Following a series of mass shootings across the county, calls for more so-called red flag laws are increasing.
Such laws allow police or family members to request a person’s guns be confiscated if that person poses a threat to themselves or others. California already has a red flag law, known as a the Gun Violence Restraining Order. But experts say it’s being underused, sometimes with tragic results.
On June 19, rookie Sacramento Police Officer Tara O’Sullivan was responding to a domestic disturbance call. She and her colleagues were helping a woman remove some belongings from a home, when suddenly, the shooting began.
The panic in her partner’s voice was clear as his body camera recorded his reaction after a hail of rapid-fire gun shots.
“Officer down! Officer down! Code three fire, high-powered rifle,” he yelled into his radio.
O’Sullivan, just 26 years old, was shot and died several hours later.
The man accused of her murder, Adel Sambrano Ramos, had had run-ins with the legal system before, most recently in the fall of 2018, when he was charged with misdemeanor battery against a minor. He had skipped a related court hearing and was subject to arrest when he shot and killed O’Sullivan.
Veronica Pear, a research data analyst at the Violence Prevention Research Program at UC Davis, wrote in a recent study that she and several colleagues found red flag laws like California’s can play a role in preventing mass shootings. Pear said Ramos would have been a good candidate for a Gun Violence Restraining Order (GVRO).
“We have reason to believe he would batter his intimate partner again, and we know that he’s out on bail and he has access to firearms,” she said. “That’s sort of a perfect spot for GRVO to come into play as sort of a stop gap between the arrest and the trial.”
But a public records inquiry reveals no order was ever requested, either by the Sacramento Police Department or Ramos’ immediate family. And Pear said, so far, that’s the norm in California.
