida as part of the Marjory Stoneman Douglas Safety Act: 

Gun control:  

• People under 21 banned from buying or possessing firearms (excluding military & law enforcement)  
• Ban on bump stocks   
• 3 day waiting period for rifle and shotgun purchases 
• Violent Threat Restraining Order - New program which empowers courts to be the arbiters of whether one is of sound mind for the purpose of possessing or buying firearms - with a minimum 60 day waiting period after any official sworn statement provided by law enforcement or person known by the individual in question  

Mental health:   

• The violent Threat Restraining Order program is ultimately a mental health initiative that segs essentially within Florida's "Baker Act" 

Specific to Florida’s risk protection order, it enabled law enforcement to be able to carry out a warrant to search and detain firearms from a person deemed to be a credible mental health risk under the state’s law. Once the order is carried out, a legal process ensues and ultimately, it’s a judge’s discretion as to if the firearms are to be returned to those they were detained from originally. Given the sensitivity of the topic and the concern of lawful gun owners that this potentially is government overreach, I’ve kept an occasional eye on what’s been happened with the use of them. Here’s the current scorecard. 

• Counties issuing orders: 62 of Florida’s 67 
• Total petitions: 8,162 
• Total orders issued: 5,862 
• Total still in force: 2,845 

Something I’d challenge everyone who is interested in this topic, regardless of your preference regarding this provision in state law, is to evaluate its performance. The bipartisan law passed by Florida’s Republican controlled government has been carried out in a bipartisan fashion as well. Only ten of Florida’s 67 counties are Democrat majority counties and yet all but five have issued orders over the past four years. The top county for issuance is Pinellas, a Republican stronghold, led by a Republican sheriff. This indicates conservative law enforcement officials, who are supportive of 2nd amendment protections, have seen value and have perceived the need for carrying out orders. What we also see is pragmatism in the process. 

While a total of 8,162 petitions have been issued, judges haven’t been rubber stamps, deeming 2,300, or 28% of the requests, as not being necessary. In answer to your question, the most common cost of regaining rights to firearms is nothing (provided a restoration due to criminal conviction hasn’t taken place). If after a year of having firearms detained by a judge due to a risk protection order, if a person hasn’t committed a crime, the firearms are returned at no cost. If one has committed a crime and is eligible for restoration the cost to attempt restoration is around $1,200. 

As we look forward, it’s worth noting that according to the FBI database, only 25% of mass murderers are from a medical perspective, mentally ill. However, most murders are preventable based on what the future killers themselves tell us. Based on a recent study by Everytown, 56% of murderers document their intent to kill prior to doing so. Our Constitutional rights are critically important and must be defended. At the same time, we’re not allowed to use our rights to inhibit the rights of others. At the point where there’s evidence guns may be used for that purpose (and/or one’s medically not of sound mind), being responsibly proactive seems to be a sensible approach. Florida’s approach appears to have been carried out sensibly for four years. We’ll never know how many crimes/murders are prevented from what’s happened here, but the facts suggest many likely have.