SANTA FE, N.M. - A "red flag" gun bill is headed to the New Mexico Senate floor for debate - but not without a major revision from the original legislation.

The "Extreme Risk Firearm Protection Order Act" would allow courts to temporarily remove guns when someone is considered a danger to themselves or others.

Cassandra Crifasi, deputy director of the Johns Hopkins Center for Gun Policy and Research, says red-flag laws are not about permanently taking firearms away from legitimate owners. Instead, she says, they focus on gun owners who are exhibiting risky behaviors.

"These policies allow people to temporarily separate someone from their firearms, and when that crisis passes or when the allotted time has passed, those individuals can get their firearms back," says Crifasi.

The bill was revised this week by co-sponsor Sen. Joseph Cervantes, D-Las Cruces, to allow only law enforcement officers - not household or family members - to petition the court for an extreme risk order.

Last week, hundreds of Second Amendment advocates protested the bill outside the New Mexico State Capitol.

A 2019 survey shows strong majorities of Americans from across the political spectrum support extreme-risk protection order laws, with more women in favor than men.

Crifasi says data from Connecticut, which has had such a law since 1999, shows it has been used to remove firearms in a variety of situations - including violent threats against wives, girlfriends and children.

"Disarming potentially violent individuals who have been committing domestic violence through this extreme-risk protection order mechanism can provide an additional layer of protection," says Crifasi.

Lawmakers in the New Mexico House approved a red-flag law last year, but it stalled in the Senate. Since then, Democrats have gained control of both chambers and the governor's office, with Michelle Lujan Grisham a strong supporter of extreme-risk firearm protection orders.



get more stories like this via email

Violence prevention groups said building trust in vulnerable neighborhoods is key to their success but a global humanitarian organization worries about setbacks after the federal government cut off grant money for its work in Minneapolis.

Nonviolent Peaceforce said a big portion of its funding was swept up in a host of grant cuts carried out by the Justice Department, including the group's "Interrupt Cycles of Violence" project in North Minneapolis. Funding for the initiative was supposed to keep flowing into the fall but is now off the table.

Odell Wilson, community peacebuilder for Nonviolent Peaceforce, said it means the teens he has been mentoring will receive disappointing news.

"Not being able to keep that promise or keep those goals set for them -- in my perspective -- that's really unacceptable and it's not fair," Wilson contended.

He emphasized if Nonviolent Peaceforce can no longer provide community spaces, healing circles and other activities, it is another broken promise from adults in their lives. As it scrambles, the organization said it will try to keep connections in the city. The Justice Department did not respond to a request for comment but broadly said certain types of grants no longer align with the Trump administration's priorities.

Minneapolis officials recently touted positive numbers in reducing violent crime in areas where Nonviolent Peaceforce is present. But Wilson argued abruptly scaling back their work could reinforce conditions for future violence.

"If none of us are trying to do that extra work and understand what it is that's really going on in the relationship field, in the trust field, I don't really see too much change happening in cases of wanting to improve the community or improve that cycle of violence," Wilson stressed.

The organization said the cut represents 40% of its federal support for violence prevention and community-based safety work in the U.S. A similar grant for San Diego was terminated early. Officials said the aid has been backed by Congress over the past decade and with the new administration, they worry about a tone in Washington D.C. where future funding requests are not even given a chance.

Florida State University students joined survivors of past mass shootings at the state Capitol this week, demanding that Gov. Ron DeSantis veto a bill that would lower the gun purchasing age to 18.

The protest follows last week's shooting at FSU's Student Union, the state's sixth mass shooting this year according to the Gun Violence Archive.

Caim Strickland was working on an engineering lab project when the alerts flashed across his phone. He spoke moments after the campuswide lockdown was lifted.

"Campus has always been a safe place, so to see this happen is crazy," he said. "You always hear about it happening somewhere else, other schools, but you never really think it's going to happen here."

The shooting, which killed two and injured six, marked F-S-U's first on-campus gun violence incident since 2014. It occurred weeks after the Florida House passed a bill to lower the gun purchase age from 21 to 18. However, Senate leaders confirmed they had already decided before the shooting not to take up the bill this session, effectively stalling it.

Rep. Christine Hunschofsky, D-Parkland, helped craft mental-health reforms after the 2018 massacre at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School, and said her focus now is on trauma response.

"I think what's important right now is that everybody gets the help and support they need. I have seen what happens in the aftermath of these traumatic situations, and unaddressed trauma is very detrimental to people," she explained.

The 2018 Parkland massacre left 17 dead and 17 wounded on Valentine's Day. It ranks among America's deadliest school shootings.

The tragedy prompted then-Gov. Rick Scott to sign a package of reforms, including raising Florida's minimum age for rifle purchases to 21, matching the federal standard already in place for handguns. The National Rifle Association quickly launched a constitutional challenge after the changes.


get more stories like this via email

Several pieces of Democrat-backed gun legislation have been heard by Nevada's Senate and Assembly Judiciary Committees but not without opposition from firearms proponents.

Assembly Bill 105 would ban firearms within 100 feet of election sites. Assembly Bill 245 would prohibit anyone younger than 21 from purchasing or possessing a semiautomatic shotgun or assault rifle. And Senate Bill 89 would tighten firearm restrictions for those convicted of hate crimes.

Sen. Julie Pazina, D-Las Vegas, said as the temperature of national discourse increases, it is imperative the measures be passed.

"The consequences of this divisiveness are real and they can't be ignored any longer," Pazina emphasized. "As a Jewish Nevadan, I have witnessed my communities and others like it come under attack simply because of the way we worship."

Pazina noted members of Nevada's LGBTQ+ community as well as ethnic and racial groups have also been targets of attacks. Each year more than 10,000 violent hate crime attacks involve either the use or threatened use of guns in the U.S., according to Giffords, the gun violence prevention organization.

Backers of Assembly Bill 245 said by restricting anyone younger than 21 from being able to purchase or possess a semiautomatic shotgun or assault rifle, suicide rates would decrease. Advocates said it strikes the right balance between the Second Amendment and preventing access to the most dangerous firearms.

Sen. Ira Hansen, R-Sparks, said otherwise.

"You take away this particular category and the people that want to kill themselves will no longer do so?" Hansen asked. "Crazy. Just crazy."

Data shows most of the deadliest mass shootings in the country since 2018 were committed by people younger than 21.

Tanya Schardt, senior counsel and director of state and federal policy for the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence, said most mass shooters younger than 21 bought their firearms legally. She argued there have to be more barriers to prevent tragedies from happening.

"By not doing that, we are creating an environment where all of our children are having to have shooter drills," Schardt stressed. "We're creating an environment where children are scared to go to school, where teachers are scared to be there."


get more stories like this via email