As we discussed on the blog earlier this month, Minnesota has enacted a new law that allows law enforcement officials to remove firearms from an person or a household if an individual is considered to be at an elevated risk for harming themselves or others. The measure went into effect of January 1 of this year, and we just learned that the first risk protection orders have already been granted.
The first Extreme Risk Protection Order filed in Hennepin County was actually requested by the Brooklyn Park police chief, who petitioned for the order after a suicidal man fired gunshots in his apartment complex.
“It’s a multi-family housing building with 200 units,” said Elliot Faust, an Inspector with the Brooklyn Park police department. “He’s a risk to himself but he’s also a risk to other people in the building when you fire a gun like that, and there are other people living there.”
The three other cases were from Martin, Steele and Wright counties. Two of the petitions were granted, while the third was denied.
Safely Executing Firearm Removal
The measure seems great on paper. It makes complete sense to temporarily remove firearms from an individual who may be at an elevated risk of self-harm or harming others, but the execution of this measure is much more nuanced. You’re asking police officers to go to a person’s residence, where it is known that they have firearms, and force them to hand over their weapons because a judge believes they possess an elevated level of danger to themselves or the public. It’s easy to see how this situation could go south in a hurry, and law enforcement are still working through the best ways to serve these orders once they are granted.
In the Brooklyn Park case, the firearm forfeiture was simple because the individual was in custody and the firearm used in the incident was already in police possession. However, police are trying to figure out the best way to safely remove firearms from the equation when an individual isn’t already in police custody.
“We want to make sure we put a process that is in place to handle these as the legislature intended,” Crystal Police Deputy Chief Brian Hubbard recently told WCCO News. “Are we going to force an armed encounter with someone at their doorstep, at their residence, I order to take guns by way of a court order? While I understand it’s written, certainly, is the public served by us doing that confrontation?”
So while the law is still in its early stages, a couple of ERPOs have already been granted and law enforcement are familiarizing themselves with the basics of the procedure. Hopefully they continue to deescalate potentially combative situations so that cooler heads can prevail and everyone stays safe.
If you need help challenging an Extreme Risk Protection Order or false accusations made by an ex or a spouse, reach out to the team at Appelman Law Firm today at (952) 224-2277.