Red Flag Law....this is absolutely outstanding!!!!

Not outstanding at all if the law does not allow people such as this woman to be severely fined and/or punished.

There is a warrant for her arrest so I would think there is punishment upcoming.

Hopefully she will also be responsible for the deputies legal bills and be open for civil suits; that would help go a long way in preventing false accusations.

Targa said:

My hats off to the Larimer County Sheriff’s Office for not taking this garbage lying down!!

https://www.9news.com/article/news/...ficer/73-6f2778a2-0105-43b4-81f2-bb6b457d0fec

Click to expand...

Do you think it would have been thrown out that quickly if it hadn't been a cop

Targa said:

I think that because it was a cop that was performing his duties with body cam footage of the incident, that it was already previously deemed that it was a good shoot and that the woman lied on the petition showed an obvious vendetta against him is what made this outcome happen so quickly.
I hope that she is made an example of to set a precedent to other anti gunners that they better think long and hard before utilizing this ridiculous red flag garbage to harass firearm owners.

Click to expand...

I think if it had been a citizen who just happened to shoot somebody who broke into their house they would have taken his guns

The judge denied Susan Holmes’ petition on Jan. 16. The fact she is not related to Morris was one of the key reasons for the denial.

Click to expand...

Let's not over look this.

Targa said:

I think that because it was a cop that was performing his duties with body cam footage of the incident, that it was already previously deemed that it was a good shoot and that the woman lied on the petition showed an obvious vendetta against him is what made this outcome happen so quickly.

Click to expand...

Yeah, but other than that whatcha got?

I hope that she is made an example of to set a precedent to other anti gunners that they better think long and hard before utilizing this ridiculous red flag garbage to harass firearm owners.

Click to expand...

Red flag laws are just another one of those feel good things that people come up with while trying to show the incredibly ignorant "Hey, we're trying to do something about it here!"
The opportunity for abuse is insanely large. SWATting is so commonplace that it the name for it was entered into the Oxford English Dictionary years ago. There are laws against it with stiff penalties but people still do it. Why on earth would anyone think it wouldn't happen with RFL's?

This just illustrates how red flag laws are a horrendous idea. If this woman had filed a red flag against a "regular person" we would be reading a much different story, likely a gun owner killed in a no knock raid.

Kind of leap there when you consider.....

The judge denied Susan Holmes’ petition on Jan. 16. The fact she is not related to Morris was one of the key reasons for the denial.

Click to expand...

Trunk Monkey said:

Do you think it would have been thrown out that quickly if it hadn't been a cop

Click to expand...

If she had falsly swore on the petition as she did, yes.

100% because it was a cop. If it were you and me it would be a coin flip if it were dropped.

FlSwampRat said:

Yeah, but other than that whatcha got?


Red flag laws are just another one of those feel good things that people come up with while trying to show the incredibly ignorant "Hey, we're trying to do something about it here!"
The opportunity for abuse is insanely large. SWATting is so commonplace that it the name for it was entered into the Oxford English Dictionary years ago. There are laws against it with stiff penalties but people still do it. Why on earth would anyone think it wouldn't happen with RFL's?

Click to expand...

That's a good point. There seems to be a lot of magical thinking going on with legislators-- that if something is made illegal, that will take care of the problem. For example, guns in post offices. Or guns near school grounds. And so on.

Justin Smith is an excellent Sheriff. He led the charge against the Bloomberg sponsored magazine ban here in Colorado and told the legislators that he would not enforce it since magazines are not serialized and could not be tracked or dated. He is a real Constitutional law enforcement professional. And he would be just as fast to go after someone filing a false claim whether they were in law enforcement or not. The officer in question is a Colorado State University cop, not a Sheriff's deputy. I do a lot of work on the CSU campus and so will not comment on the quality of those who get hired by that agency.

Susan Holmes' petition was denied because she was not a member of the class of people who would have the legal option to file such a motion against that individual subject (the officer who shot her son.) She attempted to falsify the petition by claiming to be in that class.

If the mother of a thug shot and killed by me while invading my home filed a similar petition, using the same pretense, and under the same requirements, I have no doubt that it would also be denied, and I'm not a cop (anymore.) If the same officials (judge and sheriff) were tasked with investigating it, I have no reason to believe they would not take action similar to what they did in Ms. Holmes' case.

The fact that this lying woman attempted to use a system enacted to protect those who have a legitimate fear for their life, doesn't negate the need for the law. The fact that she was caught and charged indicates the system worked.

KNO3 said:

The fact that this lying woman attempted to use a system enacted to protect those who have a legitimate fear for their life, doesn't negate the need for the law. The fact that she was caught and charged indicates the system worked.

Click to expand...

Someone who has a legitimate fear for their life should pull a restraining order and in many cases that makes the person subject to it a prohibited person by the way I read the regs. The thing that bothers me about the law is that there's no day in court beforehand for the gun owner depriving him of due process. enumerated in the 4th and 5th amendments.

I could see a good attorney getting an acquittal for her, IF, the language in the article is accurate.

If it really asks if they have a child in common...the answer is actually yes, they do.....

Wonder how the actual pertinent law reads??

Targa said:

I don’t think so. I am more concerned about the anti-gun neighbor, family member etc..etc..filing petitions simply because they can and it will fit their....what is it these days? Awoken, social warrior etc...rhetoric

Click to expand...

Exactly.

It would be a lot more impressive had it involved a common run of the mill gun owning citizen instead of just the king's men exacting retribution for an attack on one of their own.

newfalguy101 said:

If it really asks if they have a child in common...the answer is actually yes, they do.....

Click to expand...

I'm sure "child in common' means a family relationship.

The worst excesses of red flag laws could be controlled with four provisions:

• The subject must be granted a court hearing on demand within 24 hours, to include weekends and holidays, during which he can be represented by a lawyer, call witnesses to testify in his behalf and cross examine the individual(s) who sought the red flag order or who testified in its support.
• At the subject's discretion, confiscated items must be turned over to an FFL for sale with the proceeds going to the subject.
• The agency that confiscated the firearms is responsible for maintaining their condition as they were when confiscated. Damage must be repaired or the items replaced at the agency's expense regardless of cost.
• Anyone filing a false application for a red flag order or testifying falsely in its support is liable for civil damages including actual expenses, such as legal bills and loss of income, and damage to his reputation. (Laws against perjury already cover criminal liability.)