This Ping List is for all things pertaining to the 2nd Amendment.
FReepmail me if you want to be added to or deleted from the list.
More 2nd Amendment related articles on FR's Bang List.
Here’s another interesting prospect.
What are the details of why they came to his house?
-- Aleksandr I. Solzhenitsyn , The Gulag Archipelago 1918-1956
Obviously it was what was best for him. Society chose it.
I live in the People’s Republic of Maryland and am subject to these laws. If any “friend” or relative subjected me to one of these red flag raids, I would peacefully surrender all firearms in my home and all firearms that can through records be identified as belonging to me. I would then permanently cut that person out of my life as soon as I lawfully reacquired my own property, faking civility until the legal crisis passed. Would I divorce over such an attack? Despite an otherwise completely happy marriage, yes - immediately - if my wife took that step.
As for the loss of this man’s life, I find it sad. He made bad decisions when faced by the police, and his friends/relatives made even worse decisions.
Ping!
The red flag laws allow law enforcement to seek a court order to temporarily restrict people’s access to firearms when they show “red flags” that they are a danger to themselves or others.
In Maryland, the problem must be reported by either a relative, other household residents like roommates, or health care professionals. So, the cops didn’t just break in and shoot the guy. It had to be reported that he was a noted risk by those close to him or health professional. It went through the court procedures for determination, and an attempt was made to carry out the determination. These laws were put in place by the state legislators and were co-written by twenty-six representatives that were elected. The National Rifle Association has even claimed to favor some of these laws.
There is no law that is designed as a true fix for anything other than carrying out capital punishment. The article doesn’t identify what the grounds were for the court to remove his weapons or who it was filed by. But the cops can’t do it themselves unless it was connect with a crime. And this article was about the use of State senate bill 707, not crime.
What we do know by the article is he was in possession of a fire arm, put it down, then went back to it and the weapon in the struggle to get it away from him discharged and he was shot at that point. The cops coming in would, I’m sure, have rather been at the coffee stand with a donut than wrestling with a man armed with a handgun. So this wasn’t personal as far as we can see. It was the carrying out of laws placed into effect by the voters’ choice of people to make these decisions and the shooter became a danger to himself and the cops. If he had fought it in court rather than in his living room, it might have been different. He’d be alive.
Sometimes it is better to work with the law rather than physically resist. They weren’t there to arrest him, just relieve him of his first line opportunity to harm himself or others as determined by a court from family and/or medical pros.
Somewhere along the line, he proved himself dangerous. I wouldn’t want him to own or carry a gun either. It’s one thing to get the determination changed for the legal action. It’s another to cause your death by physically resisting. That in itself raises a red flag.
rwood
This isn’t the first time that the gestapo came to execute this unconstitutional order in MD.
“Since the new gun confiscation law went into effect on October 1st, police have carried out 19 such confiscation orders, which comes out to around one such seizure every other day.”
I’m glad he fought back. Unfortunately law enforcement won’t stop executing these unconstitutional dangerous orders until they themselves experience casualties.
LEOs take an oath to defend the constitution. They should know better and unless they wise up, they will reap the whirlwind.
You didn’t create the article. So why didn’t you post the whole thing?
*************
The man, whose name was not released, answered his door in the 100 block of Linwood Ave. at 5:17 a.m. with a gun in his hand, said Sgt. Jacklyn Davis, an Anne Arundel County Police spokeswoman.
He initially put it down, but then picked it up again, she said.
“A fight ensued over the gun,” Davis said.
During the struggle, the gun went off but did not strike anyone. At that point, the officers fatally shot the man, she said. No officers were injured, police said.
…
The man killed was Gary Willis, a longtime resident of the neighborhood, said Michele Willis, who was on the scene Monday morning and identified herself as his niece.
The new protective orders, which family members, police or others may seek to temporarily prohibit people’s access to firearms when they show red flags that they are a danger to themselves or others, went into effect Oct. 1.
OK, does that sound anything like Mr. Willis’ rights that are to be protected under the Fifth Amendment?
Ads by Revcontent
No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.
Nope, sounds nothing like it. There was no due process of law as these officers attempted to rob this man in broad daylight of his property. Mr. Willis was not indicted, convicted or otherwise accused of a crime, was he? Nope.
TRENDING: New York Democrats drafting bill to screen social media accounts, Internet search history of gun buyers
These brownshirts were merely following orders, unlawful orders I might add, just like the Nazis before them, and lest you think I’m too strong in my wording, how many of you reading this think they were in the right? How many of you reading this believe Mr. Willis should have just surrendered to the bandits? How many of you think he should have just been polite? I know the only polite thing would have been to close the door on them and come back when they had a warrant due to a crime being committed.
This is about to get a lot worse in places around the country that buy into these lawless red flag “laws.”
My friend and author David Risselada has written extensively on Red Flag “laws.” If you are unfamiliar with them and how they are stepping stones to full gun confiscation, I suggest you read these two pieces.
Ads by Revcontent
Take a Look at the New Cars of 2019
Kelley Blue Book®
Quantcast
***Visit our new FREE SPEECH community built for our readers. Click to Join The Deplorables Network Today!***
Article posted with permission from Guns In The News
Stories like these make me want to invest in a ballistic resistant door.
This Ping List is for all things pertaining to the 2nd Amendment.
FReepmail me if you want to be added to or deleted from the list.
More 2nd Amendment related articles on FR's Bang List.
Drove out of the Peoples Republic of Maryland on 09 October.. to retire in Georgia. Maryland is a liberal shxthole.
Over here.
Double Jeopardy.
Lacking information. Why a 5 a.m. knock on the door? Sounds more like swatting than protective step. And timing seems like intended to create escalating situation. While I think there are right time and place for these laws, they can be misused. Maybe they could have approached the guy as or after he left the house, de-escalate a confrontation? Police won’t be held accountable, but they should be.
Was there even a court data in which this person can defend himself.
Given all the g*ddamn massacres occurring via unhinged people with guns, I actually now support such things a GVRO’s or red flags, AS LONG AS the judge approving such an order HAS TO consider exculpatory evidence provided by the defendant, and the defendant GETS A COURT DATE to confront his accuser, assuring due process.
As far as I know, with Maryland’s red flag law, while an expert is needed to testify to the state of the defendant/respondent, thus making it less likely an angry neighbor or spouse or some evil individual can just get the person’s guns confiscated, a judge HAS TO consider evidence against the defendant, but DOES NOT HAVE TO consider exculpatory evidence, and I’m not sure that the defendant gets a court date in which he can show up. Thus, the law is still not a good one.
And, per the 5th Amendment, compensating people for the weapons seized would be good, also.
Maryland “Freak State” PING!
Nothing will happen to these cops or the accusers. Not one thing.
Nothing will happen to these cops or the accusers. Not one thing.
Probably not the whole story here....