Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
No expert testimony needed just a "preponderance of evidence"As more gun legislation is passed......more & more law enforcement are refusing to uphold it. Colorado wasn't the first state to have to deal with this.
The law that you ultra rightwingers are talking about is the Red Flag law. Let me attempt to dumb it down to you.
If a person is thought to be a danger to him/herself or others and has guns, a family member or a law enforcement can take it in front of a Judge to determine if that person should have those guns in their possession of not. The Judge cannot arbitrarily make a decision at that point. The Person in question has to be afforded the option of a Mental Health test by a Mental Health Professional to determine if a danger does, in fact exist. If none exists then the weapons stay. IF it does exist, the Judge can order the guns to be temporarily removed until the condition passes which will have another court date and mental health exam. Now the tricky part. The Guns can be voluntarily turned over to either the Authorities or even a Family Member or a friend and satisfy the court order.
In Delta County, in the Western Slop of Colorado, the New Sheriff was elected. One of his (about his only one) campaign promises was that he would not enforce that law if passed. He was elected. Now it's passed. He finds out that the State Police will enforce it, the AG will enforce it, the Governor will enforce it and any Sheriff that doesn't will end up with some Jail time fast, have a felony and a Felon cannot serve as a Sheriff. Guess what, he now says he will adhere to the law. You know, exactly what his oath of office says he should.
If you have trouble with this law, chances are, you are either misinformed or wouldn't pass the mental exam and have to temporarily surrender your firearms. Hopefully, there is at least one sane person in your family that could care for your firearms.
That is not an acceptable standard
ARe you saying that a licensed Shrinks testimony isn't an expert in the requirement?
Yes. There is no mention of the testimony of a mental health professional being required
Extreme Risk Protection Orders | Colorado General Assembly
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 in her or her custody or control or by possessing, purchasing, or receiving a firearm.
If a family or household member or a law enforcement officer establishes by clear and convincing evidence that a person poses a significant risk to self or others by having a firearm in his or her custody or control or by possessing, purchasing, or receiving a firearm, the court may issue a continuing ERPO. The ERPO would prohibit the respondent from possessing, controlling, purchasing, or receiving a firearm for 182 days.
I live in a City where by law, I have to wait 3-6 months and pay over $500 in fees to just keep a revolver in my own apartment.
I live in the worst case scenario.
I have to agree with Federal Judge Young. She more or less said, "If you don't like the laws, move". I wouldn't want to live there. But if it's home to you and you don't want another alternative, I guess you have to put up with the rules.
Rights of a US Citizen should not be dependent on your location.
So I guess if blacks in the South before the 60's didn't like Jim Crow they should have just moved?
There you go again. What's the matter, you afraid someone is going to take your icecream away from you or something? Or are you the one that took the other kids ice cream. Your fear tactics only works on small children and strumpets. We be adults in here.
You got called out on a crap statement, be man enough to take it.
You just looked like a childish person. You have nothing to say that I care to hear. Now, go play in your sandbox. And you can't have my ice cream either, bully.
He's a punk not a man.The point you are making is, no matter how bad it can be your twisted imagination will scream at the top of your lungs just how bad it can actually be even though it actually won't be. Damn, Sam, that scare tactic only works on small children and you strumpets. We be adults.
I live in a City where by law, I have to wait 3-6 months and pay over $500 in fees to just keep a revolver in my own apartment.
I live in the worst case scenario.
I have to agree with Federal Judge Young. She more or less said, "If you don't like the laws, move". I wouldn't want to live there. But if it's home to you and you don't want another alternative, I guess you have to put up with the rules.
Rights of a US Citizen should not be dependent on your location.
So I guess if blacks in the South before the 60's didn't like Jim Crow they should have just moved?
There you go again. What's the matter, you afraid someone is going to take your icecream away from you or something? Or are you the one that took the other kids ice cream. Your fear tactics only works on small children and strumpets. We be adults in here.
You got called out on a crap statement, be man enough to take it.
Hitler used that tact. Libs are just like him.No expert testimony needed just a "preponderance of evidence"As more gun legislation is passed......more & more law enforcement are refusing to uphold it. Colorado wasn't the first state to have to deal with this.
The law that you ultra rightwingers are talking about is the Red Flag law. Let me attempt to dumb it down to you.
