Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 40 of 44
  1. #1

    CO is HOSED... (Red Flag Bill specifically)

    https://www.denverpost.com/2019/04/0...l-jared-polis/

    Despite the similar bill in Maryland already having caused the death of one person (cops broke the door down in the middle of the night, he went to check with a gun and got shot) CO dims are apparently going to force this through...

    Say goodbye to your 2, 4, and 6 amendment rights...

    These people were voted in...
    They have completely abandoned their responsibility and are doing what they want to create their next liberal utopia of failure...
    Cages: '08 Dodge 6.7CTD, '08 Nissan Xterra Offroad
    Bikes: '05 GSXR 1000, '98 WR400

  2. #2
    Source: https://thefederalist.com/2019/03/29...grabbing-bill/

    This Is an Insane Idea Ripe for Abuse
    There’s a lot wrong with this idea. First, the Red Flag bill makes it easy for anyone to file a petition, including angry former lovers from many moons ago. A petitioner can file on the phone or in person, doesn’t have to provide his address, and doesn’t have to reside in Colorado. A petitioner doesn’t have to appear in person at any hearing, and there is no cost to file a petition.

  3. #3
    creepycrawler's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    The land of free bacon.
    Member #
    5806
    I saw that this morning.
    From the only state in the USA where O'dumbass failed to carry a single county. :hail:

  4. #4
    Quote Originally Posted by Grant H. View Post
    https://www.denverpost.com/2019/04/0...l-jared-polis/

    Despite the similar bill in Maryland already having caused the death of one person (cops broke the door down in the middle of the night, he went to check with a gun and got shot) CO dims are apparently going to force this through...

    Say goodbye to your 2, 4, and 6 amendment rights...

    These people were voted in...
    They have completely abandoned their responsibility and are doing what they want to create their next liberal utopia of failure...
    Don't forget the 14th amendment which protects due process as well...

  5. #5
    Don S's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    Burleson, (Ft.Worth) TX
    Member #
    1348
    Images
    30
    ..

    Most Conservatives are a little older with years of living in the real world.
    Liberals tend to be younger with many lessons to be learned... Wait... There's Jane Fonda

    So next year lets give the 16 year olds the vote!.. Don S..
    Burleson Tx, Where the Honey's have lotsa Miilk!
    Colorado Mountain Pass Collector for 30 years with 161
    1976 401 Wagoneer 1999 Frontier V6 4x4

  6. #6

    Join Date
    Aug 2001
    Location
    Parker
    Member #
    19
    Images
    8
    Everyone should watch the Rocky Mountain Heist on youtube.

  7. #7
    I called in Polis
    Last edited by noahfecks; April 1st, 2019 at 10:06 PM.
    "The nationalist not only does not disapprove of atrocities committed by his own side, but he has a remarkable capacity for not even hearing about them" George Orwell

  8. #8
    creepycrawler's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    The land of free bacon.
    Member #
    5806
    Quote Originally Posted by CSP View Post
    Everyone should watch the Rocky Mountain Heist on youtube.
    Yeah, the worst part was mentioned in the intro. Its heading to your state next.

    It is.

  9. #9
    Anyone watch the series "Designated Survivor"? That would be an awful way to start with a clean slate, but I am confident we need some way to start over in DC.
    God Forgives, Rock's Don't www.ucora.org
    1973 Bronco, 351 SEFI, Locked, discs, 35's ZF-5spd and Atlas 4spd. 235:1 Crawl Ratio

  10. #10
    I have not seen the show, but the concept of leaving one cockroach alive just seems like you failed to eliminate the infestation

  11. #11
    So they keep selling this as a family member, person in the house, or member of law enforcement. Can anyone confirm that just anyone can claim that they feel someone is a danger and needs to have their 2nd rights taken away?

  12. #12
    Full text available here: https://leg.colorado.gov/bills/hb19-1177
    “It is characteristic of the unlearned that they are forever proposing something which is old, and because it has recently come to their own attention, supposing it to be new.” Calvin Coolidge

  13. #13
    newracer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Timnath, CO
    Member #
    10010
    Images
    29
    Quote Originally Posted by noahfecks View Post
    So they keep selling this as a family member, person in the house, or member of law enforcement. Can anyone confirm that just anyone can claim that they feel someone is a danger and needs to have their 2nd rights taken away?
    Someone can inform the police and then the police could petition the court.
    Have you ever seen a man eat so much fish?

