Officers fatally shoot armed man while serving protective order to remove guns

Title shortened due to length.

Link

Two Anne Arundel County police officers serving one of Maryland’s new “red flag” protective orders to remove guns from a house killed a Ferndale man after he refused to give up his gun and a struggle ensued early Monday morning, police said.

MD HB 1302

This is troubling. This "red flag" law is ripe for abuse. From reading the text of the law, the petitioner can make up whatever claim they want without fear of being charged with anything more than a misdemeanor if they falsely do so.

The accused would have police sent to their house on the basis of an accusation and a judge's opinion. They would not have a chance to defend themselves in a court of law beforehand. They would then have their guns removed forcefully. No due process involved. In the "hearing" after the fact, the accused does not have the presumption of innocence, but in fact has to prove their innocence.

Even if they manage to get their guns back, the accused still could be responsible to pay "reasonable" storage fees to retrieve their guns.

I don't know the rules of Criminal Procedure for MD, but I see no mention of an appeal or jury trial. How does this law protect the accused's due process rights in any way?

The writers of this law have blood on their hands. They will continue to have blood on their hands as long as it is in effect. This law will get formerly law-abiding gun owners hurt and killed.

What's to stop an angry family member or jilted romantic partner from using this law as a weapon? I can foresee people using this as the new "Swatting", hoping to see something bad happen to the accused.

I am all for protecting potential victims, but kangaroo courts and star chambers are not the way. If you're going to take away someone's rights, you need to follow due process.

Just another way to disarm the populace. Brought to you by the left. Stalin, Mao, Hitler, Obama, ect,ect.....

Dang.....it's a fallen world.....coming to the end of the EPOCH

Salute to the victim, the Perp will stand judgement......Maryland

originally posted by: WUNK22
Just another way to disarm the populace. Brought to you by the left. Stalin, Mao, Hitler, Obama, ect,ect.....

I was going to post something succinct but... just what you said.

And here we go....

A-why was the cop overpowered by a 60 year old man. B- why wasnt the second cop helping with the struggle. this is more evidence that the world needs better cops rather than it needs gun control

a reply to: cynicalheathen

Let's not pretend like this hasn't been in the making for years. People need to realize that our rights are inalienable. No judge, senator, president, king, or emperor can take that away. Ever. Where's the outrage? This is craziness.

a reply to: Woodcarver

This isn't the mudpit, show some decorum.

a reply to: fightzone58

This.

a reply to: cynicalheathen

The next time they do this, expect police casualties.

On the surface, this is reprehensible.

This law will be challenged, perhaps by the man's family whilst seeking compensation from the State.

Ramp it up until the We The People have had enough.

Protests are in order, take your 2A with you. Camp outside the State Legislature. Watch them cave.

The Police should simply refuse to undertake these tasks, but they wont.

P

the police, whoever issued the order and the instigator of the order need to be charged with home invasion and murder (remember you just have to be a part of a crime in order to be charged with murder when a crime is committed, you don't even have to be there when the death occurs). if there is enough cause to think someone should not own a gun, because they might be a danger to themselves or others. then forget about their guns and bring them in and have them properly investigated/mental health checked, court hearing etc. seriously if they represent such a danger, they are a danger whether they have guns or not. if the worry is criminal actions, then arrest and properly charge. if mental health issues bad enough to cause the taking away of weapons they need to be institutionalized. one does not need a gun to kill or harm themselves or others. are they also taking away their knives, cars and everything else that can be used? if not this is a gun grab plain and simple.

QUOTE REMOVED BY STAFF

Might be stupid but a man still died when they tried to enforce it.......

a reply to: cynicalheathen

It is the equivalent of "SWAT'ing" someone.


Police coming in the middle of the night to take your life.

originally posted by: generik
are they also taking away their knives, cars and everything else that can be used? if not this is a gun grab plain and simple.

A buddy of mine was telling me about this the day it happened. At that time he said this 'law' has been used over 200 times and that there have been multiple 'victims'. Funny how that number is not making the news.

