In a move that shocked many gun rights supporters, the National Rifle Association came out vocally in support of Gun Violence Restraining Orders (GVROs), calling them “Risk Protection Orders.”
While their use of the term “Risk Protection Orders” may not seem significant to some, it shows just how carefully the NRA had to be in making the decision to support this measure. “Gun Violence Restraining Order” has been the term popularized by anti-gun groups like the Michael Bloomberg-funded Everytown for Gun Safety, which effectively do the same thing that the NRA is pushing.
GRVOs operate similarly to a temporary restraining order, which allows a court to issue a protective order in situations where a person or business needs to be temporarily protected by an individual. A GRVO would use much of the same criteria used to gain these protective orders to allow individuals to petition a court to remove guns from an individual they believe is a threat to themselves or others.
The “Risk Protection Orders” promoted by the NRA in a recent ad are nothing more than GRVOs with a different name. Even David French, the NRA’s number one cheerleader on this issue, acknowledges that fact in an article he published to the National Review.
Anti-gun groups like Everytown for Gun Safety have spent tens of millions of dollars promoting this measure, enacting legislation codifying them into law in 7 states. These states are actively using these measures to take guns from individuals.
The major issue with a GRVO is that it does not give the individual having their guns taken away the ability to challenge the ruling until the guns have already been taken away. A rogue anti-gun judge hearing a case from a vindictive family member is all it could take to have someone’s guns confiscated. A vital part of due process is having the ability to defend yourself. GRVOs remove your ability to do that.