Post yer ERPO stories here...

A place for sharing news stories related to armed citizens, law enforcement & 2A/CCW topics.

Please note that when linking to an article you must cite the source URL and provide no more than a brief preview of the article to ensure fair-use standards are met.

NO DOCUMENT DUMPING.

Posts in violation of these rules are subject to immediate deletion without warning.

Moderators: Chuck, Mustang380gal, Coordinators, Moderators

Post Reply
Brian D.
Posts: 16229
Joined: Mon Jul 04, 2005 8:42 pm
Location: SW Ohio

Re: Post yer ERPO stories here...

Post by Brian D. »

bignflnut wrote:Here's a cop making a video from 2015...just to give you a mindset timestamp before ERPOs were a big deal...
Sufficed to say, ERPOs are the natural progression of police power against the citizens...with the express and primary goal of confiscation!

Adult language and not much detail on the supposed topic of the video: "What Rights Do You Have To Stop Cops From Entering Your House - Warrants, Consent, Exigency"

In short, wellness checks, some neighbor ratting you out, a family member calling the cops saying that you're crazy...anybody can sic the cops on you, and they're coming in...for your safety, of course.

There's more lonely people in society and people don't feel a strong family or community connection anymore? Huh? Why might that be?
I was proud of how my fire/EMS agency, along with our police, handled calls like "wellness checks". They sometimes needed our skills/tools getting to a door or window, and opening same with as little damage as possible. First consideration was always getting all information available to us, before even knocking on the door. Whenever possible, we'd meet the neighbor/relative/friend who'd contacted us, on scene. Maybe it was a "small town" thing, but we respected our residents.

This militancy stuff I read stories about now, bothers the hell out of me.
Quit worrying, hide your gun well, shut up, and CARRY that handgun!

********************************************************************************
1911 and Browning Hi Power Enthusianado.
User avatar
Bruenor
Posts: 7306
Joined: Mon Jul 24, 2006 3:03 pm
Location: Geneva, OH

Re: Post yer ERPO stories here...

Post by Bruenor »

Interesting
http://thegarrisoncenter.org/archives/14086" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Judges who issue ERPOs aren’t “suspending” their victims’ gun rights and constitutionally mandated due process and property protections. They’re ordering police to violate those rights and ignore those protections. There’s a difference.

Rights are inherent characteristics possessed by all human beings, not privileges to be granted or withheld at the whim of a bureaucrat in a black dress. And the point of the 5th Amendment’s due process clause is precisely to protect the life, liberty, and property of Americans against arbitrary judicial edicts. Under the US Constitution, “laws” which violate those protections are null and void.
What might we call a system under which anonymous judges can secretly order anonymous police officers to expropriate property from citizens who have neither been accused of nor convicted of crimes, on pain of death for resistance?

The only term that seems to fit is “police state.”
Μολὼν λαβέ

"Arms discourage and keep the invader and plunderer in awe, and preserve order in the world as well as property. . . Horrid mischief would ensue were the law-abiding deprived of the use of them."

- Thomas Paine

"Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem."

- Thomas Jefferson
User avatar
Bruenor
Posts: 7306
Joined: Mon Jul 24, 2006 3:03 pm
Location: Geneva, OH

Re: Post yer ERPO stories here...

Post by Bruenor »

Headline should read: Violations of rights under Maryland "Red Flag" law exceed expectations.. hard to believe these numbers are only for 7 weeks.

https://www.wusa9.com/article/news/loca ... -616308100" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Gun siezures under Maryland 'Red Flag' law exceed expectations
There have been at least 172 "extreme risk" complaints in Maryland allowing the seizure of guns filed in the seven weeks since the state's controversial "Red Flag" law went into effect October 1st – a number that has exceeded expectations, according to Montgomery County Sheriff Darren Popkin.
Some gun owners have been able to get their weapons returned. Final seizure orders have been denied or dismissed by judges in 24 of the 172 cases so far.

"The judges are not rubber-stamping these complaints," Popkin said. "They are holding substantial hearings and making rulings based on evidence. The system is working."
Μολὼν λαβέ

"Arms discourage and keep the invader and plunderer in awe, and preserve order in the world as well as property. . . Horrid mischief would ensue were the law-abiding deprived of the use of them."

