Frequently Asked Questions About Firearm Restraining Orders

FRO is part of a larger crisis response that can keep communities safer from mass shootings and individuals safe from suicide. Before many shootings, family members of the shooter have observed dangerous behaviors or have grown concerned about their risk of harming themselves or others. In addition, law enforcement officers frequently come in contact with individuals who are dangerous or in crisis. In heightened moments, removing access to firearms to those at risk of harming themselves and others provides a time to pause.

Taking a pause provides a space for people in such moments to seek the help they need and saves them from harming themselves or people around them. A pause de-escalates emergency situations and gives the person the time to seek treatment and the help they need.  FROs also provide law enforcement or mental health professionals time to prevent a potential tragedy. By intervening when the time is most crucial, tragedies can be averted and lives changed forever. 

If you are worried that someone poses a danger to themselves or others, immediately contact local law enforcement to report the situation.

There are two types of FROs:

• an emergency FRO that immediately addresses a crisis and lasts up to 14 days, 
• and a plenary FRO that provides longer protection but only after there has been a full court hearing.

FROs are designed to prevent danger by temporarily removing a person’s access to firearms when there is an urgent risk to themselves or others. Here is how they work:
 

1. The petitioner (such as law enforcement or family or household member) files a petition in court.
2. Within a few hours or the next day (if filing after court hours), the judge reviews the petition to determine if there is sufficient evidence the person poses an immediate risk to themselves or others.
   1. If the petition is approved: The judge issues an emergency order that prohibits the person in crisis from purchasing or possessing firearms for up to 14 days after issuance. The police notify the person in crisis of the emergency order and the date of an upcoming final hearing regarding the emergency order. At this time, the person must temporarily hand over any firearms in their possession.
   2. If the petition is denied: A hearing is scheduled within 14 days to determine if a final order should be issued, and the police notify the person in crisis of the hearing.
3. The judge holds a final order hearing within 14 days after issuance of an emergency order to determine if there is sufficient evidence that the person poses a risk to themselves or others with a firearm. Both parties may present evidence at the hearing.
4. Finally, the judge makes a decision.
   1. If the judge issues a final order: The person is prohibited from purchasing firearms for six months (subject to renewal or early termination). The person must hand over firearms if they have not already done so.
   2. If the judge denies the final order: Any firearms that were previously surrendered under the emergency order are returned to the person.

The petitioner and respondent can present any evidence they think will be relevant to the court’s decision. Examples of evidence that may help the court include, but are not limited to, facts about the respondent’s:

1. Unlawful or reckless use of firearms;
2. History of physical force;
3. Prior felony arrests;
4. Abuse of controlled substances or alcohol;
5. Recent threats or acts of violence;
6. Violations of domestic violence protection orders; or
7. Pattern of violence.

Yes. The respondent is allowed one opportunity to ask the court to terminate the plenary FRO before it expires. In order to have the court end the plenary FRO, the respondent must prove to the court by a “preponderance of the evidence” that he or she does not pose a danger.

Yes. A court can renew a FRO. A petitioner may file a written request for an extension of an FRO during the final three months before the order is scheduled to expire. Before the judge extends an FRO, the court will hold another full hearing where the petitioner again must prove by “clear and convincing evidence” that the respondent continues to pose a danger.