Maryland Man Shot and Killed by Police While Serving a Gun Violence Restraining Order

Gun Violence Restraining Order Police Shoot Gun Owner

courtesy Baltimore Sun

We’ve been saying this was going to happen since the first “gun violence restraining order” or “red flag” law went into effect in California. It was just a matter of time. Two Maryland police officers were attempting to enforce a red flag order and confiscate the guns of a 60-year-old Anne Arundel County man who didn’t want to turn over his firearms.

As the Baltimore Sun reports, two officers knocked on a gun owner’s door bright and early this morning . . .

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.

The subject of the protective order, Gary J. Willis, 60, answered his door in the 100 block of Linwood Ave. at 5:17 a.m. with a gun in his hand, Anne Arundel County Police said. He initially put it down next to the door, but “became irate” when officers began to serve him with the order, opened the door and picked up the gun again, police said.

That’s when a struggle ensued over the gun.

One of the officers struggled to take the gun from Willis, and during the struggle, the gun fired but did not strike anyone, police said. At that point, the other officer fatally shot Willis, police said. Neither officer was injured, police said.

The order was apparently issued following a family dispute.

Police had come to the house Sunday night to speak with Willis, a longtime resident of the neighborhood, said Michele Willis, who was on the scene Monday morning and identified herself as his niece. She attributed that visit by police to “family being family” but declined to elaborate.

She said one of her aunts requested the protective order to temporarily remove his guns.

Gun control advocates have pushed for these laws in states all across the country over the last few years as a way to get firearms out of the hands of those who friends or family members claim shouldn’t have access to them. The problem is that none of these laws have adequate due process protections for the targets of the confiscation orders. They’re enforced first and then the burden is on the gun owner to prove why he or she should have their firearms returned.

Mr. Willis won’t be the last gun owner to object to a knock on the door by police officers attempting to confiscate his firearms, no matter what the circumstances behind the order.

 

comments

  1. avatar Rick the Bear says:

    Very sad. This is not what America is about—basically guilty until you can prove your innocence. Also like asset forfeiture—but a greater potential for violence.

    1. avatar Bearpaw says:

      Or perhaps this situation just avoided a murder-suicide. A fight with armed cops over a gun usually does not work end well for the perp. My guess is there was a justifiable and accurate reason the Red Flag order was issued.

      I’m not saying I agree with the law, just that it went down on the side of the Red Flag.

      1. avatar Gov. William J Le Petomane says:

        I’m sure that will be very reassuring to the ‘aunt’ (sister?) who filed it on him. He may be dead, but at least it was justifiable for me to sic the cops on him…

        1. avatar Gov. William J Le Petomane says:

          Also, just a little curious – what exactly is the penalty in Maryland for making a false claim in filing one of these ‘protective orders’? My guess is that if there is any it will never be prosecuted.

        2. avatar FedUp says:

          Gov, I’m sure it’ll be like all the women who make false accusations of rape, they’ll never prosecute because it would potentially discourage others from doing the same thing, and prosecutors like rape accusations.

        3. avatar Gov. William J Le Petomane says:

          Hopefully this gets a lot of media attention in MD (probably won’t though) because it needs to be common knowledge that if you file one of these you could be signing the death warrant of the person on the receiving end of it. Even vindictive family members rarely want to see their relative die.

        4. avatar Tom says:

          That aunt is going to have that death on her conscience for the rest of her days. I hope she is haunted by that.
          I didn’t think aunts were considered immediate family. More further abuse of due process.

        5. avatar FedUp says:

          The speaker was the niece of the victim.
          She claimed that her aunt asked for the civil rights revocation order.
          Her aunt would logically be the wife, sister, or sister in law of her dead uncle.

        6. avatar Geoff "Mess with the bull, get the horns" PR says:

          “… I’m sure it’ll be like all the women who make false accusations of rape, they’ll never prosecute…”

          News Flash –

          ‘I was angry and I sent it’: Another Kavanaugh accuser referred to FBI after recanting

          https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2018/11/02/brett-kavanaugh-accuser-referred-fbi-doj-investigation/1863210002/

        7. avatar MAGA says:

          These laws are unconstitutional! Do not defend the officials enforcing them!