If a person is thought to be a danger to him/herself or others and has guns, a family member or a law enforcement can take it in front of a Judge to determine if that person should have those guns in their possession of not. The Judge cannot arbitrarily make a decision at that point. The Person in question has to be afforded the option of a Mental Health test by a Mental Health Professional to determine if a danger does, in fact exist. If none exists then the weapons stay. IF it does exist, the Judge can order the guns to be temporarily removed until the condition passes which will have another court date and mental health exam. Now the tricky part. The Guns can be voluntarily turned over to either the Authorities or even a Family Member or a friend and satisfy the court order.
In Delta County, in the Western Slop of Colorado, the New Sheriff was elected. One of his (about his only one) campaign promises was that he would not enforce that law if passed. He was elected. Now it's passed. He finds out that the State Police will enforce it, the AG will enforce it, the Governor will enforce it and any Sheriff that doesn't will end up with some Jail time fast, have a felony and a Felon cannot serve as a Sheriff. Guess what, he now says he will adhere to the law. You know, exactly what his oath of office says he should.
If you have trouble with this law, chances are, you are either misinformed or wouldn't pass the mental exam and have to temporarily surrender your firearms. Hopefully, there is at least one sane person in your family that could care for your firearms.
That is not an acceptable standard
ARe you saying that a licensed Shrinks testimony isn't an expert in the requirement?
Yes. There is no mention of the testimony of a mental health professional being required
Extreme Risk Protection Orders | Colorado General Assembly
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 in her or her custody or control or by possessing, purchasing, or receiving a firearm.
If a family or household member or a law enforcement officer establishes by clear and convincing evidence that a person poses a significant risk to self or others by having a firearm in his or her custody or control or by possessing, purchasing, or receiving a firearm, the court may issue a continuing ERPO. The ERPO would prohibit the respondent from possessing, controlling, purchasing, or receiving a firearm for 182 days.
This sets a terrible precedent of due process to me. I believe this 'see something, say something' tactic will be taken advantage of by both private citizens and law enforcement. If one individual loses a civil liberty because due process is jeopardized because of the 'order', then it is not due process and is thus a failure. Shall not be infringed seems a pretty simple concept.
They are trying to protect people. These sheriffs should follow and do their jobs. If its not constitutional, that's a job for judges.
So you're just fine with them disregarding people's rights because they are trying to protect people?
So then an armed swat team can break down your door and search you r person and your home even if they don't have a warrant if they are trying to protect people?
Warrant signed, sealed and delivered by a court. That warrant you say that wouldn't exist would have to exist. Now, go peddle your hysteria someplace else. We aiI sun't buying it. The only thing we are covering is, is the persons due process protected. Not your silly "Let's ding the Dems" crap.
You didn't get my point as usual
Brain alluded to thing being done in the name of "safety" that clearly violate a person's rights.
Like the CO Red Flag bill.
Then I suggest you take Federal Judge Young's advice and don't move to Colorado. Of course, her advice applied to Boston but it can apply to anywhere else as well. You have options, use them. Chances are, we don't want you either.
Everything you said about the Red Flag law was WRONG
There is no mental health evaluation by a professional. You only get a court appointed lawyer after an EPRO is issued and your guns are confiscated and all it takes is the opinion of a family member or law enforcement officer.
This law will be challenged and it will not stand
Legal or not, still stupid libtard gun grabbing.So you're just fine with them disregarding people's rights because they are trying to protect people?
So then an armed swat team can break down your door and search you r person and your home even if they don't have a warrant if they are trying to protect people?
Warrant signed, sealed and delivered by a court. That warrant you say that wouldn't exist would have to exist. Now, go peddle your hysteria someplace else. We aiI sun't buying it. The only thing we are covering is, is the persons due process protected. Not your silly "Let's ding the Dems" crap.
You didn't get my point as usual
Brain alluded to thing being done in the name of "safety" that clearly violate a person's rights.
Like the CO Red Flag bill.
Then I suggest you take Federal Judge Young's advice and don't move to Colorado. Of course, her advice applied to Boston but it can apply to anywhere else as well. You have options, use them. Chances are, we don't want you either.
Everything you said about the Red Flag law was WRONG
There is no mental health evaluation by a professional. You only get a court appointed lawyer after an EPRO is issued and your guns are confiscated and all it takes is the opinion of a family member or law enforcement officer.
This law will be challenged and it will not stand
I just got off the phone with a high dollar Lawyer friend of mine. He charges at least 500 bucks an hour even when his underlings do the legwork. His court time is many times that. He said he would jump at the chance to take the case. And he said he would win doing it Pro Bono. The business that it would bring in would be fantastic. As I suspected, there is a problem with the Due Process. And being the first one to represent it in court would be a gold mine in the Press if handled properly. He doesn't take cases he will lose. From the looks of things, this will end up in federal court and be overturned before Jan 1, 2020. But all Colorado has to do is to put in the Due Process into it and it will fly. The State MUST put in the mandatory Mental Health review before they take the weapons. And then, the warrant can be issued and acted upon. Like the 10 shot mag versus the 15 shot mag, Colorado has until Jan 1, 2020 to make that change. Otherwise, the law stands as written.
Legal or not, still stupid libtard gun grabbing.Warrant signed, sealed and delivered by a court. That warrant you say that wouldn't exist would have to exist. Now, go peddle your hysteria someplace else. We aiI sun't buying it. The only thing we are covering is, is the persons due process protected. Not your silly "Let's ding the Dems" crap.
You didn't get my point as usual
Brain alluded to thing being done in the name of "safety" that clearly violate a person's rights.
Like the CO Red Flag bill.
Then I suggest you take Federal Judge Young's advice and don't move to Colorado. Of course, her advice applied to Boston but it can apply to anywhere else as well. You have options, use them. Chances are, we don't want you either.
Everything you said about the Red Flag law was WRONG
There is no mental health evaluation by a professional. You only get a court appointed lawyer after an EPRO is issued and your guns are confiscated and all it takes is the opinion of a family member or law enforcement officer.
This law will be challenged and it will not stand
I just got off the phone with a high dollar Lawyer friend of mine. He charges at least 500 bucks an hour even when his underlings do the legwork. His court time is many times that. He said he would jump at the chance to take the case. And he said he would win doing it Pro Bono. The business that it would bring in would be fantastic. As I suspected, there is a problem with the Due Process. And being the first one to represent it in court would be a gold mine in the Press if handled properly. He doesn't take cases he will lose. From the looks of things, this will end up in federal court and be overturned before Jan 1, 2020. But all Colorado has to do is to put in the Due Process into it and it will fly. The State MUST put in the mandatory Mental Health review before they take the weapons. And then, the warrant can be issued and acted upon. Like the 10 shot mag versus the 15 shot mag, Colorado has until Jan 1, 2020 to make that change. Otherwise, the law stands as written.
I don't support antifa, they are your crybaby antarcists.(probably not correct spelling)Legal or not, still stupid libtard gun grabbing.You didn't get my point as usual
Brain alluded to thing being done in the name of "safety" that clearly violate a person's rights.
Like the CO Red Flag bill.
Then I suggest you take Federal Judge Young's advice and don't move to Colorado. Of course, her advice applied to Boston but it can apply to anywhere else as well. You have options, use them. Chances are, we don't want you either.
Everything you said about the Red Flag law was WRONG
There is no mental health evaluation by a professional. You only get a court appointed lawyer after an EPRO is issued and your guns are confiscated and all it takes is the opinion of a family member or law enforcement officer.
This law will be challenged and it will not stand
I just got off the phone with a high dollar Lawyer friend of mine. He charges at least 500 bucks an hour even when his underlings do the legwork. His court time is many times that. He said he would jump at the chance to take the case. And he said he would win doing it Pro Bono. The business that it would bring in would be fantastic. As I suspected, there is a problem with the Due Process. And being the first one to represent it in court would be a gold mine in the Press if handled properly. He doesn't take cases he will lose. From the looks of things, this will end up in federal court and be overturned before Jan 1, 2020. But all Colorado has to do is to put in the Due Process into it and it will fly. The State MUST put in the mandatory Mental Health review before they take the weapons. And then, the warrant can be issued and acted upon. Like the 10 shot mag versus the 15 shot mag, Colorado has until Jan 1, 2020 to make that change. Otherwise, the law stands as written.
Then you support the crazies running around the streets brandishing weapons even when we know they are going to go off on a killing spree. Doesn't sound too Right Wing to me.
You said there would be a mental health evaluation by a professional before any guns were seized.You're an idiot.
But I get to keep my guns. If you lived here, you might not be so lucky. We would have to see.
Unless you find a judge with an agenda, then you get to wait months for any appeals process to go forward.
If you find a judge with an agenda, you could get life for just crossing the street. You really don't have a point here. Yes, hire Guliani where he can get your Life in Prison for a Parking Ticket.
You just ignore the point I am making because you are a pansy prog dick sucking quisling.
The point you are making is, no matter how bad it can be your twisted imagination will scream at the top of your lungs just how bad it can actually be even though it actually won't be. Damn, Sam, that scare tactic only works on small children and you strumpets. We be adults.
I was right... you ARE ten years old... or, more likely a ten-year-old mind trapped in a fifty-year-old body....Nope. Just well-acquainted with leftist totalitarianism. And you don't get to do that in America. We don't want your fascism. Tyrants all throughout history have disarmed their subjects. The military will not side with you. They will turn against you. That means you'll have to un-ass the couch and (try) to disarm people yourself. View attachment 256082
You said there would be a mental health evaluation by a professional before any guns were seized.But I get to keep my guns. If you lived here, you might not be so lucky. We would have to see.
Unless you find a judge with an agenda, then you get to wait months for any appeals process to go forward.
If you find a judge with an agenda, you could get life for just crossing the street. You really don't have a point here. Yes, hire Guliani where he can get your Life in Prison for a Parking Ticket.
You just ignore the point I am making because you are a pansy prog dick sucking quisling.
The point you are making is, no matter how bad it can be your twisted imagination will scream at the top of your lungs just how bad it can actually be even though it actually won't be. Damn, Sam, that scare tactic only works on small children and you strumpets. We be adults.
That is simply not correct.
Own your mistake.
none of that mean s jackSo you're just fine with them disregarding people's rights because they are trying to protect people?
So then an armed swat team can break down your door and search you r person and your home even if they don't have a warrant if they are trying to protect people?
Warrant signed, sealed and delivered by a court. That warrant you say that wouldn't exist would have to exist. Now, go peddle your hysteria someplace else. We aiI sun't buying it. The only thing we are covering is, is the persons due process protected. Not your silly "Let's ding the Dems" crap.
You didn't get my point as usual
Brain alluded to thing being done in the name of "safety" that clearly violate a person's rights.
Like the CO Red Flag bill.
Then I suggest you take Federal Judge Young's advice and don't move to Colorado. Of course, her advice applied to Boston but it can apply to anywhere else as well. You have options, use them. Chances are, we don't want you either.
Everything you said about the Red Flag law was WRONG
There is no mental health evaluation by a professional. You only get a court appointed lawyer after an EPRO is issued and your guns are confiscated and all it takes is the opinion of a family member or law enforcement officer.
This law will be challenged and it will not stand
I just got off the phone with a high dollar Lawyer friend of mine. He charges at least 500 bucks an hour even when his underlings do the legwork. His court time is many times that. He said he would jump at the chance to take the case. And he said he would win doing it Pro Bono. The business that it would bring in would be fantastic. As I suspected, there is a problem with the Due Process. And being the first one to represent it in court would be a gold mine in the Press if handled properly. He doesn't take cases he will lose. From the looks of things, this will end up in federal court and be overturned before Jan 1, 2020. But all Colorado has to do is to put in the Due Process into it and it will fly. The State MUST put in the mandatory Mental Health review before they take the weapons. And then, the warrant can be issued and acted upon. Like the 10 shot mag versus the 15 shot mag, Colorado has until Jan 1, 2020 to make that change. Otherwise, the law stands as written.
you do not get a defense attorney before the order is givenYou said there would be a mental health evaluation by a professional before any guns were seized.Unless you find a judge with an agenda, then you get to wait months for any appeals process to go forward.
If you find a judge with an agenda, you could get life for just crossing the street. You really don't have a point here. Yes, hire Guliani where he can get your Life in Prison for a Parking Ticket.
You just ignore the point I am making because you are a pansy prog dick sucking quisling.
The point you are making is, no matter how bad it can be your twisted imagination will scream at the top of your lungs just how bad it can actually be even though it actually won't be. Damn, Sam, that scare tactic only works on small children and you strumpets. We be adults.
That is simply not correct.
Own your mistake.
If the defense lawyer is any good, there will be. Part of his job (first year law student learns this) is to ensure that the defendants due process is preserved. I can't see any other way for this to go down. Even a Public Defender knows this right out of Law School. You can zig and squirm all you want to but that's just the way it has to be. It says it right in the 14th amendment. I guess you still want to pick and choose what parts of the Constitution of the United States you pay attention to. I happen to pay attention to all of it as I should. You are far from a patriot doing it any other way.
none of that mean s jackWarrant signed, sealed and delivered by a court. That warrant you say that wouldn't exist would have to exist. Now, go peddle your hysteria someplace else. We aiI sun't buying it. The only thing we are covering is, is the persons due process protected. Not your silly "Let's ding the Dems" crap.
You didn't get my point as usual
Brain alluded to thing being done in the name of "safety" that clearly violate a person's rights.
Like the CO Red Flag bill.
Then I suggest you take Federal Judge Young's advice and don't move to Colorado. Of course, her advice applied to Boston but it can apply to anywhere else as well. You have options, use them. Chances are, we don't want you either.
Everything you said about the Red Flag law was WRONG
There is no mental health evaluation by a professional. You only get a court appointed lawyer after an EPRO is issued and your guns are confiscated and all it takes is the opinion of a family member or law enforcement officer.
This law will be challenged and it will not stand
I just got off the phone with a high dollar Lawyer friend of mine. He charges at least 500 bucks an hour even when his underlings do the legwork. His court time is many times that. He said he would jump at the chance to take the case. And he said he would win doing it Pro Bono. The business that it would bring in would be fantastic. As I suspected, there is a problem with the Due Process. And being the first one to represent it in court would be a gold mine in the Press if handled properly. He doesn't take cases he will lose. From the looks of things, this will end up in federal court and be overturned before Jan 1, 2020. But all Colorado has to do is to put in the Due Process into it and it will fly. The State MUST put in the mandatory Mental Health review before they take the weapons. And then, the warrant can be issued and acted upon. Like the 10 shot mag versus the 15 shot mag, Colorado has until Jan 1, 2020 to make that change. Otherwise, the law stands as written.
Because the order can be issued the very same day the petition is filed so you wouldn't have time to find a lawyer.
you are wrong about every aspect of this law and i posted the proof
All you have are stupid and unbelievable anecdotes
Nope. Just like sanctuary illegal invader cities/counties these sheriffs are actually becoming sanctuary cities/counties for a constitutional right.Sad, Sheriff’s refusing to do their jobs. They don’t make laws, they enforce them.Controversial Colorado gun bill becomes law, 11 sheriffs willing to choose jail over enforcement - CNN
Good for those Sheriff's! Its unconstitutional.
Unfortunately for your delusions Hitler EXPANDED gun laws for GERMANS. Google is your friend.Raise your hand if you think gun control is a good idea.Safety first, Constitutionality second... a practical necessity... it's the way the world works....This law is a side step around due process. And why should a person have to incur the expense of a mental health examination in order to prove anything? If the court wants to order a mental health evaluation then the court should foot the bill to prove that the state has the authority to suspend a citizen's rights. THAT is due process
At the start of the Civil War, Lincoln suspended habeus corpus in the interests of public safety.
The President decided that the threat outweighed the Constitutional Right being set aside temporarily.
At the start of WWII, Roosevelt incarcerated scores of thousands of Japanese-Americans in the interests of public safety.
The President decided that the threat outweighed the Constitutional Right being set aside temporarily.
In Colorado, the State temporarily impounds firearms of suspected mental illness victims in the interests of public safety.
The State Legislature decided that the threat outweighed the Constitutional Right being set aside temporarily.
When constitutionality and safety are dramatically juxtaposed, safety almost always wins.
Peoples' lives are more important than allowing a mentally unbalanced individual to continue to possess firearms.
Will it be abused from time to time and will the law 'get it wrong' from time to time? Yep.
But for every one it gets wrong, it will get a hundred right, and a lot of folks will live, who might not have otherwise.
And that is the single most important thing, not the feelings of knuckle-dragging NRA bumper-sticker echo-chambers.
This legislation merely accelerates due process on an emergency basis, vetted by a law-judge, based upon testimony.
------------
I agree, however, that the State should foot the bill for subsequent mental health examinations to affirm or dismiss the impound.
View attachment 256056
This is 15th state to pass this crap. Already a man in Maryland was murdered when they came to steal his weapons.No other states even dream of doing something so blatently unconstitutional.Controversial Colorado gun bill becomes law, 11 sheriffs willing to choose jail over enforcement - CNN
Good for those Sheriff's! Its unconstitutional.
Man, you sure hate it when someone points out you're a pussy.I was right... you ARE ten years old... or, more likely a ten-year-old mind trapped in a fifty-year-old body....Nope. Just well-acquainted with leftist totalitarianism. And you don't get to do that in America. We don't want your fascism. Tyrants all throughout history have disarmed their subjects. The military will not side with you. They will turn against you. That means you'll have to un-ass the couch and (try) to disarm people yourself. View attachment 256082
Nobody is talking about taking weapons away from anyone who is mentally stable, Tinkerbelle.
Only people of questionable mental health, demonstrating a risk to others, based upon testimony, and vetted by a law judge.
And that only representing (a) common sense and (b) a temporary impounding, not a permanent seizure.
Now...
Take your brain-dead NRA bumper-sticker echo-chamber ten-year-old mind, and go dry-hump somebody else's leg for a while, Princess.
You're not only a simpleton, but you're a boring, dull, unimaginative simpleton...
Considering you're okay with absence of due process and taking away people's 2nd Amendment rights, you have no business questioning anyone else's patriotism.You said there would be a mental health evaluation by a professional before any guns were seized.Unless you find a judge with an agenda, then you get to wait months for any appeals process to go forward.
If you find a judge with an agenda, you could get life for just crossing the street. You really don't have a point here. Yes, hire Guliani where he can get your Life in Prison for a Parking Ticket.
You just ignore the point I am making because you are a pansy prog dick sucking quisling.
The point you are making is, no matter how bad it can be your twisted imagination will scream at the top of your lungs just how bad it can actually be even though it actually won't be. Damn, Sam, that scare tactic only works on small children and you strumpets. We be adults.
That is simply not correct.
Own your mistake.
If the defense lawyer is any good, there will be. Part of his job (first year law student learns this) is to ensure that the defendants due process is preserved. I can't see any other way for this to go down. Even a Public Defender knows this right out of Law School. You can zig and squirm all you want to but that's just the way it has to be. It says it right in the 14th amendment. I guess you still want to pick and choose what parts of the Constitution of the United States you pay attention to. I happen to pay attention to all of it as I should. You are far from a patriot doing it any other way.
Google is pretty cool, isn't it?Nope. Just like sanctuary illegal invader cities/counties these sheriffs are actually becoming sanctuary cities/counties for a constitutional right.Sad, Sheriff’s refusing to do their jobs. They don’t make laws, they enforce them.Controversial Colorado gun bill becomes law, 11 sheriffs willing to choose jail over enforcement - CNN
Good for those Sheriff's! Its unconstitutional.
Unfortunately for your delusions Hitler EXPANDED gun laws for GERMANS. Google is your friend.Raise your hand if you think gun control is a good idea.Safety first, Constitutionality second... a practical necessity... it's the way the world works....This law is a side step around due process. And why should a person have to incur the expense of a mental health examination in order to prove anything? If the court wants to order a mental health evaluation then the court should foot the bill to prove that the state has the authority to suspend a citizen's rights. THAT is due process
At the start of the Civil War, Lincoln suspended habeus corpus in the interests of public safety.
The President decided that the threat outweighed the Constitutional Right being set aside temporarily.
At the start of WWII, Roosevelt incarcerated scores of thousands of Japanese-Americans in the interests of public safety.
The President decided that the threat outweighed the Constitutional Right being set aside temporarily.
In Colorado, the State temporarily impounds firearms of suspected mental illness victims in the interests of public safety.
The State Legislature decided that the threat outweighed the Constitutional Right being set aside temporarily.
When constitutionality and safety are dramatically juxtaposed, safety almost always wins.
Peoples' lives are more important than allowing a mentally unbalanced individual to continue to possess firearms.
Will it be abused from time to time and will the law 'get it wrong' from time to time? Yep.
But for every one it gets wrong, it will get a hundred right, and a lot of folks will live, who might not have otherwise.
And that is the single most important thing, not the feelings of knuckle-dragging NRA bumper-sticker echo-chambers.
This legislation merely accelerates due process on an emergency basis, vetted by a law-judge, based upon testimony.
------------
I agree, however, that the State should foot the bill for subsequent mental health examinations to affirm or dismiss the impound.
View attachment 256056
You tell 'em, Princess....Man, you sure hate it when someone points out you're a pussy...
It doesn't need to. Safety first, administrative follow-up second....The law makes no provision for a mental health evaluation by a professional right away...
Thank you, Miss NRA Bumper-Sticker Echo Chamber....This law WILL be abused by irrational gun-haters to disarm legal gun owners...
Enjoy the ride, darlin', 'cause a New Reality is now upon you in Colorado....Your acknowledgement of this reality is neither required nor expected. So hush, fascist.
