stephpd wrote:What so wrong with the current system of adjudication that we need a new law?
That is a question that I'll be asking my senator. In any case, here's the scenario proposed in HB 88.
A credentialed mental health professional reports a person who is dangerous to others or self to the appropriate law enforcement agency.
The law enforcement agency investigates and makes a recommendation to Department of Justice.
The DOJ requests that the Superior Court issue an "order order prohibiting the purchase, ownership and possession of a deadly weapon".
At the hearing "The Department shall have the burden of proving by clear and convincing evidence that the respondent is dangerous to others or self as defined in Section 5122 of Title 16."
"Any proceedings pursuant to this section shall be in a closed and confidential hearing."
"The respondent shall have the right to present evidence and be heard in any such proceedings."
"In the event that the Court makes such a finding, the Court shall issue an order to relinquish respondent’s firearms or ammunition under this section."
"Any person subject to an order of the Court pursuant to this Subchapter may petition the Court for an order to return firearms or ammunition by procedures established by § 1448A of this Title.
(e) If the basis for relinquishment in 1448B(b) is removed by the Court, any firearms and ammunition taken from the person shall be restored in a timely fashion without the requirement of § 1448A.
(f) Any party in interest aggrieved by a decision of the Courts under this Subchapter may appeal such decision to Supreme Court. "
There are a number of amendments that need to be made to avoid misuses of this law. But we need something in place to catch the Aaron Alexis types before they do something like the Navy Yard or Sandy Hook here in Delaware. If that type of tragedy occurs here, I predict that we will get HBs 88, 58 and 67 plus SBs 23 and 37 rammed down out throats without recourse.