  14. #14
    To be clear- I do not support the bill.

    BUT- the details are different than what I have been hearing...

    1. They must petition the court ("family or household member or a law enforcement officer") and sign a sworn affidavit
    2. The petitioner must establish by a "preponderance of the evidence that a person poses a significant risk to self or others by having a firearm".
    3. If granted- initially, it is good for 14 days
    4. A second hearing within 14 days is required to determine if a continuation of the order is needed, by the same standard above
    5. If granted, the new order is only good for 364 days, and must be continued by hearing, again by the same standard

    Additionally:

    "The bill provides a respondent who had a malicious or false petition for a temporary extreme risk protection order or extreme risk protection order filed against him or her with a private cause of action against the petitioner. In the action, the plaintiff is entitled to actual damages, attorney fees, and costs."


    So, a person is entitled to actual costs if someone falsely starts this process.


    I guess in my humble opinion- this is one of those feel good laws, that will overall make little difference. It certainly wouldn't have stopped Columbine or Sandy Hook...
    If you cross thread a bolt, there is no need for loctite.

    Run whatcha brung... And hope you brought enough.

  15. #15
    newracer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Timnath, CO
    Member #
    10010
    Images
    29
    Since the initial hearing is ex parte "preponderance of the evidence" is not that hard to do.

  16. #16
    Quote Originally Posted by noahfecks View Post
    So they keep selling this as a family member, person in the house, or member of law enforcement. Can anyone confirm that just anyone can claim that they feel someone is a danger and needs to have their 2nd rights taken away?
    That is not true. The definition in the statute is as follows:

    (2) "FAMILY OR HOUSEHOLD MEMBER" MEANS, WITH RESPECT TO A RESPONDENT, ANY: (a) PERSON RELATED BY BLOOD, MARRIAGE, OR ADOPTION TO THE RESPONDENT; (b) PERSON WHO HAS A CHILD IN COMMON WITH THE RESPONDENT, REGARDLESS OF WHETHER SUCH PERSON HAS BEEN MARRIED TO THE RESPONDENT OR HAS LIVED TOGETHER WITH THE RESPONDENT AT ANY TIME; (c) PERSON WHO REGULARLY RESIDES OR REGULARLY RESIDED WITH THE RESPONDENT WITHIN THE LAST SIX MONTHS; (d) DOMESTIC PARTNER OF THE RESPONDENT; (e) PERSON WHO HAS A BIOLOGICAL OR LEGAL PARENT-CHILD RELATIONSHIP WITH THE RESPONDENT, INCLUDING STEPPARENTS AND STEPCHILDREN AND GRANDPARENTS AND GRANDCHILDREN; (f) PERSON WHO IS ACTING OR HAS ACTED AS THE RESPONDENT'S LEGAL GUARDIAN; AND (g) A PERSON IN ANY OTHER RELATIONSHIP DESCRIBED IN SECTION 3 18-6-800.3 (2) WITH THE RESPONDENT.

    The statute referenced in the bold, italicized citation above reads as follows:

    18-6-800.3. Definitions.
    (2) "Intimate relationship" means a relationship between spouses, former spouses, past or present unmarried couples, or persons who are both the parents of the same child regardless of whether the persons have been married or have lived together at any time.



    So, anyone that held themselves out as being one half of an 'unmarried couple' would also be allowed to petition the court, or a former spouse, etc. that no longer lives there.
    Jeff Mason
    99 Isuzu Amigo.

  17. #17
    Quote Originally Posted by PovertyByJeep View Post
    To be clear- I do not support the bill.

    BUT- the details are different than what I have been hearing...

    1. They must petition the court ("family or household member or a law enforcement officer") and sign a sworn affidavit
    2. The petitioner must establish by a "preponderance of the evidence that a person poses a significant risk to self or others by having a firearm".
    3. If granted- initially, it is good for 14 days
    4. A second hearing within 14 days is required to determine if a continuation of the order is needed, by the same standard above
    5. If granted, the new order is only good for 364 days, and must be continued by hearing, again by the same standard

    Additionally:

    "The bill provides a respondent who had a malicious or false petition for a temporary extreme risk protection order or extreme risk protection order filed against him or her with a private cause of action against the petitioner. In the action, the plaintiff is entitled to actual damages, attorney fees, and costs."


    So, a person is entitled to actual costs if someone falsely starts this process.


    I guess in my humble opinion- this is one of those feel good laws, that will overall make little difference. It certainly wouldn't have stopped Columbine or Sandy Hook...
    Not saying this is your opinion (because I have seen the same list of BS elsewhere), but that is a very "kind" laying out of the steps.

    Step 2.1 needs added in:

    2.1 - No-knock warrant is issued and SWAT is tasked to enter the home without warning, search the premises, and remove all firearms.


    Other major issues:

    There is no procedure for "proving" you are mentally sane, healthy, stable etc...
    If the firearms are removed, and the VICTIM cannot prove they are mentally stable, refer to above - no details or discussion of what constitutes proof, at the 14 day hearing, they lose their firearms, and RIGHTS, till the 364 hearing. If they cannot "prove" the "unprovable" then, they are forever banned from a constitutional right, with NO DUE PROCESS!!!

    While the lip service of "entitled to actual costs" is in there, all they have to say is "he/she said XXXX, and that made me concerned. I'm so happy I was wrong", and that's the end of it. None of these virtue signalling twats are going to be held accountable for making a claim.


    I 100% agree with Newracer. Since the party being accused doesn't know about this until SWAT is breaking down there door in the middle of the night, a "preponderance" of evidence is a joke. The whole process is a joke. We have the right to face our accusers... Except when they label it as a mental health issue...

    Stupid ass virtue signaling morons... (Only the people that support this farce)...

  18. #18
    ASCTLC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    Black Forest
    Member #
    1416
    Images
    5
    This, and many new gun restriction laws, are poorly thought through at best and intentionally vague with details on purpose at there worst. It's real simple: Think of how the (any) new, innocent/benign/moral/good intentioned/common sense/fillinthefeelgoodblank law can be abused in a manner to exaggerate applying it where it was promoted it wouldn't be and you can foresee where it'll actually be used unjustly.

    I've learned a bit about dignity vs honor societies lately and have a much better understanding how honest, law abiding, people get manipulated by criminals and idealists (antifa/peta/earth first/etc type liberals) using laws for revenge...and Red Flag laws are about as ripe as any for "...I understand your intention but the law states I MUST...".

  19. #19
    Remember when no knocks were supposed to be reserved for hardened drug dealers and gangsters? Now SWAT shows up for ol' men who are known to be benign and own no weapons.

    It's time. You need to decide where you stand and what it's worth to you. Is freedom, liberty and the Constitution worth a family member? Your home? The rest of you life in a cell or the ground? When they come knocking or no knocking for mine, I've decided. I've broken no laws and have complied to every existing and new law thus thrusted upon me. This is beyond anything before. This shits on the Constitution is so many ways I can't believe we're even debating it. Debates over for me. Unconstitutional laws are unconstitutional. It's your duty as an American to stand up, take arms and fight. Pick a side. It's coming.

  20. #20
    newracer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Timnath, CO
    Member #
    10010
    Images
    29
    Proudly displayed on my vehicles.


  21. #21
    DaleD's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Colorado Springs
    Member #
    14519
    Is there not a federal judge in CO who would challenge this? Or is CO a goner beyond CA status? On second thought never mind. No ban on the Mag ban was ever brought up and strongly protested in a court that I remember.

    What am I thinking???? I own "ZERO" guns anyhoooo... Screw you guys.

  22. #22
    ASCTLC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    Black Forest
    Member #
    1416
    Images
    5
    And here's exactly what I'm talking about:

    https://www.yahoo.com/lifestyle/teen...010332991.html

  23. #23
    70jimmy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    On some trail in Park County
    Member #
    4962
    I call bull on the story. 17 year old can't be held in county jail. If the teacher allowed it/requested it they should be arrested for contributing to the delinquency of a minor and other charges. Seems strange for this to happen in Texas a very pro open carry place.

    The other kid that edited the video should be facing charges.

