How do you guys read these red flag laws? A few states have passed them. This is the summary to the one that made it out of committee in Colorado.

https://leg.colorado.gov/bills/hb18-1436

Burden of proof is the alarm on this one.

Read the bill and do what you can. This is a mess.

Boulder and Denver are CO now. May have to move.

I may be reading it incorrectly, but it sounds to me as if the "burden of proof" is upon the person petitioning for the order and that if challenged during the 182 day period, that the person petitioning has to show credible facts or the order is rescinded, and in all cases, the firearms will be returned unless proof can be established.

So, it is not a simple step of someone "crying wolf" and another loosing their rights from such thing.

Some are saying the firearms are collected first, and then the court hears evidence. I'm not reading it that way. Am I wrong?

For those non-Colorado folks, the Douglas County Sheriff backs this "law", based on the ambush shooting on New Years eve 2017 by Matthew Riehl.

Matthew Riehl was evidently pretty out here, even his mom tried to get his guns removed.

I'm not saying I agree, just providing the explanation.

https://www.denverpost.com/201...nty-shooting-emails/

As I understand it, the "temporary" order, if granted, would have weight of the "full order", but a hearing would be scheduled within 7 days to find the facts and be certain a real and credible threat exists, and if so a permanent order for the 182 day period would follow.

I think in this case, the desire to give options to those with legitimate concerns, but help lesson false, manipulative and "retaliatory" type accusations from depriving anyone of their rights.

There are people we consider "left of center" who are equally tired of a lot of the crap the "GDC"s are ramming up our asses and down our throats.

We need to spot them and "win them", if even as "cold" allies. Because the "Occasional Cortex" types and Schumers are a relentless BORG.

“Never give up. Never surrender!”
-Cmdr. Peter Quincy Taggart.

quote:

Originally posted by goose5:
How do you guys read these red flag laws? A few states have passed them. This is the summary to the one that made it out of committee in Colorado.

https://leg.colorado.gov/bills/hb18-1436

goose 5, the bill you linked to is last year's bill. There were problems with it...but this year's proposed bill is far and away more onerous

HB19-1177 is being discussed in this thread.

Colorado Free Resistance

Very interesting reading. Thank you very much.

Interesting, sounds like the loons running the asylum. Old well, typical blue!
What a tool for an ex-wife, husband, girlfriend, boyfriend, disgruntled wife or husband, upset neighbor, or just jerk to cause trouble.
Says if the person whose guns were seized, wins (poor choice of words) their rights back, the firearms are returned, wonder what condition they are returned in. Property marks scratched in various places, nicks, scratches, chips, or other asorted damage, from a property clerk or others handling, or storing in a barrel or box.
You win but lose?

From the POV of the accused, with no prior knowledge of the order having been issued, somebody is breaking into his house to steal his firearms. Somebody is bound to get hurt.

Here's a link to New Mexico's new Red Flag Law.
I haven't the linkage but from what I heard on a local radio show that the petitioner could claim that they received a threating phone call to get the red flag process started.
Not much in proving what was or was not said on a phone call.

https://www.nmlegis.gov/Sessions/19 Regular/bills/house/HB0083.pdf

All the more reason to keep a few off the books in a safe deposit box or with a trusted friend. Just sayin.

Remember Gary Willis? He was the Maryland resident killed when police served a “red flag” warrant.
The raid was at 5 AM on a Sunday. The night before his niece was discribed things as family being family.” That lead to a relative calling police. Willis had no record, had never been in trouble as his niece “said her uncle "likes to speak his mind," but "wouldn't hurt anybody." The chief of police immediately closed down the case stat8ng that the officers followed procedure. Interestingly, there has been no further news about the case.

In Vermont an a person’s guns ere seized simply because a teenage relative claimed he could access them. The Vermont red flag law clearly states that it applies only to the gun owner. The teenager did not live with the gun owner and there was never proof released that he even could have gotten the guns.

What about false claims? The Maryland law has a red flag complaint signed “under threat of perjury.” Perjury is very difficult to prove and convictions are rare. An irate spouse could lie and escape by claim she felt something.

None of the red flag laws, passed or proposed addresses these issues. I’m hoping the courts will start declaring the laws unconstitutional.

The Rhode Island chapter of the ACLU sums it up.

“the breadth of this legislation, its impact on civil liberties, and the precedent it sets for the use of coercive measures against individuals not because they are alleged to have committed any crime, but because somebody believes they might, someday, commit one.”

With so many of these laws around I haven't heard of anyone challenging them in court. Are there any challenges going on anywhere?