Red Flag Law has no guidance for Police

[eddiememphis]

https://coloradosun.com/2019/12/04/colorado-red-flag-law-policies-gun-seizures/

Highlights

The law allows a judge to order temporary seizure of guns from someone deemed a significant risk to themselves or others. But the guidance didn?t include advice on what to do when someone refuses to give up their firearms.

?It?s up to each law enforcement agency to determine how to respond to an individual who refuses to surrender a firearm,? said Lawrence Pacheco, a spokesman for Attorney General Phil Weiser.

But the lack of a roadmap on the crucial ? and potentially deadly ? question of what to do when someone refuses to hand over their guns underscores broader law enforcement unknowns (https://www.denverpost.com/2019/11/29/colorado-red-flag-law-courts-police/) around the complicated new law.

...they could be arrested if they don?t comply. First, however, law enforcement would have to be able to prove they actually have firearms.

Fremont County Sheriff Allen Cooper... questions whether law enforcement could even act if someone refused to comply with an order to surrender their guns.
?This is a civil protection order, not a criminal protection order..."

[buffalobo]

Helluva lot more than another step on the path...

[TFOGGER]

http://youtu.be/aCbfMkh940Q

[newracer]

My understanding is that whoever files for the order is responsible to tell the court what firearms the person has. I also thought that they were responsible to notify as well.

[Little Dutch]

My understanding is that whoever files for the order is responsible to tell the court what firearms the person has. I also thought that they were responsible to notify as well.

I didn't find that in the wording. Do you have a specific source and section of the law?

[newracer]

13-14.5-104 3 A Petition must (b) IDENTIFY THE NUMBER, TYPES, AND LOCATIONS OF ANY FIREARMS THE PETITIONER BELIEVES TO BE IN THE RESPONDENT'S CURRENT OWNERSHIP, POSSESSION, CUSTODY, OR CONTROL;

I must be mistaken about the serving part.

[Irving]

Does any law provide guidance for the police how they are written?

[eddiememphis]

Does any law provide guidance for the police how they are written?

No.

The six-page guidance issued Dec. 1 by the Colorado Peace Officer Standards and Training Board, known as POST, deals only with how law enforcement should accept, store and return guns seized under the law.

?It?s up to each law enforcement agency to determine how to respond to an individual who refuses to surrender a firearm,? said Lawrence Pacheco, a spokesman for Attorney General Phil Weiser. ?It would likely depend on the factors of each case and available resources.?

[Little Dutch]

13-14.5-104 3 A Petition must (b) IDENTIFY THE NUMBER, TYPES, AND LOCATIONS OF ANY FIREARMS THE PETITIONER BELIEVES TO BE IN THE RESPONDENT'S CURRENT OWNERSHIP, POSSESSION, CUSTODY, OR CONTROL;

I must be mistaken about the serving part.
Thanks!

[FoxtArt]

Gotta love how it's an ex-parte "civil protection order" for seizure of constitutionally protected assets, enforced as a criminal (not a civil) prohibition on their possession, and served with all the authority of a judicial warrant for felony arrest.

But they call it "civil" only so their burdens are "preponderance of the evidence" and you have to PROVE your innocence. All while ironically, they follow none of the civil rules and due process notes regarding civil property seizure innumerated under e.g. C.R.C.P. 104 - which would require a bond be posted to cover all your losses if they are wrong, and require a very prompt, proper hearing while your property is in situ.

It would be nice to see it at least modified to include bond requirements by the municipality and/or the accuser; required in an amount sufficient to cover potential loss of life claims and all damages. Then, they'd only execute one when they were REALLY REALLY REALLY REALLY REALLY SURE. As it is now, if they accidentally kill you, it falls under sovereign immunity, qualified immunity, and judicial immunity; so usually there would be no recourse for victims at all, even if their survivors bet the entire farm on "going after" those responsible.

[newracer]

I saw somewhere that a sheriff and DA were questioning if they could legally seize firearms since it's a civil order and not criminal.

[FoxtArt]

That was in the article sourcing from "Fremont County" which is hilarious. They've been in the news left and right for all sorts of corruption in the last year or two. The one deputy with all the murder evidence in his shed, and IIRC like two other pretty serious deputy-corruption issues. Pretty sure the S.O. had to resign or something over a big corruption case recently, forgot all the details. Probably more likely to get your firearms outright stolen from the LEO there than seized anyway [LOL]

[Aardvark]

[QUOTE=newracer;2247913]13-14.5-104 3 A Petition must (b) IDENTIFY THE NUMBER, TYPES, AND LOCATIONS OF ANY FIREARMS THE PETITIONER BELIEVES TO BE IN THE RESPONDENT'S CURRENT OWNERSHIP, POSSESSION, CUSTODY, OR CONTROL;

The way the reads, all the info that "must" be identified, can be made up: "petitioner *believes*". no burden of proof from the accuser. With this vaguely defined proof, how does a judge determine a person warrants a visit from LEO?

[TFOGGER]

My prediction: After the first time an attempt to serve such a warrant goes horribly wrong and the serving LEO is injured or killed, subsequent "Red Flag" service will be made by SWAT teams, probably under "No Knock" conditions. All of this despite no charges being filed, and no convictions being adjudicated.

[buffalobo]

My prediction: After the first time an attempt to serve such a warrant goes horribly wrong and the serving LEO is injured or killed, subsequent "Red Flag" service will be made by SWAT teams, probably under "No Knock" conditions. All of this despite no charges being filed, and no convictions being adjudicated.That is the goal.

[Rucker61]

I saw somewhere that a sheriff and DA were questioning if they could legally seize firearms since it's a civil order and not criminal.

I wonder if they can legally possess NFA items since it's a civil order, and also when the future decision is found in favor of the respondent, does the process for returning NFA items require ATF action?

[DavieD55]

That is the goal.


That^^^


Communism

[FoxtArt]

3,000 problems with these of a severe nature that shouldn't even pass a liberal court.

a) Preponderance of the evidence standard for criminal wrongs handled in an ex-parte hearing which guarantees 99% issuance.
b) Anonymous accusations triggering red-flags in an ex-parte nature
c) No bonds to protect against innocents damages (required, btw, for civil seizures)
d) No ramification of any kind for false reporting
e) "suspect" has the obligation to pursue relief at their cost at a higher evidentiary burden, no right to an attorney
f) Clear criminal punishment (immediate forfeiture of firearm rights + jail time for refusing to comply)
g) No right to face your accuser or cross examine them in any kind (or even for them to be identified)

And I could go on. But even David Koppel doesn't want to call this shit out for what it is, it's en vogue in our society to say "Well, we need SOMETHING". All the legal challenges are weak. And at the end of the day, our courts operate on a "well, we need something, so we'll keep it" concept instead of "This is clearly in violation of virtually all constitutional protections and therefore, is not the solution".

Day by day, there is far less distinction between our courts, and those of China or North Korea.

[iego]

It's all fun and games, until you have a balanced budget.

We have to stop Government. They are out of control. And the only way to stop them is to make them accountable. And the first step to making them accountable, is to ask them to balance the budget.

-John

[Great-Kazoo]

It's all fun and games, until you have a balanced budget.

We have to stop Government. They are out of control. And the only way to stop them is to make them accountable. And the first step to making them accountable, is to ask them to balance the budget.

-John

No the first step is to toss them out after 2 years if they haven't done shit for We The People. After that a monthly delivery of tar & feathers till they get back on track.

[iego]

It's pretty much been proven that whomever is in power, Government grows.

We don't need to limit who is in power, but rather what power they have.

-John

[Gman]

How about this for guidance: The police file the ERPO

Denver police file what is likely the first extreme risk protection order under new ‘red flag’ law (https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/denver-police-file-what-is-likely-the-first-extreme-risk-protection-order-under-new-red-flag-law/ar-BBYB1IL)

DENVER — The Denver Police Department has filed what is likely the first extreme risk protection order under the state’s new “red flag” law.

Under the new law, which went into effect Jan. 1, any Colorado citizen can apply for an ERPO against a gun owner if the citizen feels the gun owner may be a threat to themselves or others.

A judge decides if someone initially meets the criteria to have his or her guns taken away. This first hearing will be conducted ex parte, without the gun owner present.

A judge can decide if the situation warrants the sheriff and his or her deputies moving in to take guns away immediately without the gun owner’s knowledge and before a notice to appear in court can be given to the gun owner.

DPD says in this case, a judge granted a temporary filing. In 14 days, there will be a hearing to determine if a continuing order is necessary.

DPD says it filed the order against a man involved in a domestic violence situation and there were suicidal statements.

The man’s name was not released.

The department says the man turned over his two firearms before the ERPO was filed.

[def90]

https://www.9news.com/article/news/local/next/first-known-case-using-colorados-new-red-flag-law-filed-in-denver/73-2c6b704c-bb49-4683-a8e8-df85b978596b?fbclid=IwAR2B9Rbkq3ELerZwV4mR1--SwAaZhhPJ6bpc-8xNJMCxXkc1N58GuDXcZzM


https://www.rallyforourrights.com/colorado-first-red-flag-erpo/

[Gman]

Can you follow Denver's plan for the red flag law? (https://www.9news.com/article/news/local/next/denver-red-flag-law/73-1419bf8e-a386-4607-baf4-02bb49be5a90)

Crazy that they had to flow chart this, but that's what you get from politicians.

Flow chart PDF: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1H2iuJD-tB6a_vv8cHgdUFkTKQfPvmldN/preview
79835
79836

I'm also not shocked that the guns are to be returned because no charges were filed, but Denver PD doesn't want to return them because he threatened suicide (like a gun is required to commit suicide). This shouldn't be up to the dept. to decide when they finally return the firearms.

[kidicarus13]

https://gazette.com/ap/state/guns-owned-by-domestic-violence-offenders-probed-in-denver/article_539fafaf-ca29-56d2-8678-9c2c75f61e0c.html

"Denver is the only jurisdiction in the state with a full-time position dedicated to removing firearms from domestic violence suspects, officials said.
Prosecutors hope working with the investigator will provide ideas for implementation of the state's new red flag law"

[FoxtArt]

"Denver is the only jurisdiction in the state with a full-time position dedicated to removing firearms from domestic violence suspects, officials said.


That position is probably also used to dramatically increase the performance and customer service of the entire force.

F*** up one just more time and I'm going to transfer you into the "DV Gun Seizure Task Force" (spoken with air quotes)

[DavieD55]

https://i.ibb.co/YkxfWgW/ec041c7cd4a3ecad001-1.png (https://ibb.co/wWfpLtL)

[Gman]

They just deem that anybody that wants to have a gun is mentally unfit.