- Thomas Paine

"Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem."

- Thomas Jefferson
User avatar
Chuck
OFCC Director
OFCC Director
Posts: 4753
Joined: Mon Nov 16, 2009 7:06 am
Location: Licking County

Re: Post yer ERPO stories here...

Post by Chuck »

Bruenor wrote:
Some gun owners have been able to get their weapons returned. Final seizure orders have been denied or dismissed by judges in 24 of the 172 cases so far.

"The judges are not rubber-stamping these complaints," Popkin said. "They are holding substantial hearings and making rulings based on evidence. The system is working."
The hearings are most certainly not "substantial" if they are ex parte, and if I understand the term "final seizure" correctly, that means these people have had their guns taken but managed to get them back.
That would mean they are "rubber stamping" the original orders
Ain't activism fun?

"Associate with men of good quality if you esteem your own reputation; for it is better to be alone than in bad company. " - George Washington

"I am only one, but I am one. I cannot do everything, but I can do something.
And because I can not do everything, I will not refuse to do the something I can do.
What I can do, I should do. And what I should do, by the grace of GOD, I will do."
- Edward Everett Hale (descendant of Nathan Hale)
bignflnut
Volunteer
Volunteer
Posts: 8135
Joined: Mon Jun 30, 2008 12:14 pm
Location: Under Naybob Tinfoil Bridge
Contact:

Re: Post yer ERPO stories here...

Post by bignflnut »

Here is what happens when anyone can call State Thunder Squad down on others without due process:
Last Friday the Houston Police Department released the inventory of items seized during the January 28 drug raid that killed a middle-aged couple and injured five narcotics officers. Strikingly absent is any evidence that Dennis Tuttle and Rhogena Nicholas were selling drugs from their house at 7815 Harding Street, notwithstanding Police Chief Art Acevedo's portrayal of them as scary, heavily armed, locally notorious heroin dealers.

According to the warrant affidavit, a confidential informant bought heroin from a man matching Tuttle's description at the house the day before the raid, when he reported seeing a "large quantity of plastic baggies" containing heroin. Instead police found "approximately 18 grams of marijuana" and "approximately 1.5 grams of an unknown white powder" that Acevedo later identified as cocaine. These are personal use quantities that are not consistent with drug dealing. Nor did police find any equipment, supplies, or cash indicative of drug sales. The inventory does not mention scales, bags, or heroin paraphernalia. It does not even mention the police-supplied money that the C.I. supposedly used to buy heroin from Tuttle, which should have been identifiable by serial numbers recorded before the purchase.

SNIP

Update: KTRK, citing "sources close to the investigation," reports that the woman who called police on January 8 was Rhogena Nicholas' mother, who was worried that her 58-year-old daughter "was doing drugs inside her own home." If so, the complaint that set the investigation into motion, culminating in the home invasion that killed Nicholas and her husband, was very different from the way Acevedo described it during his press conference three days later, when he implied that Tuttle and Nicholas were scary "drug dealers" and that the caller was afraid they might kill her. Acevedo also said that two patrol officers dispatched to the house heard a passer-by say "the police are at the dope house" while talking on her cellphone. If the KTRK story is accurate, Acevedo, wittingly or not, misrepresented a family dispute as a tip about drug dealing.
“It’s not that we don’t have enough scoundrels to curse; it’s that we don’t have enough good men to curse them.”–G.K. Chesterton-Illustrated London News, 3-14-1908

Republicans.Hate.You. See2020.

"Avarice, ambition, revenge and licentiousness would break the strongest cords of our Constitution, as a whale goes through a net. Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other." John Adams to Mass Militia 10-11-1798
User avatar
High Power
Posts: 2557
Joined: Mon Apr 23, 2007 6:03 pm

Re: Post yer ERPO stories here...

Post by High Power »

I've not been the victim of an ERPO but the late ex-mother-in-law tried to have me murdered by filing a false report on me.