    I agree slippery slope.
    I suffered trail rejection from a carb infection and after futher inspection fuel injection was my election for proper correction and now I want some gear selection, any question?

  24. #24
    Curious, why cant a 17 year old be held in a county jail?

  25. #25
    Don S's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    Burleson, (Ft.Worth) TX
    Member #
    1348
    Images
    30
    ..

    I just read that 11 Coclorado sheriffs would rather go to jail than comply with the new law.

    If you are into politics you'll understand Coclorado.. Don S..

  26. #26
    creepycrawler's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    The land of free bacon.
    Member #
    5806
    Not exactly on topic but did ya see where Trump suggested sending all the people seeking asylum to sanctuary cities? Its never gonna happen but that funny right there. I like it.

  27. #27
    Garfield County commissioners declared a 2nd amendment sanctuary county so that the sheriff would not have to enforce this law once signed

  28. #28
    creepycrawler's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    The land of free bacon.
    Member #
    5806
    Quote Originally Posted by noahfecks View Post
    Garfield County commissioners declared a 2nd amendment sanctuary county so that the sheriff would not have to enforce this law once signed
    I saw that a few had done that. This is awesome as well. If places can declare themselves sanctuary cities and the dumbass Dems back them then there is no reason this shouldn't be done as well.

    If Denver, Aspen, and Durango could be wiped out, Colorado would be pretty cool again.
    Last edited by creepycrawler; April 12th, 2019 at 08:15 PM.

  29. #29
    Quote Originally Posted by creepycrawler View Post
    I saw that a few had done that. This is awesome as well. If places can declare themselves sanctuary cities and the dumbass Dems back them then there is no reason this shouldn't be done as well.

    If Denver, Aspen, and Durango could be wiped out, Colorado would be pretty cool again.
    It's actually about half of the 64 counties.

    Mark

    Sent from my SM-G935V using Tapatalk
    ''Wise men speak because they have something to say; fools, because they have to say something.'' - Plato

  30. #30
    The Man With The Plan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2001
    Location
    Arvada, Crawlorado
    Member #
    58
    Images
    8
    In other news, illegal immigrants can get Colorado driver's licenses now.

    Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk
    Jon, AKA The Man With The Plan, ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ Illegitimi non Carborundum = "Don't let the bastards get you down" Micris Fidelis="Faithful to small things" And it's an anagram...I'll let you figure it out

  31. #31
    creepycrawler's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    The land of free bacon.
    Member #
    5806
    Quote Originally Posted by ScaldedDog View Post
    It's actually about half of the 64 counties.

    Mark

    Sent from my SM-G935V using Tapatalk
    Sounds about right. As i said, yall only need to wipe out about 3 cities.

  32. #32
    Quote Originally Posted by The Man With The Plan View Post
    In other news, illegal immigrants can get Colorado driver's licenses now.

    Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk
    Haven't they been able to for a while?

    We have a murder case over here where one wetback killed another and they were able to buy the gun & ammunition because they had a valid CO drivers licence. About 2 years old

  33. #33
    The Man With The Plan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2001
    Location
    Arvada, Crawlorado
    Member #
    58
    Images
    8
    I may have misspoke. Went back to find the link, and can't.

    Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

  34. #34
    DaleD's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Colorado Springs
    Member #
    14519
    Quote Originally Posted by The Man With The Plan View Post
    I may have misspoke. Went back to find the link, and can't.

    Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk
    They just increased the of number DMV locations that offer them is all.

  35. #35
    Quote Originally Posted by creepycrawler View Post
    Not exactly on topic but did ya see where Trump suggested sending all the people seeking asylum to sanctuary cities? Its never gonna happen but that funny right there. I like it.
    Trump supports Red Flag legislation.

  36. #36

  37. #37
    creepycrawler's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    The land of free bacon.
    Member #
    5806
    Quote Originally Posted by Colo.TJ View Post
    Yup, and its working......everywhere.

  38. #38
    tacotoy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Westminster
    Member #
    6222
    Images
    8
    So...... Can we start reporting the governor and all his friends for mental state issues? I take it from the legislation that they don't really have the capacity for this at this point anyways lol.
    hookers and blow!

  39. #39

  40. #40
    Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable.
    John F. Kennedy

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •