Guns

The basis for the attempt was that the girl had texted a classmate that she was thinking of hanging herself.

Eugene Volokh | 12.22.2025 8:01 AM

From N.Y. State Police v. K.L., decided by Ulster County (N.Y.) trial court judge Julian Schreibman on Dec. 12:

Often referred to as the "Red Flag Law," Article 63-A created ERPOs [Extreme Risk Protection Orders]. Although an ERPO is a "Protection Order," it does not limit where the subject can go or with whom he or she can associate. Rather, an ERPO does one thing: it prohibits the subject from possessing or acquiring firearms for up to one year.

Significantly, the Red Flag Law is not addressed only to criminal gun violence but also encompasses the goal of reducing suicide by firearm…. "The Red Flag Law seeks to keep guns out of the hands of persons who may be suffering from acute emotional trauma or a mental health crisis and are at risk of harming themselves or others." …

The enactment of the Red Flag law was not met with a flood of petitions. However, on May 14, 2022, a racially motivated mass shooting in Buffalo left ten Black New Yorkers dead. In the wake of this massacre, on May 18, 2022, Governor Kathy Hochul issued an Executive Order titled, "Directing the State Police to File Extreme Risk Protection Orders" (the "Executive Order")….. [S]ince the Executive Order, there has been a sharp increase in the filing of TERPO [Temporary Extreme Risk Protection Order] applications, with a significant portion of these directed at at-risk persons including troubled children, senior citizens, persons with serious chronic illnesses, and individuals processing trauma through acts of non-suicidal self-harm such as "cutting."

Since the Executive Order was issued, more than 17,000 New Yorkers have been found by a court to be likely to seriously harm themselves or others. In this County, it has been the Court's experience that, in the majority of cases, the respondent does not possess any firearm, and has no intention of doing so, so that even when the TERPO or ERPO is granted, no firearms are confiscated and neither the respondent nor the public are made any safer. Instead, the aggressive pursuit of ERPOs simply raises the prospect of further traumatizing the respondent. This is such a case….

On the evening of January 27, 2025, respondent K.L., who had turned 11 years old just two weeks prior, had the following text exchange with a friend ["B"]:

[K.L.:] About hanging myself I might still do it but idk probably not idrk don't tell [b]
[B:] Don't pls
[K.L.:] Idk I might why do you care Don't you hate me DON'T TELL [B]
[B:] Don't I like you as a friend I mean I do Sorry
[K.L.:] Oh everyone says that you say you hate me
[B:] Don't believe in rumors
[K.L.:] But I might do it everyone hates me my own parents hate me my life is so hard I always seem so happy but under that im just sad and wanting to kill myself I've attempted to kill myself 19 times my life is so hard
[B:] [B appears to have responded with a smiley face and thumbs up emojis]

K.L's friend "B" showed these texts to his mother who then contacted law enforcement. NYSP troopers responded first to B's house, where they interviewed his mother and reviewed the text messages, and then to K.L.'s house.

According to NYSP's investigative report, troopers "interviewed [K.L.] in the presence of her parents…. [K.L.] made no comments of self harm, or displayed any suicidal ideation in our presence." {At the hearing on the final ERPO, the responding trooper clarified that rather than interview K.L. directly, they permitted her parents to confront her with the text messages and ask her about them, while in the troopers' presence.........

© Reason.com