Printable View
This is one of those laws that theoretically could have some benefit, but there are too many ways for it to be abused without rigorous checks/balances, due process, restitution and false claim liability. If all it takes is one snowflake to say you make them feel "unsafe", its a NO GO.
I love how Dickinhispooper says if nothing is done he will consider an executive action. [emoji849]
So basically this lame duck is giving the G.A. an ultimatum to either do something or he will.
Typical liberal trying to strong arm people to get what they want.
Quote:
Hickenlooper, a term-limited Democrat, supports a “red flag” law, but he is deferring to the General Assembly to draft a bill. Though if no action is taken, the governor acknowledged Thursday, he would consider executive action on the issue.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
The only way to achieve compliance is with registration :|
There are already 20,000 UNCONSTITUTIONAL laws now.
Sometimes we get help from strange bedfellows:
"The ACLU analysis notes that the court order authorized by the legislation could be issued without any indication that the person poses an imminent threat to others, and without any evidence that he or she ever committed, or has even threatened to commit, an act of violence with a firearm. Further, the court decision would be made at a hearing where the person would not be entitled to appointed counsel. Under the legislation, a court order would require the confiscation for at least a year of any firearms lawfully owned by the person, place the burden on him or her to prove that they should be returned after that time, potentially subject him or her to a coerced mental health evaluation, and give police broad authority to search their property for firearms.
Among the other points raised by the ACLU’s analysis:
The standard for seeking and issuing an order is so broad it could routinely be used against people who engage in “overblown political rhetoric” on social media or against alleged gang members when police want to find a shortcut to seize lawfully-owned weapons from them.
Even before a court hearing is held, and a decision is made, on a petition for an ERPO, police could be required to warn potentially hundreds of people that the individual might pose a significant danger to them.
Without the presence of counsel, individuals who have no intent to commit violent crimes could nonetheless unwittingly incriminate themselves for lesser offenses."
http://www.riaclu.org/news/post/aclu...un-legislation
Those warning that liberals would abuse this law and don't think that conservatives would do the very same are living in la la land.
Patriot Act and R.I.C.OQuote:
Originally Posted by Irving
No political party is beyond abusing their power.
I'm not talking about parties, I'm talking about individual people.
Reporters should be held accountable for false and/or harassing reports. Should be able to be sued for damages and emotional distress over losing one's rights for self protection and legal process.
Reporting should not be anonymous, and shall be forced to appear to testify under oath.
But the whole law is bull.
JUST SAY NO!