The word is going out: Gun owners can't trust cops anymore at all.

a reply to: cynicalheathen


Well if you can't take their guns, just kill them. The Family should take this to the U.S. Supreme Court.

originally posted by: highvein
a reply to: cynicalheathen


Well if you can't take their guns, just kill them. The Family should take this to the U.S. Supreme Court.

One of the family members is why this happened. They called in a complaint..... And the law is under no compulsion to tell the person they are taking the weapons from. Who or WHY they are doing so......

It's fking criminal and more people are going to go down fighting because of this law.....

States rights should always come first. Except when they are a clear violation of the constitution

Sounds like a weak, gutless law invented by weak, gutless Libs so that other weak, gutless Libs can falsely accuse law abiding citizens of anything they want and have their evil, bad guns taken away.

I’m probably way off the mark but that’s what it looks like on the surface.

“He’s a meany and he has guns in his house. Go and ruin his day for me because I’m so weak and gutless that my feelings hurt”.

This is exactly why people worried for the law. See my thread on it in 2014 - www.abovetopsecret.com... Similar bills are gaining more traction around the country too as since then they have.

a reply to: cynicalheathen

It gets worse. There's a a later article on the shooting.

Police said Willis answered the door at 5:17 a.m. with a gun in his hand and initially put it down next to the door as he first spoke with the officers.

Police said he “became irate” when officers tried to serve him with the emergency risk protective order and picked it up again.

As he struggled with the officers over the gun, it went off but didn’t strike anyone. One of the two officers then fatally shot Willis with his department-issued firearm, a police spokeswoman said.

So, let me get this straight... a 61-year old man, possibly retired, gets woken up in the early morning hours by a knock on his door. He opens the door with a gun in his hand for protection, sees it's the cops, and puts the gun down. Then the cops try to take his gun, he resists, the cops prefer to use force rather than words, and he is shot and killed.

Apparently his crime was using reasonable caution to defend himself.

And...

Chief Timothy Altomare said the fatal shooting in Ferndale was a sign that the law, which went into effect Oct. 1, is needed.

... the Police Chief seems to think that using reasonable self-defense is a good reason to disarm people!

There is a term I rarely use, and certainly do not use lightly... it's a scary term to me, because the person it references was an animal, a malicious, unstable, genocidal maniac. But in this case... it appears to sadly be the most appropriate term: How Hitler-esgue of him.

I have in the past been personally somewhat cautiously hopeful about these "red-flag" laws, but this changes everything for me. I can see the need to take firearms from those who are mentally unstable. I went through watching my mother's second husband, an avid hunter, descend into dementia. I saw the bullet hole in his truck mirror where he claimed he was shooting at a turtle (which according to the trajectory appears to have been in mid-flight). His children removed his guns, as well as some of my father's old guns, from their house. But they didn't do it without protest; the old man fought tooth and nail to try and keep them. But it was necessary to protect him, my mother, and my family.

But, if taking guns from those who need to have them taken is going to result in the lost lives of those accused... no. No way. No way in HELL! I will now oppose any and all red flag laws. The cries of "no one is coming for your gunz" are hollow and false.

These murderers (not police; murderers), including anyone in that police department who was in any way involved, need to be brought up on charges, and if convicted, sentenced to twice the maximum penalty. They were servants of the public and used their position of authority to commit cold-blooded murder out of laziness and incompetence.

May God have mercy on this nation...

TheRedneck

I'm pretty sure this was the prime concern when the first breaths of this law were announced.

I imagine this will go all the way to the supreme court and some big charges and bills are to follow.

a reply to: ManBehindTheMask


What was the scenario that lead to the Family member calling?

Michele Willis said she had grown up in the house and had been there Sunday night to move out her son, who had been helping to care for her grandmother. Her uncle, Gary Willis, lived in an apartment above the garage; she said other family members, including her grandmother, another uncle, two aunts and Gary Willis’ girlfriend were also at the home Sunday night. She said her uncle “likes to speak his mind,” but she described him as harmless. “I’m just dumbfounded right now,” she said. “My uncle wouldn’t hurt anybody.”

Some busybody aunt called the cops and the man dies.