False red flag law claim filed in Colorado
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 13

Thread: False red flag law claim filed in Colorado

  1. #1
    Distinguished Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2016
    Location
    Ocala
    Posts
    3,096

    False red flag law claim filed in Colorado

    The claim was filed by the mother of a man who committed "suicide by cop,” and was obviously invalid. But that didn’t prevent the officer from having to defend himself in court.

    https://www.westernjournal.com/woman...s-confiscated/
    Last edited by ArthurDent; 01-20-2020 at 02:20 PM.
    "The right to buy weapons is the right to be free." A. E. van Vogt

  2. #2
    Distinguished Member Ronnie948's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Location
    Daytona Beach
    Posts
    3,993
    There really needs to be a very severe consequence for a person to lie on a red Flag law claim.
    Ronnie
    N.R.A. - FLORIDA CARRY - D.A.V. - American Legion - M.C.A.--- U.S. Army disabled Veteran, GOA
    If you are not a member of the N.R.A. - It is time to join - Turn 5 million members into 15 or 20 million members
    If your not a member of FLORIDA CARRY it is time to join.

    An armed population conststs of CITIZENS"
    AN UN-ARMED POPULATION CONSTSTS OF "SUBJECTS

  3. #3
    Distinguished Member racer88's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    9,944
    Naaa.... this can't happen. They said it wouldn't happen. No chance at all for abuse. And, even still... worth it, eh? It's worth forsaking the Right to Due Process before your property is seized and your freedoms infringed. Totally worth it.
    NRA Certified Pistol Instructor
    NRA Certified Range Safety Officer
    NRA Life Member

    "Dances with guns."

  4. Remove Advertisements
    FloridaConcealedCarry.com
    Advertisements
     

  5. #4
    Distinguished Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Location
    Pensacola
    Posts
    3,377
    The order never was issued so where is the foul? The dead kid's mom attempted to misuse the law and it didn't work. Even the story reveals it was rejected due to lack of facts and the inclusion of false claims by the mom. So bottom line is, she lied and tried to misuse the law but it didn't work. It did NOT work. So tell me how the system is screwed up?

    That officer elected to go to court, he wasn't required to do that, but it does shoot a pretty big hole in the "no due process" bleating. WTH was that court hearing if not due process? Can't have it both ways... hearings and claiming no due process... so which one is it?

    There are already laws in place to deal with people who make false statements to police or to courts of law. Nothing else is needed if they want to punish this woman for what she did, it appears though that they feel sorry for her loss and just want her to go away. That's not the law's fault.
    A man with two watches never really knows what time it is.
    M. Twain


    I think the feminists probably need some serious man in their lives.
    Delores O'Riodan

  6. #5
    Distinguished Member racer88's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    9,944
    According to the story (and I'm not giving it "carte blanche" as being accurate), the officer DID have to go to court to defend his rights. He won. But, he had to go, according to the story. Again... grain of salt and all that.

    She was able to file the patently and obviously false petition, and it went to court. She claimed to have a child with the officer! LOL!

    According to the Red Flag laws, the firearms can be confiscated BEFORE any court proceedings. Right? That would be the very definition of "before Due Process." I'm guessing that in this case, since he's an LEO, his firearms were not confiscated. The story didn't stipulate that fact.
    NRA Certified Pistol Instructor
    NRA Certified Range Safety Officer
    NRA Life Member

    "Dances with guns."

  7. #6
    Distinguished Member Riverpigusmc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    right here
    Posts
    14,912
    Red flag laws are patently garbage and supported by fools and lemmings
    "All civilians are targets or dependants" Drill Instructor Boone, Parris Island

    I don't own the clothes I'm wearing..and the road goes on forever..
    NRA Life Member
    Florida Carry Member
    Wilson Combat CQB, Kimber Tactical Pro, S&W J frame

    COTEP #523
    Founding Member

  8. #7
    Distinguished Member
    Join Date
    May 2016
    Location
    South Florida
    Posts
    1,804
    Quote Originally Posted by OHEng View Post
    The order never was issued so where is the foul? The dead kid's mom attempted to misuse the law and it didn't work. Even the story reveals it was rejected due to lack of facts and the inclusion of false claims by the mom. So bottom line is, she lied and tried to misuse the law but it didn't work. It did NOT work. So tell me how the system is screwed up?

