"Gun Court" In Fall River

[Ripach]

If used correctly and not abused this could be a step in the right direction. Maybe I'm too optimistic but it would be nice to see a measure to punish criminals that doesn't add restrictions to law abiding gun owners.

Fall River - As legislation to establish a gun court in Bristol County makes its way through the state Legislature, a new pilot program will tackle the issue of firearm violations in Fall River.

Through an order established by Massachusetts Chief of District Courts Lynda M. Connolly, beginning July 2 all firearm charges brought at the Fall River District Court must be disposed of within six months.

The purpose of the order is to “more efficiently provide prompt dispositions in cases involving alleged firearm violations.”

The order, which has no expiration date, affects firearm arrests in Fall River, Somerset, Swansea, Westport and Freetown.

“This new gun court will give our district attorney, Sam Sutter, and the Fall River Police a powerful new weapon in the fight for safer streets,” state Rep. Robert Correia said. “Instead of leaving violent, gun-toting thugs on our streets waiting for trial as long as two years, we can move quickly to get them out of our community and in jail where they belong.”

Monday’s announcement follows the submittal and subsequent testimony on a bill proposed by Correia, D-Fall River, earlier this year calling for the establishment of a “firearms sitting in the Superior Court department of Bristol County.”

Correia’s bill remains before the Joint Legislative Judiciary Committee following a May 8 public hearing.

The bill is co-sponsored by area Reps. Stephen R. Canessa, D-Freetown, Patricia A. Haddad, D-Somerset; John F. Quinn, D-Dartmouth; Robert M. Koczera, D-New Bedford; and Michael J. Rodrigues, D-Westport.

Correia said Monday that after he testified on behalf of the bill he struck up a conversation with Connolly stressing the need for a gun court in Fall River. Correia said he lamented the fact it could take at least a year before the proposed legislation could be enacted and that the sooner something could be done the better. From there, the creation of the Fall River Gun Court was born.

According to a release from Connolly’s office, the program is expected to reduce the amount of time between the arrest and disposition of cases involving defendants charged with certain firearm-related offenses, including violations based on charges of possession, control or distribution of a firearm, carrying a loaded firearm on a public way and discharge of a firearm within 500 feet of a dwelling. Requests to alter the maximum allowable time to disposition for a firearm case may be allowed only by a judge and upon a showing of good cause.

“This gun court ... will deal exclusively with gun-related crimes. It will take those who threaten the peace of our citizens with firearms and place them in a judicial express lane off our streets and into jail where they belong,” Correia said.

Sutter, who along with Police Chief John M. Souza and the Rev. Robert P. Lawrence joined Correia on the steps of the Massachusetts Trial Court on Rock Street, said the implementation of the gun court and corresponding regulations will give him another tool in prosecuting suspected firearm offenders.

Sutter, who has made judicious use of the state dangerousness statute that allows a person to held for 90 days if found to be a danger to the community, said the establishment of the gun court will mean that many held under the statute for firearm offenses will be expeditiously ushered through the judicial system, leaving little room for attorneys who try to delay trials.

“This not only gives me a gun court but also a powerful argument in Superior Court,” Sutter said.

Correia said the order-established gun court will work just like the one that could be approved by the Legislature. He said staffing the gun court will come from resources already existing within the Fall River court system.

Souza, who called the proliferation of handguns “one of the primary wars” the Police Department is fighting in the city, said the creation of the gun court will be a useful tool for fighting that battle.

“This is a step in the right direction to make Fall River a safer community,” Souza said.

E-mail Will Richmond at [email protected].

http://www.heraldnews.com/homepage/x1396260963

 

[noelephant]

Intersting...

What I don't understand, however, is why gun crime has to be treated differently than other sorts of crime.

I think it would make a lot more sense if this special court were to handle violent criminals in general instead of just criminals that use firearms.

That being said, I think EVERYONE should be able to have a trial in a relatively speedy manner. Waiting 2+ years for a trial is unconscionable. So it would seem to me that firearms suspects could actually given an advantage in our court system.

 

[sksguns]

Intersting...

What I don't understand, however, is why gun crime has to be treated differently than other sorts of crime.

I think it would make a lot more sense if this special court were to handle violent criminals in general instead of just criminals that use firearms.

That being said, I think EVERYONE should be able to have a trial in a relatively speedy manner. Waiting 2+ years for a trial is unconscionable. So it would seem to me that firearms suspects could actually given an advantage in our court system.

Exactly. And what types of crimes are backing up the system? Maybe it's their so called "gun crime". If so, this special court will soon back up as well and then they will have wasted funds on a useless experiment.

 

[Chris]

If they would actually enforce the laws and sentence what people actually did (like the 18 laws that Robyn Anderson broke in the Columbine incident and was never even charged with) maybe we wouldn't have to keep processing the same people over and over and over again.

 

[matt1956]

If they would actually enforce the laws and sentence what people actually did (like the 18 laws that Robyn Anderson broke in the Columbine incident and was never even charged with) maybe we wouldn't have to keep processing the same people over and over and over again.

couldn't have said it better myself +1

 

[drgrant]

Intersting...

What I don't understand, however, is why gun crime has to be treated differently than other sorts of crime.

I think it would make a lot more sense if this special court were to handle violent criminals in general instead of just criminals that use firearms.

BINGO. You hit the nail on the head. Problem with this shit is all it exists
to do is demonize firearms. Even if 99.9% of the cases going to the court
involve scumbags doing something bad with a firearm, it will still serve to
demonize gun ownership or possession as a whole. It is a part of a long term
plan to get the public to believe even more that "guns are inherently bad"
and only "bad people use guns" and that "crime involving guns is somehow
WORSE than any other violent crime". The whole idea is brain/mindset
contamination. They want the public to piss themselves with fear every
time the word "gun" comes up in conversation, regardless of the fact that
a given owner might be a perfectly legal one, for perfectly lawful
purposes.

Also, what some may forget is that if one lawfully defends themselves with a
firearm, the way this state works, you or I could end up on the defense
stand in such a "gun court" as well.

That being said, I think EVERYONE should be able to have a trial in a relatively speedy manner. Waiting 2+ years for a trial is unconscionable. So it would seem to me that firearms suspects could actually given an advantage in our court system.

Agreed but the "tone" of the court to be extra harsh on gun offenders
may just cancel that out. EG, a guy charged merely with "illegal
posession" or some other menial non violent, but gun related charge, may
get extra-screwed in such a court.

IMO we should prosecute the people committing violent crimes,
not the devices involved. Otherwise all we will do is trade one type of
violence for another. By segregating violent offenses by means, what
the court does is send a message that, by golly, it's less offensive to society
to beat someone to death, stab them, or run them over with a car. But if
you shoot someone, it's somehow WORSE. What kind of f'ed up system of
justice is that?

-Mike

 

[drgrant]

If they would actually enforce the laws and sentence what people actually did (like the 18 laws that Robyn Anderson broke in the Columbine incident and was never even charged with)

Chris, where is this documented? IIRC, the feds couldn't prosecute her
because somehow they could not determine whether or not she purchased
the guns from a licensee. Given that the feds usually go balls to the
wall on gun violations, there must've been something which stopped
them. If the purchases did not fall under what the government could
regulate (eg, a transfer between two residents of the same state, ,and
the seller not being a licensee) then it is easy to see how she escaped
prosecution. The other conspiracy theory is that gov + bradyites colluded to
use her as a poster-girl for the "guns are bad" movement, because later
on she claimed that if she had faced a background check she would not have
bought the guns.


-Mike

 

[JonJ]

If they truly wanted to unclog the system, they would implement Drunk Driving Courts and limit the amount of continuances.

 

[Ripach]

Also, what some may forget is that if one lawfully defends themselves with a firearm, the way this state works, you or I could end up on the defense stand in such a "gun court" as well....

....EG, a guy charged merely with "illegal posession" or some other menial non violent, but gun related charge, may
get extra-screwed in such a court.
-Mike

This is exactly what I was thinking about when I said "If used correctly and not abused". I don't necessarily disagree with a court to fast track violent offenders and punish them as harshly as possible, I would however be angered to see an innocent caught up in this just because he found himself in the unfortunate position of having to use their 2A right to defend his life/families lives.

 

[RKG]

Intersting...

What I don't understand, however, is why gun crime has to be treated differently than other sorts of crime.

I think it would make a lot more sense if this special court were to handle violent criminals in general instead of just criminals that use firearms.

That being said, I think EVERYONE should be able to have a trial in a relatively speedy manner. Waiting 2+ years for a trial is unconscionable. So it would seem to me that firearms suspects could actually given an advantage in our court system.

Everything you say is true, and in a perfect world would be implemented forthwith.

It is not, however, a perfect world.

I, for one, have no problem with "gun courts." What they will do is send a bunch of folks whose behavior gives all gun owners a bad name off to a stint as an MCI tenant, while perhaps detering one or two others from following the same course. If, as a result, there is a detectable diminution in the unlawful use of firearms, will that not redound to the benefit of we lawful gun owners?