When it became apparent that she filed a false report, I made a criminal complaint. The Sheriff and Chief of Police refused to do anything. She was also friends with a person who worked for the County Prosecutor.

I finally won a civil suit against the lying witch.

I say all this as it seems that when a false report like these is made, the cops a reluctant to take any action against the lying complainant. Could the reason be that when all the discovery is made during any sort of criminal prosecution against the liar that evidence will come out showing (criminal) negligence by the cops?
"Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results." - Albert Einstein
bignflnut
Volunteer
Volunteer
Posts: 8135
Joined: Mon Jun 30, 2008 12:14 pm
Location: Under Naybob Tinfoil Bridge
Contact:

Re: Post yer ERPO stories here...

Post by bignflnut »

More than 1,700 court orders to temporarily seize guns from people deemed a threat to themselves or others across more than a dozen states were issued last year, according to an Associated Press report published this week.

SNIP

The National Rifle Association told the Washington Free Beacon it supports the laws but only if they meet certain due process requirements.

"Nobody wants dangerous people to have access to firearms, which is why the NRA supports risk protection orders with adequate due process protections and ensure those adjudicated to be dangerously mentally ill receive treatment," Jennifer Baker, a spokesperson for the NRA's Institute for Legislative Action, said. "The NRA believes that any effort should be structured to fully protect the Second Amendment rights of law-abiding citizens while preventing truly dangerous individuals from accessing firearms. We will only support an [Emergency Risk Protection Order] process that strongly protects both Second Amendment rights and due process rights at the same time."

SNIP

Other gun-rights groups have opposed any implementation of Red Flag laws. Brandon Combs, president of the Firearms Policy Coalition, said his group "has consistently opposed ‘red flag' legislation at every level of government because they are a truly dangerous, unjust, unconstitutional, and immoral policy."

He said the laws punish people who haven't yet committed a crime and can create deadly situations when police attempt to confiscate firearms from those subject to an order.

"These Minority Report-style ‘pre-crime' laws target people for disarmament and seizure of their property before they even commit a crime," Combs told the Free Beacon.
“It’s not that we don’t have enough scoundrels to curse; it’s that we don’t have enough good men to curse them.”–G.K. Chesterton-Illustrated London News, 3-14-1908

Republicans.Hate.You. See2020.

"Avarice, ambition, revenge and licentiousness would break the strongest cords of our Constitution, as a whale goes through a net. Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other." John Adams to Mass Militia 10-11-1798
User avatar
High Power
Posts: 2557
Joined: Mon Apr 23, 2007 6:03 pm

Re: Post yer ERPO stories here...

Post by High Power »

bignflnut wrote:
More than 1,700 court orders to temporarily seize guns from people deemed a threat to themselves or others across more than a dozen states were issued last year, according to an Associated Press report published this week.

SNIP

The National Rifle Association told the Washington Free Beacon it supports the laws but only if they meet certain due process requirements.

"Nobody wants dangerous people to have access to firearms, which is why the NRA supports risk protection orders with adequate due process protections and ensure those adjudicated to be dangerously mentally ill receive treatment," Jennifer Baker, a spokesperson for the NRA's Institute for Legislative Action, said. "The NRA believes that any effort should be structured to fully protect the Second Amendment rights of law-abiding citizens while preventing truly dangerous individuals from accessing firearms. We will only support an [Emergency Risk Protection Order] process that strongly protects both Second Amendment rights and due process rights at the same time."

SNIP

Other gun-rights groups have opposed any implementation of Red Flag laws. Brandon Combs, president of the Firearms Policy Coalition, said his group "has consistently opposed ‘red flag' legislation at every level of government because they are a truly dangerous, unjust, unconstitutional, and immoral policy."

He said the laws punish people who haven't yet committed a crime and can create deadly situations when police attempt to confiscate firearms from those subject to an order.

"These Minority Report-style ‘pre-crime' laws target people for disarmament and seizure of their property before they even commit a crime," Combs told the Free Beacon.
We can always thank the NRA for protecting our rights :roll:

The caveat about adhering to due process is one that is routinely ignored. Besides, that due process is something that the authorities and courts may only address after your guns are in the police property room.