      2. …Until there’s a knock on YOUR door…Maybe Autie Maybel filed a RED FLAG/EROP/STOP order with the local PD because your part of the Trump Train and she DOESN’T like YOUR politics…She informs THEM that you have lots of guns, engage in ALT-Right politics, and are preparing for DNC Lead NWO…But, really Auntie is just suffering from Trump Derangement Syndrome because she’s a [email protected]$$, mentally disturbed Lib TARD…Now YOUR about to be SWAT’ed by one of YOUR relatives…

        1. avatar Corey Burrup says:

          Exactly. This opens up all sorts of doors between neighbors and vindictive family. They get pissed off for some reason or an other then see you loading guns for the range. Then they call the cops saying they believe you to be unstable and your finished. Now you have to spend $20,000 in attorney fees to get $5,000 worth of guns. They win on the gun grabbing

        2. Sounds very likely. These laws are absolutely UNCONSTITUTIONAL!

        3. avatar Ted says:

          Yes, because they don’t investigate anything, all you have to do is file the paperwork and the STASI shows up. Some of ya’ll need to go out and breeze in the real world every once in a while.

        4. avatar Mahatma Muhjesbude says:

          Of all the universally illegal anti-Constitutional gun laws (see USCC 18 241-242) that the leftist totalitarians keep getting away with because we are now all sufficiently brainwashed by the ever more efficient mind control technology and practices, this due blatant unlawful suspension of a citizen’s due process is the worst, and will prove to be the most deadly. Wait until they try this with one of those highly experienced but PTSD’s out to the max combat veterans who is just minding their own business but simply doesn’t play well with others and can’t suffer igno-imbecilic troublemakers well so he just wants to exercise his right to be left alone and some despicably asshole decides he’s inherently a ‘potential danger’ just because he exercises his 1st A right and says something that ‘offends’ the moron messing with him, and the government jackboots try to take his shit. And that causes him to snap and he takes out way too many of ‘them’, before they finally and unnecessarily kill him?

          And don’t anybody Dare say that he shouldn’t ‘be allowed’ to have weapons because of his PTSD? PTSD isn’t only AFTER you get out of combat. Many current Active Duty Soldiers, especially Infantry and Spec Ops personnel, suffer from it quietly and as long as it doesn’t interfere with their ‘job’ of killing the enemy for the Government, they surely can have all the super powerful weaponry the military allows them to have?

          The ACLU should immediately challenge this and the idiot legislators who made these fiat laws should be charged according to USCC 18-242 and the sued to the max for it by this poor victims family. It’s got to stop, folks. This is a slippery slope that’s jet-skiing down a death spiral of no return… (see youtube video of attorney Publius Huldah’s speech to American Sherriff’s Association, ‘All Gun Control Laws are Unlawful’)

      3. Willis wasn’t a “perp”. He was a man exercising his rights as recognized by the 2nd Amendment but the state via its police enforcers was attempting to curtail those rights without affording him the opportunity to contest that curtailment in court. Any useful definition of “due process” must include such an opportunity.

        1. avatar Nunya says:

          This is why it’s a shame that at least one of the pigs didn’t take a bullet too.

        2. avatar Ted says:

          @Nunya, it is a shame you are too freaking stupid to understand how things actually work. I know, I know, you woulda coulda shoulda.

        3. avatar Arnold says:

          I won’t open carry because of just this reason. If people know you have a gun they will lie. A women gets mad at you, say your sister and wants to get even because you won’t babysit her monster. Boom Boom the cops want your guns.
          Michigan just elected a female demonrat as gov. There goes our constitutional carry unless spineless Snyder would sign the bill before he leaves office. I dont expect that to happen. They’ll be too busy smoking legal pot in the capitol now.

      4. avatar Silphy says:

        Or….hear me out, we shouldn’t take rights away from people that aren’t charged with a crime of any kind? If they’re dangerous enough that we have to take their guns away, then we should be arresting and locking them up.

      5. avatar Garrison Hall says:

        So under the new “red flag” laws any pissed off relative or morally empowered anti-gun citizen can drop a dime on a gun owner—who simply because of this incredibly stupid, probably unconstitutional law immediately becomes vulnerable to getting shot by cops. Needless to say, but for this entirely wrong headed law, this man would be alive. Red-flag laws presume, without any other criteria, that simply owning guns places a private citizen in a different category from all other citizens. It goes without saying that this should not have happened. But it did happen. And it will continue to happen, again and again.

        1. avatar CZJay says:

          If it just saves one life it will be worth it. Don’t worry gun owners are not human, they are just a cluster of cells, we can abort them whenever the cops want.

      6. avatar CZJay says:

        I want to know why the woman did it and why the government felt it justified to allow it.

        This could be the new form of SWATing. Making false claims to get someone murdered through the use of the government and their laws.

