Senator Bellino’s statement is as follows:
Mr. President, I had a speech ready here for this amendment to invest more money in school safety, but a previous speaker’s comments changed my plans. A member of this chamber stood up earlier and said that an amendment similar to this one—to invest $800 million into school safety measures—is, quote, unnecessary. Unnecessary, Mr. President? What world can we possibly be living in? Door locks? Cameras? ID cards? Unnecessary? We just had an incident in our state where a gunman walked right into an open school building and we don’t think we need to invest more money in security?
I’m sorry, Mr. President. This is unconscionable. We need to do more to help our students. I ask for a “yes” vote on this amendment to make our schools safer from gun violence.
Senator McMorrow’s statement is as follows:
Back in 2019 after we first introduced a version of this legislation alongside then-State Representative Robert Wittenberg who himself had introduced earlier versions of extreme risk protection orders years before, I hosted a roundtable discussion on red flag laws in my district in Berkley. This panel intentionally featured no legislators, but did include a woman named Mary Miller Strobel. Mary spoke about her brother Ben. She said, “My brother and I started the summer each year jumping into Lake Michigan on Memorial Day weekend. He was my hero,” she said. “He was a hero to a lot of other people too. Ben was a combat veteran. After he returned home, he was suffering. Ben had lost 30 pounds after his tour. Returning home, his father asked him about the weight loss and Ben replied that he couldn’t eat. He said, ‘It’s just too hard out there, dad. It smells like death.’ Ben was seeking treatment at the local VA but his family, including Mary, worried. Mary said that she and her dad drove to every local gun store showing the owners pictures of Ben. They pleaded with the owners. ‘If Ben comes in, please, please do not sell him a gun.’ Ben died by suicide using a gun he bought at a local gun store.” Mary and her dad knew. They saw the warning signs. They knew Ben needed help. He needed time.
A red flag law could have bought them that time. A red flag law could have saved Ben’s life. A few weeks ago in committee we met Karen and Michael Kobaleck whom Senator Bayer previously spoke about. Karen said, “I am a mother of triplets who should be turning 23 next week. Last year my child Ruby shot and killed my son Bishop, then shot and killed their significant other, then shot and killed themselves.” Karen went on to explain that she was not here to excuse Ruby’s behavior but she knows it did not need to happen—not like this. Karen learned that when Ruby turned 21, she bought a gun. This was after Karen had explained that Ruby had suffered from mental illness from a young age. She had a spectrum disorder, major depressive disorder, and a history of self-harming, among others. Karen said, “I subscribe to the philosophy, ‘Know something, say something.’ So I called the police over and over and over again. And every single time, I was told they could not and would not revoke Ruby’s Second Amendment right to own a gun.” She said through tears, “I am Ruby’s mother. I knew something was seriously wrong and this was a dangerous situation.” Only a few weeks prior to this horrific event, Ruby was involuntarily committed to a mental health hospital. I called the police again and again and I begged them to take Ruby’s guns away. I was still denied. She said their whole family tried to help Ruby and within weeks of discharge, Ruby went to a gun store and bought another gun. Michael, the husband, said, “In my wildest imagination, I would never think that I would be sitting here today in front of you today talking about this. I am also a firearm owner and a CPL holder and frankly before all this, I thought procedures were in place to have prevented this. Had the ERPO been in place, three people would be alive today,” he told us.
These are the lives that could have been saved with the legislation we have before us today. Extreme risk protection orders can and do save lives. Six out of every ten gun deaths in the United States are suicides and of those who attempt suicide by firearm, 90 percent are successful. A significantly higher percentage than attempts made via any other method. In fact, the vast majority of those who survive a suicide attempt do not go on to die by a subsequent suicide, meaning that moment and the result of that first attempt is critical in determining the ultimate outcome for an individual who is in crisis. Red flag laws create a preventative tool, a stopgap for loved ones, judges, and law enforcement and while it is difficult to measure events that did not happen, evidence shows that these extreme risk protection orders can and do save lives. Here in Michigan, approximately half of all suicides are by firearm, and by 2019 there were 742 suicides by firearm including 31 children. Based on what we’ve learned from states like Indiana and Connecticut, implementation of similar laws in Michigan could have resulted in dozens of these victims still being alive today. I ask for a “yes” vote.
The following bill was read a third time:
Senate Bill No. 84, entitled
A bill to amend 1927 PA 372, entitled “An act to regulate and license the selling, purchasing, possessing, and carrying of certain firearms, gas ejecting devices, and electro-muscular disruption devices; to prohibit the buying, selling, or carrying of certain firearms, gas ejecting devices, and electro-muscular disruption devices without a license or other authorization; to provide for the forfeiture of firearms and electro-muscular disruption devices under certain circumstances; to provide for penalties and remedies; to provide immunity from civil liability under certain circumstances; to prescribe the powers and duties of certain state and local agencies; to prohibit certain conduct against individuals who apply for or receive a license to carry a concealed pistol; to make appropriations; to prescribe certain conditions for the appropriations; and to repeal all acts and parts of acts inconsistent with this act,” by amending sections 2, 2b, 5b, and 8 (MCL 28.422, 28.422b, 28.425b, and 28.428), section 2 as amended by 2015 PA 200, section 2b as amended by 2014 PA 205, and sections 5b and 8 as amended by 2017 PA 95.
The question being on the passage of the bill,
The bill was passed, a majority of the members serving voting therefor, as follows: