Tennessee House Bill HB7101

Tennessee 2023-2024 Regular Session

• Introduced: 8/18/23
• Refer: 8/22/23
• Failed: 8/22/23

Caption

AN ACT to amend Tennessee Code Annotated, Title 33; Title 36; Title 38 and Title 39, relative to temporary mental health orders of protection.

Impact

If enacted, this bill would establish a legal framework for temporary mental health orders of protection that can lead to the immediate surrender of firearms and ammunition by individuals deemed dangerous. The measures outlined in HB7101 are intended to enhance public safety by allowing courts to issue protective orders that can temporarily restrict firearm access. This brings a significant change to the existing laws regarding mental health evaluations and the management of firearm access for individuals identified as high-risk.

Summary

House Bill 7101 seeks to amend various sections of the Tennessee Code Annotated concerning temporary mental health orders of protection. The bill empowers law enforcement officers to petition for these orders when they believe an individual poses a significant danger to themselves or others due to firearm possession or control. This legislative change aims to provide law enforcement with the tools necessary to safeguard vulnerable populations and mitigate risks associated with firearms in potentially dangerous situations.

Sentiment

The sentiment surrounding HB7101 appears to be largely supportive among those who advocate for stronger gun control measures in relation to mental health issues. Proponents argue that the bill is a necessary step toward preventing violence and providing better support for individuals experiencing mental health crises. However, concerns may arise regarding the implications of due process, civil liberties, and the potential overreach of law enforcement in identifying individuals who require protective measures.

Contention

Notable points of contention include the balance between ensuring public safety and respecting individual rights. Critics might argue that the proposed process may lead to unjust restrictions on individuals' access to firearms without due process, raising concerns about how assessments of 'significant danger' are made. Furthermore, potential questions about the adequacy of mental health resources, and the implications of law enforcement's role in mental health issues could fuel ongoing debate regarding this legislative proposal.