Then it's up to you to prove that you should be able to keep your guns. The burden of proof isn't placed on the state or the accuser.

Then there is the other problem with the "Trier of Fact." That may be a Judge, Jury or Tribunal. In case some of you have never been before a "Trier of Fact," I'd like to enlighten you.

The "Trier of Fact," will determine who is truthful in a court of law. In other words, if it comes down to one person's word against another's the "Trier of Fact," will determine who is telling the truth.

So if your ex-wife, mother-in-law or brat kid wants to become a PITA to you or get you shot then they make the accusation. If you aren't shot when the cops break down your door then you go to court and listen to their lies.

If you don't have any supporting evidence or testimony then it's your word against their's.

BTW, there is also a little thing called the 5th amendment. You don't have to take the witness stand but if your case stands or falls on disproving their testimony then you better hope the "Trier of Fact" is smart enough or honest enough to recognize a liar when they see it.

Real due process would require that the accuser have substantial proof of their allegations at the ex-parte hearing. That's a little something that most "Triers of Fact" ignore.
"Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results." - Albert Einstein
User avatar
Bruenor
Posts: 7306
Joined: Mon Jul 24, 2006 3:03 pm
Location: Geneva, OH

Re: Post yer ERPO stories here...

Post by Bruenor »

Due process is not After the fact either.. You would be able to defend yourself before having your property stolen by the state.
Μολὼν λαβέ

"Arms discourage and keep the invader and plunderer in awe, and preserve order in the world as well as property. . . Horrid mischief would ensue were the law-abiding deprived of the use of them."

- Thomas Paine

"Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem."

- Thomas Jefferson
User avatar
AlanM
Posts: 9435
Joined: Mon Jul 04, 2005 1:38 am
Location: Was Stow, OH now Charlottesville, VA

Re: Post yer ERPO stories here...

Post by AlanM »

Current article that voices what we already know to be true.

Red Flag Gun Laws Turn Due Process on Its Head
Red flag laws have spurred quite a bit of controversy. This legislative movement seeks to create a process to remove firearms from the homes of people who are rumored to be dangerous to themselves or others. The proponents of such laws cite this as a possible way to help combat mass shootings and suicides. However, the truth is far more damning.

The 5th & 14th Amendments of the U.S. Constitution mandate that no one shall be "deprived of life, liberty or property without due process of law." Although this should be clear to anyone with a basic comprehension of English, it’s often ignored by judges and politicians. Depriving people of a constitutional right before a trial and without charges tramples on the notion of innocent until proven guilty and severely erodes the core values of justice.
AlanM
There are no dangerous weapons; there are only dangerous men. - RAH
Four boxes to be used in defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, ammo - use in that order.
If you aren't part of the solution, then you obviously weren't properly dissolved.
bignflnut
Volunteer
Volunteer
Posts: 8135
Joined: Mon Jun 30, 2008 12:14 pm
Location: Under Naybob Tinfoil Bridge
Contact:

Re: Post yer ERPO stories here...

Post by bignflnut »

Days after three separate suicides in Parkland, Fla., and Newtown, Conn., left those communities reeling, the Senate did something rare for a GOP-led chamber: It held a hearing on gun control.

Tuesday, in the previously scheduled hearing, the full Senate Judiciary Committee heard from experts on extreme risk protection orders, commonly referred to as red flag laws.

These laws allow law enforcement, and in some states, relatives and other concerned parties, to petition judges in order to temporarily restrict access to firearms from people who may be a harm to themselves or others.

Supporters of the laws say they can save lives by removing guns from individuals who should not have them. Some states have used the laws to successfully protect individuals from suicide, at least one study shows. Opponents of such laws say they violate the second amendment and say they do nothing to thwart the underlying issues causing the threat.

Senate Judiciary Chairman Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., in his opening remarks, sought to play down fears of second amendment infringement.

"There are a lot of people [who] may be worried, 'Is the government going to come take your guns?' And the answer is, 'No,' " Graham said, hinting that one day he hopes there could be a federal process for law enforcement or family members to be able to petition a court signaling someone is "about to blow."

SNIP
Instead, he hopes to get a federal law enacted to incentivize states to create their own unique extreme risk laws.
Are you not appeased?
A GOP senator holding pro-ERPO hearings in a GOP Senate, but it's not about the government coming to take your guns...it's about safety! So call the cops and tell them your neighbor is crazy/dangerous/suicidal...and apparently Graham will tell the government not to take your guns.
“It’s not that we don’t have enough scoundrels to curse; it’s that we don’t have enough good men to curse them.”–G.K. Chesterton-Illustrated London News, 3-14-1908

Republicans.Hate.You. See2020.

"Avarice, ambition, revenge and licentiousness would break the strongest cords of our Constitution, as a whale goes through a net. Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other." John Adams to Mass Militia 10-11-1798
bignflnut
Volunteer
Volunteer
Posts: 8135
Joined: Mon Jun 30, 2008 12:14 pm
Location: Under Naybob Tinfoil Bridge
Contact:

Re: Post yer ERPO stories here...

Post by bignflnut »

Bipartisan supportfor this red flag gun bill has caused pro-gun organizations like Gun Owners of America to stand up in opposition, as BLP recently reported.

Once the Texas senator was given the mic, he gave his two cents on the red flag bill, describing mass shootings as an “epidemic” during his testimony at the hearing. Cruz’s testimony was temporarily derailed by a gun control activist who interrupted the proceedings, yelling, “End Gun Terror!” and was quickly escorted off the premises by security.

Once the commotion settled, Cruz went back to his testimony. “I do think extreme risk laws, of the kind we’re discussing can potentially be part of the solution set,” Cruz said.

https://www.c-span.org/video/?458685-1/ ... egislation" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Cruz’s seeming endorsement of red flag laws has worried some gun owners.

Georgia Gun Owners member Marjorie Taylor Greene, who’s currently in Washington D.C. talking to Senators and recently confronted David Hogg, claims that Senators like Ted Cruz may be caving in to anti-gun pressure because they “are being hammered” by gun control groups who relentlessly confront them at their offices.
“It’s not that we don’t have enough scoundrels to curse; it’s that we don’t have enough good men to curse them.”–G.K. Chesterton-Illustrated London News, 3-14-1908

Republicans.Hate.You. See2020.

"Avarice, ambition, revenge and licentiousness would break the strongest cords of our Constitution, as a whale goes through a net. Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other." John Adams to Mass Militia 10-11-1798
bignflnut
Volunteer
Volunteer
Posts: 8135
Joined: Mon Jun 30, 2008 12:14 pm
Location: Under Naybob Tinfoil Bridge
Contact:

Re: Post yer ERPO stories here...

Post by bignflnut »

During Tuesday’s hearing on confiscatory red flag laws, Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Lindsey Graham (R-SC) said, “every right has limits.”
But now it turns out some of our friends on the anti-gun left have a problem with them, too. Oh, they’re fine with grabbing someone’s (anyone’s?) guns based on nothing more than the word of a relative or co-worker, in some cases. What they’re having trouble with is the insensitive term “red flag.”

Our latest blog.

It’s Time to Retire the Term #RedFlag Laws

The catchy nickname stigmatizes individuals with mental health disabilities and mischaracterizes the way these evidence-based laws operate.#ERPO#ERPOsaveslives#RedFlagLawsSaveLiveshttps://t.co/VqDT9xzjEl

— CSGV (@CSGV) March 26, 2019
Evidence? Huh.
Identity politics eats its own.
“It’s not that we don’t have enough scoundrels to curse; it’s that we don’t have enough good men to curse them.”–G.K. Chesterton-Illustrated London News, 3-14-1908

Republicans.Hate.You. See2020.

"Avarice, ambition, revenge and licentiousness would break the strongest cords of our Constitution, as a whale goes through a net. Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other." John Adams to Mass Militia 10-11-1798
User avatar
High Power
Posts: 2557
Joined: Mon Apr 23, 2007 6:03 pm

Re: Post yer ERPO stories here...

