Proposed legislation would create emergency gun violence restraining orders to remove firearms from dangerous individuals. This process would allow family members or other members of the community to go before a magistrate or judge in an ex parte hearing and give reasons why someone should have their firearms removed from them. Proponents of this proposal say this is a very important measure that could help get firearms away from people who are a danger to themselves or others. They point to examples were mass shooters have posted disturbing social media posts prior to their shooting or relatives may have been aware that they were acting strange. Opponents argue this violates due process since the respondent (gun owner) is not notified of the proceeding, not given an opportunity to respond or present evidence to the contrary, and can be used maliciously by estranged family members or other individuals to target someone who may not actually be a danger. Opponents point to examples in other states where after a restraining order was issued in which the individual was not aware, law enforcement showed up at the homes of people to seize their weapons and ended in armed confrontation which resulted in death. Those who support these protection orders say that is a rare occurrence and in an emergency situation where a mass shooting may be imminent, there is not time to wait days or put someone on notice that you are trying to take away their guns, which may also cause them to act sooner. Opponents say despite the risk to public safety, we should not allow the government to remove firearms from someone’s possession without a full judicial hearing first. Do you support the creation of emergency gun violence restraining orders?