    That officer elected to go to court, he wasn't required to do that, but it does shoot a pretty big hole in the "no due process" bleating. WTH was that court hearing if not due process? Can't have it both ways... hearings and claiming no due process... so which one is it?

    There are already laws in place to deal with people who make false statements to police or to courts of law. Nothing else is needed if they want to punish this woman for what she did, it appears though that they feel sorry for her loss and just want her to go away. That's not the law's fault.
    Did you see the link in the article to Sheriff Justin Smith's Facebook page, where he (as Sheriff) says that even he is worried about abuse of red flag laws.
    Now, I know from your posts here that you disagree, and that is your right.
    But frankly, I'm inclined to give a little more credence to the man who's job is it to actually enforce red flags, and not just intellectually armchair them waiting for day it happens.
    And it will. If it hasn't already.

  9. #8
    Distinguished Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Location
    Pensacola
    Posts
    3,377
    No one is claiming it won't. All I am saying is that from the very conception of these laws, we were "warned" that they are nothing but ripe for abuse by ticked off ex-girlfriends and ex-wives, that it was a great way for them to cause problems and get someone's guns confiscated for - essentially - no reason or false reasons. It was going to be epidemic, remember?

    Turns out that was not the case. Turns out when asked to present a case, no one can find one, so my response has been to ask the question that logically ought to be asked - where is the epidemic of abuse we heard about? Answer: there isn't one.

    Now in this case a woman with a big axe to grind lies and makes a false petition to the court. The court did not accept that petition which exactly matches what I predicted based on my experiences with judges who exercise the same cautions with Baker Act and Marchman Act petitions. They don't take people's written statements as absolute facts; they require documentation to back it up. My experience has been that judges will not sit around waiting for the documentation if it's missing. They will simply reject the petition and move on. That is why it is my opinion that the notion of these being easily manipulated for selfish reasons is nothing but someone's pipe dream. Sounds great as a way to scare people, but it isn't really viable because the courts don't work that way.

    Can it ever be abused? Sure it can. Show me any law that can't. The question isn't about is it possible to do, it's really about is it actually being done beyond some rare, unusual case and the answer is it is not, so I'm not concerned that my guns will be snatched by someone telling fairy tales. I don't think anyone else ought to be scared of that happening either.
    A man with two watches never really knows what time it is.
    M. Twain


    I think the feminists probably need some serious man in their lives.
    Delores O'Riodan

  10. #9
    Distinguished Member racer88's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    9,944
    Copied from a post on FB:

    You post on facebook that you might go party with friends this weekend. Someone calls the police and says they suspect you MIGHT be a danger to yourself or others because you MIGHT drink and drive sometime in the future. The police break down your door to take your car keys and take possession of your car to keep you from harming yourself and others in case you MIGHT decide to drink and drive someday. No crime has been committed and you haven't been charged with anything so you have no right to an attorney to fight this in court. THAT IS RED FLAG LAWS!!!! Stripping someone of their Constitutional Rights because someone thinks they MIGHT do something eventually.
    But, hey... you can petition and go to court to get your car BACK. So, it's all good, brah!
    NRA Certified Pistol Instructor
    NRA Certified Range Safety Officer
    NRA Life Member

    "Dances with guns."

  11. #10
    Distinguished Member joecarry's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Tampa Bay
    Posts
    4,311
    Quote Originally Posted by racer88 View Post
    Copied from a post on FB:



    But, hey... you can petition and go to court to get your car BACK. So, it's all good, brah!
    Interesting point of view. I agree.
    Anyone interested in the 80's TV show Miami Vice? If so click here --->Miamiviceonline.com

    The largest Miami Vice web site on the planet dedicated to all things Vice!

Sposors

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •