Washington Redmond man has EPO and guns taken

[gunnoob75]

No crime committed.

Sounds like the right hill to die on; even if you don't like the idiot.

 

[Xaevian]

They continually refer to this person as "suspect". He isn't a suspect at all, has committed no crime, is not under arrest, and isn't being charged. His postings should be protected by the 1st amendment. Child rapists have more protection under the law than ERPO victims do. Yeah, this guy could be scum of the earth, but still has rights. This is what America has become...

 

[awshoot]

Could just be crappy writing, but they make it sound like you have guns listed on your CPL and he did something wrong by having more than listed. That's not how CPLs work on WA.

Anyone notice how many errors or misleading statements are in news reports nowdays?

I was about to point out the same thing. Makes me wonder what other facts are wrong, bloated, or misleading.

I also do feel sorry for him in the sense I feel sorry for me. I will never post a picture online in which I and a firearm appear. These ERPOs are chilling to speech and violate the 5A.

 

[tionico]

I have to assume there is more to this story that was not written but as a current LEO, this really disturbs me...

it should really disturb all of us. You are correct. no warrant, due process, no opportunity to examine your accuser, property taken BEFORE guilt is etablished, flimsy excuses to justify" the taking.. yes, they DO want us disarmed, all of us, all the time.

I am waiting for the time they pull this on the wrong guy to mess with. The one with enough clout and lawyerbux to come back at them. ALL these ERPO/RFL disasters are so unconstitutional its scary. It won't be too long before a serious and solid Costitutional based lawsuit will b eseeking a court injunction permanentlu enjoining the use of these illegal and unconstitutional laws..

I suppose before much longer someone will show up at a Halloween party dressed as Zorro, complete with a shiney toy revolver, complete with orange thingamabob poking out of the business end of the barrel, mask in place.... they'll roll the coppers and waylay the poor schlump, haul HIM in, then go tear apart his house to find his real guns and take them all.

 

[SUPER X]

The accuser should need to have some type of proof .And false accusers should be jailed and fined. They would be punished if they made other false police reports,Has anyone ever had a woman leave them and then accidentally run into them monthes later while your in the company of a younger more attractive woman ? . In most cases This will be a problem. And the once lucky chap must pay dearly. I can see the red flag law being used on the once lucky guy if it hasnt already . If someone is truly out of control I can see it being justified but based on hear say and not being able to confront the accuser is not a just law in any form.

 

[CV-66]

All dust in the wind at this point. What are we going to do about it.

Taco Lean; you should be careful about your avatar. Dwayne Johnson might be offended having your ar pointing at "the rocks". I proactively sought permission from the colonel before I used my chicken holding a pistol (sanders said it was OK). Oh and Ranger Arms should heed warning about threatening the forrest with that flame thrower avatar. We don't need any more CO in the atmosphere. Maybe we should all start eating babies?

 

[No_Regerts]

So I'm actually 5 months into my year long ERPO here in Oregon. Basically it's preponderance of the evidence rather than innocent until proven guilty (I am not convicted of the accompanying crime for which I was arrested, I was served ERPO papers when they released me which require you to surrender your guns to the Sherriff's office within 24 hours and give you a court day within 10 days; so I was let out of jail but had to immediately give my guns to LE). I didn't fight it, I feel like most people probably DO NOT fight it either and those that do probably lose 99% of the time; remember the year is the max UNTIL they bring it back up to extend it and decide again; this could be for LIFE! You're best served acting like a rational, calm and responsible individual who says something like, "I understand the concerns although I feel them to be unwarranted; I'll voluntarily surrender my firearms instead of fighting it to put so-and-so at ease as I wouldn't want to cause them any undue worry or stress" it'll make it easier to get them back when the ERPO has expired rather than getting it renewed/extended.

Essentially they (whoever files against you, doesn't even have to be the police it could be your spouse/parent/sibling/concerned neighbor) tell the judge whatever they like: "He's erratic/irrational/emotional and there was a gun in his vehicle (legal one) when we arrested him for an unrelated traffic offense we were hoping he'd be a felon or on probation or something right after this arrest and now we're worried he might shoot an officer or neighbor, friend, etc. he's just crazy - believe me."

Then you say, "Ummmm, I'm not actually crazy I've never shot anyone before don't plan on it now".

Judge says, well 4 cops think you're a crazy guy with a gun and all you can say is you aren't? (you don't even get to face your accuser, it's just a filed motion the judge has read they don't have to be present to answer any follow-ups from the judge or you challenging their honesty or recollection of events so you can't argue their lies/version of the truth) I'm going to play it safe and they'll be holding your gun for the full 12 months, at the end if they wish to extend it (it's a real thing, you might NEVER get your gun rights back without any conviction) I'll hear from them again and make my decision at that time; you not having guns for a year isn't gonna hurt anyone but you having guns right now does seem to cause some worries in the community so we better play it safe.

That's literally it, I don't think the best lawyer in the world could win one of these, there is no burden of proof and it's ALWAYS more safe to take the guns for 3 months to a year than to hand them back (remember the police already have them at this point) when a police officer has taken the time to file paperwork saying they're concerned about it. There's little to no possible blowback from taking someone's guns for a few months and a LOT for ignoring law enforcement saying there's a crazy gun nut that needs stopped. In addition a LE is likely to have somewhat of a relationship with a prosecutor or even a judge that lends his word even more weight (beyond what the badge and uniform do) and you being taken to court for, literally, being a crazy gun nut, drops your weight a few notches below the average.

Unfortunately I too am an idiot, and I'm not likeable so I'm not the guy to make a stand either BUT this law does good; some people should have to give up their guns for a few months, but I think it needs some modifications. Perhaps the way it is now for a 30 or 90 day surrender but then require a professional impartial third party like a psychiatrist to make the ruling. As it is now basically the police get to tell the judge every year to keep your guns away and you've lost your gun rights for life; there's a ton of room for abuse the way the law is written and carried out.

My point: I would've been shocked if more than 5% of people didn't have their guns taken for the full allowable year (it's a full year before it needs to be re-filed, then they can simply extend it so the year isn't even the max).

Wow, thanks for sharing.

 

[Sprintdude]

Several guns removed from Redmond man after 'concerning Twitter posts' for 'Joker' movie

REDMOND, Wash. -- A 23-year-old Redmond man who police say made "concerning Twitter posts posing with weapons and referencing the Joker movie" has had several guns -- including two assault weapons -- removed from his home as part of an "Extreme Protection Order," Redmond police said...

komonews.com

Got to love America now

The Redmond police are monitoring Twitter now? Looks like the the Police are becoming the Thought Police.

 

[Massolo]

This is why I never became a Twit and Twittered. Social media will be our undoing if you are not a politically correct sheeple.

 

[DB is Here]

The Redmond police are monitoring Twitter now? Looks like the the Police are becoming the Thought Police.

According to the article, KCSO found this guys post from another investigation and forwarded it to Redmond PD.

 

[Sprintdude]

According to the article, KCSO found this guys post from another investigation and forwarded it to Redmond PD.

And yet no crime was comitted. The guy sounded like a nut from the article (was that article accurate?) but had not committed a crime. Now the governemnt has taken his guns for a year? This is proactive not reactive stuff.

 

[ORhutner]

Regardless of the legality, do stupid things, win stupid prizes.

 

[Dunes190203]

The infection we see focused right now on 2A and POTUS resonates throughout society. Those humans are everywhere and they set up the system to take down any citizen for any reason. We've all seen how corrupt the justice system has become. The system itself is fine; it works. The infection of corruption is human. They're like a virus and they're spreading and gaining strength. When peaceful, conscientious life long law abiding citizens start looking at the stuff and finding all kinds of wrong there, we're in trouble. We're in trouble and are rapidly becoming an ununited group of states and humans. That internal strife leaves us vulnerable to outside attacks. They're watching and, yeah, they're in our government.

 

[Xaevian]

ERPOs are as much an attack on the 1st amendment as they are the 2nd. The Supreme court has ruled several times over the last century, the latest in 2017 with an unanimous decision, that what this person posted is protected speech. So called "hate speech" does not have an exemption from 1st amendment protection and I find it a stretch to call what we know of this specific incident "overwhelming proof of imminent harm", which is the current jurisprudence for restricting free speech. ERPOs as they currently stand in WA and OR (probably elsewhere) are unconstitutional. The Supreme court has said that any time a constitutionally protected right is in danger, extra scrutiny is warranted. Preponderance of evidence is not "extra scrutiny". ERPOs are just an end-around of SCOTUS, just like "hate speech" laws are. The liberals want their no-fly, no-buy policy, SCOTUS be damned.

 

[Spad]

Look at what the Democrats, Pelosi & Pencil Head from California are doing to the President right now. Does this look familiar, no crime but if you refuse to incriminate yourself, obstruction. Same game with this ERPOS stuff. Oregon and Washington are jumping on the band wagon. Pray for the country.

 

[Ura-Ki]

So I'm actually 5 months into my year long ERPO here in Oregon. Basically it's preponderance of the evidence rather than innocent until proven guilty (I am not convicted of the accompanying crime for which I was arrested, I was served ERPO papers when they released me which require you to surrender your guns to the Sherriff's office within 24 hours and give you a court day within 10 days; so I was let out of jail but had to immediately give my guns to LE). I didn't fight it, I feel like most people probably DO NOT fight it either and those that do probably lose 99% of the time; remember the year is the max UNTIL they bring it back up to extend it and decide again; this could be for LIFE! You're best served acting like a rational, calm and responsible individual who says something like, "I understand the concerns although I feel them to be unwarranted; I'll voluntarily surrender my firearms instead of fighting it to put so-and-so at ease as I wouldn't want to cause them any undue worry or stress" it'll make it easier to get them back when the ERPO has expired rather than getting it renewed/extended.

Essentially they (whoever files against you, doesn't even have to be the police it could be your spouse/parent/sibling/concerned neighbor) tell the judge whatever they like: "He's erratic/irrational/emotional and there was a gun in his vehicle (legal one) when we arrested him for an unrelated traffic offense we were hoping he'd be a felon or on probation or something right after this arrest and now we're worried he might shoot an officer or neighbor, friend, etc. he's just crazy - believe me."

