Members of the Judiciary Committee, It’s wrong for legislators to champion a red flag law as though they are the solution to the growing crisis of gun violence in America. Address the real problem fund the Firearm Trafficking Task Force, Support HB 5432 AN ACT CONCERNING NONLETHAL ELECTRONIC DEFENSE WEAPONS and HB 5390 AN ACT CONCERNING THE DUTY TO RETREAT IN A HOUSE OF RELIGIOUS WORSHIP. Oppose HB 5448 AN...

Dear Committee, I am a resident of Connecticut and wish to voice my opposition for Bill 5448. Your opposition for this bill is important to me. There are already laws on the books that can protect people instead of this bill changing the existing law into something which I see being too easy to abuse. Sincerely, [INSERT NAME] [INSERT TOWN]

Joint Committee on Judiciary Legislative Office Building 300 Capitol Avenue Hartford, CT 06106 RE: OPPOSTITION to HB 5448 AN ACT CONCERNING A RISK PROTECTION ORDER OR WARRANT To: Judiciary Committee, I’m opposed to H.B. 5448 An Act Concerning a Risk Protection Order or Warrant because a study of the Indiana law allowing police to seize firearms from people, they considered dangerous, found outcomes closely correlated to defendants' presence at the...

Connecticut General Assembly Joint Committee on Judiciary Legislative Office Building, Room 2500 300 Capitol Avenue Hartford, CT 06106 Re: OPPOSTITION to H.B. 5448 AN ACT CONCERNING A RISK PROTECTION ORDER OR WARRANT.  To: The members of the Judiciary Committee, I am strongly opposed to the Extreme Risk Protective Order or Warrant bill, which are already addressed in section 29-38c of the General Statutes. Stop wasting tax payers money on gun...

Esteemed Judiciary Committee Members; OPPOSE- H.B. 5448 AAC a Risk Protection Order or Warrant The bill would demand that anyone who has had a risk warrant filed against them prove by a preponderance of evidence that they are no longer a risk before any of their property will be returned. All Connecticut residents who value any of their constitutionally protected rights should be concerned about the precedent being suggested and...

Oppose Bill #5448 An Act Concerning a Risk Protection Order or Warrant Members of the Joint Judiciary Committee Keep the due process, allow for an investigation before rights are taken away. Any procedure that allows a judge to hear only one side of a case necessarily will produce a high error rate. [INSERT NAME] [INSERT TOWN] 

Esteemed Judiciary Committee Members; This is another opportunity for the state to potentially deprive certain people of their civil liberties. Oppose Raised HB-5448 AN ACT CONCERNING A RISK PROTECTION ORDER OR WARRANT. Sincerely,  [INSERT NAME] [INSERT TOWN] 

To Whom it May Concern, OPPOSE Raised HB-5448 An Act Concerning a Risk Protection Order or Warrant Afford strong due process protections, including high burdens of proof (i.e., “clear and convincing evidence”), cross-examination rights, and the right to counsel. Not ex parte orders. Thank You! [INSERT NAME] [INSERT TOWN]

Judiciary Committee, I’m opposed to HB5448, An Act Concerning a Risk Protection Order or Warrant. There is no need to change Connecticut’s current law. This current law is available to anyone at any time 365 days a year with police arriving within minutes from the time of call. In Connecticut, a confiscation petition may be filed only by law enforcement officers or state’s attorney. Any person—including family members, former dating...

Honorable Members of the Judiciary Committee, Courts have identified seven key elements in procedural due process; 1. Notice 2. A neutral decision-maker 3. An opportunity to make an oral presentation 4. The opportunity to present evidence 5. The opportunity to cross-examine witnesses and respond to evidence 6. Right to representation by counsel 7. A decision based on the record, and reasoning for the result. HB 5448 does not do this;...