Assemblyman Andrew Molitor is pictured debating legislation that would require the seizure of guns police officers see when they respond to a domestic violence incident.

Legislation that would require the seizure of guns police officers see when they respond to a domestic violence incident will be sent to Gov. Kathy Hochul for approval.

The state Assembly approved A.544B by a 93-46 vote, largely along party lines, with Assemblyman Andrew Molitor, R-Westfield, and Assemblyman Joe Sempolinski, R-Canisteo, voting against the measure. It earlier passed the state Senate by a 37-20 vote with state Sen. George Borrello, R-Sunset Bay, voting against. The legislation was amended before Assembly passage, with the Senate also approving the amended version of the bill.

The legislation the legislation would amend the Criminal Procedure Law to require a police officer who responds to a report of a family offense to take temporary custody of a firearm or other weapons within plain sight or is discovered pursuant to a consensual or other lawful search and any license to carry, possess, repair and dispose of such weapon issued to the person arrested or suspected of such family offense.

Weapons seized would be returned in four days as long as there is no order prohibiting the owner from possessing such a weapon or license or pending criminal charges or convictions that would prevent the owner from possessing such a weapon or license.

Molitor asked several questions of Assemblywoman Amy Paulin, D-Scarsdale, when the bill came up for debate amidst the annual end-of-session rush of legislation. Molitor, a former county first assistant county attorney, had several technical questions of Paulin, including the length of time it can take for a Domestic Incident Report to be filed, whether or not it will be a burden on small police departments to store weapons seized as part of domestic violence incidents and what happens in cases where violent domestic incidents are reported at a police department rather than investigated at a home.

“I understand exactly why this particular piece of legislation is being brought forth and sort of piggybacking off the floor leader here,” Molitor said. “Why limit it to just these enumerated weapons? Why not expand it to the Penal Law definition of an illegal weapon and dangerous instruments? That way if the police respond to a scene and the victim is not there, if the abuser doesn’t have a gun, that’s not the issue, maybe it is a hammer or a knife or a leather belt or whatever it may be, the police can seize those things too.

“You’re giving me an idea, but I actually didn’t think about it for this bill,” Paulin responded.

Weapons required to be seized would include a firearm, rifle, electronic dart gun, electronic stun gun, disguised gun, imitation weapon, shotgun, antique firearm, black powder rifle, black powder shotgun, or muzzle-loading firearm that is found in plain sight or pursuant to a lawful search. Weapons could be seized if the victim responds affirmative

ly to suspect threats questions in the Domestic Incident Report, the victim responds affirmatively to lethality assessment questions in the Domestic Incident Report or the officer has a reasonable belief that seizing the weapon is necessary to protect the victim or other persons present, preventing the risk of further violence or threat.

Republicans in the state Senate voted against the measure en masse, including state Sen. George Borrello, R-Sunset Bay. Borrello said in his comments on the Senate floor that the legislation goes a step too far by taking firearms from those who aren’t accused of a crime while too quickly releasing those accused of domestic violence back into the public.

“Here’s the issue for me, unfortunately thanks to bail reform we release the domestic abusers with an appearance ticket,” Borrello said. “We’re going to seize the weapons. It sounds like a good idea, except this bill has a flaw, and that flaw is that the victim’s firearm can also be seized. So we’re going to release the criminal and also take the weapon away from the abused. That’s a problem. We should just be putting the criminals in jail where they belong, not releasing them.”