Then you say, "Ummmm, I'm not actually crazy I've never shot anyone before don't plan on it now".

Judge says, well 4 cops think you're a crazy guy with a gun and all you can say is you aren't? (you don't even get to face your accuser, it's just a filed motion the judge has read they don't have to be present to answer any follow-ups from the judge or you challenging their honesty or recollection of events so you can't argue their lies/version of the truth) I'm going to play it safe and they'll be holding your gun for the full 12 months, at the end if they wish to extend it (it's a real thing, you might NEVER get your gun rights back without any conviction) I'll hear from them again and make my decision at that time; you not having guns for a year isn't gonna hurt anyone but you having guns right now does seem to cause some worries in the community so we better play it safe.

That's literally it, I don't think the best lawyer in the world could win one of these, there is no burden of proof and it's ALWAYS more safe to take the guns for 3 months to a year than to hand them back (remember the police already have them at this point) when a police officer has taken the time to file paperwork saying they're concerned about it. There's little to no possible blowback from taking someone's guns for a few months and a LOT for ignoring law enforcement saying there's a crazy gun nut that needs stopped. In addition a LE is likely to have somewhat of a relationship with a prosecutor or even a judge that lends his word even more weight (beyond what the badge and uniform do) and you being taken to court for, literally, being a crazy gun nut, drops your weight a few notches below the average.

Unfortunately I too am an idiot, and I'm not likeable so I'm not the guy to make a stand either BUT this law does good; some people should have to give up their guns for a few months, but I think it needs some modifications. Perhaps the way it is now for a 30 or 90 day surrender but then require a professional impartial third party like a psychiatrist to make the ruling. As it is now basically the police get to tell the judge every year to keep your guns away and you've lost your gun rights for life; there's a ton of room for abuse the way the law is written and carried out.

My point: I would've been shocked if more than 5% of people didn't have their guns taken for the full allowable year (it's a full year before it needs to be re-filed, then they can simply extend it so the year isn't even the max).

Am I correct in assuming this is Yamhill county?
Can you share the finer points of WHAT they are "holding" against you?
I would assume they at least told you what the reasoning you got served for?
DO YOU HAVE AN ATTORNEY?

 

[Ratfink]

We have allowed lib-tards to circumvent our constitutional rights in the name of votes/voters. Knee-jerk reactions to mass-shootings and work place /domestic violence has become the Rosetta stone of what truly lies beneath. If they can take away all NRA funding of the right'-wing politicians, then they stand a better chance of winning in the polls. When they win and crush our constitutional rights as to "dangerous" for the "good of the people", then we have no weapons in which to rebel. We murder thousands of unborn children daily without batting an eye under the guise of "women's health". We're the "frog in the pot" right now...How's the water?

 

[bbbass]

We have allowed lib-tards to circumvent our constitutional rights in the name of votes/voters. Knee-jerk reactions to mass-shootings and work place /domestic violence has become the Rosetta stone of what truly lies beneath. If they can take away all NRA funding of the right'-wing politicians, then they stand a better chance of winning in the polls. When they win and crush our constitutional rights as to "dangerous" for the "good of the people", then we have no weapons in which to rebel. We murder thousands of unborn children daily without batting an eye under the guise of "women's health". We're the "frog in the pot" right now...How's the water?

Come on in... the water's fine. I keep wondering how to turn on the jets and bubbles tho...

 

[Geardo]

ERPOs are as much an attack on the 1st amendment as they are the 2nd. The Supreme court has ruled several times over the last century, the latest in 2017 with an unanimous decision, that what this person posted is protected speech. So called "hate speech" does not have an exemption from 1st amendment protection and I find it a stretch to call what we know of this specific incident "overwhelming proof of imminent harm", which is the current jurisprudence for restricting free speech. ERPOs as they currently stand in WA and OR (probably elsewhere) are unconstitutional. The Supreme court has said that any time a constitutionally protected right is in danger, extra scrutiny is warranted. Preponderance of evidence is not "extra scrutiny". ERPOs are just an end-around of SCOTUS, just like "hate speech" laws are. The liberals want their no-fly, no-buy policy, SCOTUS be damned.

Well said!

 

[Dunes190203]

We know who the enemy is. What remains is what we're going to do about it. This isn't a matter of disagreeing philosophically and choosing to respect those disagreements and co-exist peacefully. They're attacking our liberties and in some cases our very lives. I remember as a young person turning the other cheek and getting both cheeks literally beaten in. Finally I'd had enough and took the violence to the bullies and put them in the dirt. Sometimes that's what's needed. Don't like it, no, but sometimes that's what right and righteous. Turning the other cheek gets us nowhere. Sometimes it costs us our freedom and sometimes it costs us our life. Remember, they don't care whether we live or we die. We're meaningless to them. Batteries, tossed in the trash when used up. What is justice going to cost you today? Who will you enrich to enjoy your basic rights and freedoms as a human being? Look what they make you give.