Post by High Power »

What is even worse is that some cops believe everyone they come in contact with is mentally ill. This LEO's article certainly gives that impression.
According to the 2016 National Survey on Drug Use and Health, about 18.3% (44.7 million American adults) had Any Mental Illness and 4.2% (10.4 million American adults) had a Serious Mental Illness. These figures are deceivingly low.
If a person is released, the person can regain possession of their firearms initially taken for safe keeping, unless the person was not legally authorized to possess firearms originally (due to a domestic violence conviction, felony conviction, or prior mental health commitment). This creates a problem for law enforcement officers who are trying to prevent someone from using a firearm to commit suicide and/or homicide. How does law enforcement prevent a high-risk individual from possessing firearms? The answer is red flag laws.
Where this guy goes off the deep end is that he says that the LEOs can use the Red Flag Laws to confiscate a person's firearms. Let that sink in for a second. If I'm reading him correctly, a cop (who may not know the person) can simply attend an ex-parte hearing, sign an affidavit and testify to a person's mental health to confiscate their property. If I am also interpreting his grammar correctly he gives the impression that in some states, a family member can confiscate relative's firearms!
Red flag laws allow law enforcement (or in some cases family members) to take possession of a person’s firearms for safe keeping if there is probable cause to believe a person poses an immediate and present danger to themselves or someone else.
Here is the article: https://www.policeone.com/active-shoote ... laws-work/
"Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results." - Albert Einstein
bignflnut
Volunteer
Volunteer
Posts: 8135
Joined: Mon Jun 30, 2008 12:14 pm
Location: Under Naybob Tinfoil Bridge
Contact:

Re: Post yer ERPO stories here...

Post by bignflnut »

If you have never had an adversarial former spouse, angry child, or disillusioned business partner, you are fortunate, because any of these or your doctor can file a motion for an extreme risk protective order in at least 14 states.

If you’ve crossed swords with a police officer who wants to get even with you for embarrassing him in court or for filing a complaint against him, you should be worried about red flag laws going into effect in your state.

That being said, as a municipal prosecutor and retired police lieutenant, I will offer my professional opinion for those who have had their constitutional right to due process limited by legislative action.
An effective setup, admitting an illegal and tyrannical act...so what are we going to do about this injustice in real time?
1. What are a citizen’s options when the police knock on the door with a warrant and want to confiscate the citizen’s guns?

You have NO Options. Be polite and cooperative; you are basically considered a “dangerous armed adversary.” Call your attorney as soon as you can, not to stop the seizure, but to start the appeal process to get your property back.

SNIP

I’m not advising anyone to violate a judge’s order, but some may want to consider having another firearm stored in a fireproof gun safe at a trusted friend’s or relative’s house so that he will have some means of protecting himself if a dangerous situation arises before the firearms are returned.

SNIP

2. Assuming the guns are securely locked in a gun safe, do you advise the citizen to comply and open the safe?

YES. The safe may be taken (unlikely because police officers are government employees and, by their nature don’t like the physical work involved in moving the whole safe) or opened by force, to include destruction of the locking mechanism. The red flag court order gives them that authority.

3. What consequences do you anticipate would result from refusing to open a safe?

It depends on how your state’s law is worded but expect arrest for P.O.P. ({inappropriate language} off the police). It may be termed as “interfering with officers in the course of/performance of their duties,” harassment, assault, and/or violating an extreme risk protective order (remember an order was signed by a judge who conducted a hearing without you present), and they will pile on by adding “resisting arrest.” Try getting a concealed carry permit after conviction for a couple of those charges.
Of course I'm not a lawyer. I am a shopper, however.
Here's a device that one can place on solid exterior doors.
There's also security film that will prevent/delay window penetrations.

Unless Clinton and Reno are nearby, this may buy time enough to get legal representation and/or a local news crew to the door. But who knows what ex-military vehicles your county SWAT team has at the ready?
“It’s not that we don’t have enough scoundrels to curse; it’s that we don’t have enough good men to curse them.”–G.K. Chesterton-Illustrated London News, 3-14-1908

Republicans.Hate.You. See2020.

"Avarice, ambition, revenge and licentiousness would break the strongest cords of our Constitution, as a whale goes through a net. Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other." John Adams to Mass Militia 10-11-1798
Post Reply