        Don’t forget the police now have the power to take away your 2nd, 4th and 5th amendments with these “laws.” They are malicious laws intended to get rid of due process and create a method for gun confiscation. This conditions and trains “law enforcement” to take part in gun confiscations. I don’t see any cops refusing to take part…

      7. avatar ian says:

        He’s not a perp though, as he broke no laws.

      8. avatar Tom says:

        “Perp” What EXACTLY did he do WRONG? Own a gun? So my “aunt” or anyone ELSE thinks I’m an ANGRY VETERAN and THAT gives them the right to take my guns? Fuck you MORON

      9. avatar Michael says:

        Speculation about what ”might” have been prevented is not in any way justification for the senseless murder by this unconstitutional law, through the hands of hyoer-zelous, power-thirsty police.

        What credible threat was there for the red flag order? Or was it simply a spat with a dishonest family member who was willing to fabricate something?

      10. avatar TyrannyOfEvilMen says:

        Looks to me like the murderer went off without a hitch.

      11. avatar Richard Robinett says:

        He WAS NOT a “perp” YET. That is for the court to decide.

      12. avatar Elaine D. says:

        @Bearpaw

        I had that same thought (probably because my partner is a cop and we talk about things like this quite a bit). I wonder why the red flag was issued. Threatening family members or neighbors? Ranting online? What exactly happened that someone got scared enough to think it was warranted? That information would always be helpful.

      13. avatar John Compton says:

        Idiot like they said the reason could be for no other reason than someone you know either it’s is a neighbor or family member. It is nothing but a death warrant.

      14. avatar Tony says:

        So bear paw because he refused to give up his constitutional right you think it could have saved a murder suicide? Yet it created a murder justified by a corrupt law. There is a man dead for standing up for his right to protect himself. When in fact if this was the 1800’s he could of shot both cops and that would have been justified. You seem to believe if it’s the law it’s correct? Laws pass more for agenda or profit then safety. Example. Here in Washington state a motorcycle cop can give you a seat belt ticket. Does that make sense? Do you ever question it? Look at taxes. We are made to think we need them for this country to move forward. When in fact it makes you into a slave. Think about slaves of the early 1900’s. We are not bought and sold but only given enough freedom to make us think we are free. Guns are the ONLY thing that will keep us from being bought and sold. Cops are just soldiers to enforce the corrupt

        1. avatar kenth says:

          They will come up with any justification to protect the inroads they make into full blown gun control. “He could have murder-suicided someone!” “He had an arsenal!” “He could have shot up a school!”

          The media, being complicit with government taking away your rights, will continue to paint this man as a crazed gun owner, liable to shoot up a place at a moment’s notice.

      15. avatar 50wt says:

        Sadly, no one will ever know. Was the Aunt there, witness, or just stirring the pot. You found him guilty by calling him the perp. What did he do wrong? He has a right to protect his home and property. There is something seriously wrong with you people to think this is ok by the cops part in it. Every citizen is allowed due process, which they denied.

      16. avatar Deborah says:

        The man picked up his hand gun. So what! The cops should never have served such an order. It is completely against the Constitution. Judges, law enforcement, lawyers, everyone seems to have forgotten that the Constitution is THE LAW OF THE LAND. As for the Aunt doing this over a family spat, I hope she’s happy being the cause of this man’s death. I’m sure spats have happened before and obviously he never hurt anyone. She only did it to prove she could go one better. She is to blame completely

      17. avatar James says:

        Perhaps we should ban your 1st amendment rights because you could say something hateful? There is a reason why you have due process and the burden of proof is on the state/ accuser, it is untenable to force anyone to disprove what is imagined to be possible in the future.

      18. avatar Gun Owner says:

        The law is unconstitutional based on a basic and simple reading of the constitution… so there in this situation there is no “valid” reason to issue any orders to remove someone’s arms. Shall. Not. Be. Infringed.

      19. avatar Dave says:

        The fact that these hearings are done in secret and the person involved never knows until the police arrive to take away your rights smacks of Gestapo tactics used in Germany when Jews were convicted in secret, this is the part to Socialism ans we should all be aware. What’s next go to jail because you don’t agree with the ruling party line like in Iran, Iraq,Syria or N. Korea. Liberal Socialism is on tbe move in this country ans needs to be stopped7

        1. avatar John Donovan says:

          This statute is unlawful and it violates the USA constitution. But unfortunately Dave, you have absolutely no clue what you’re talking about in relation to law, Germany, and jews. First, the jews were responsible for explicitly causing the death of 10s of thousands of Germans as the jewish communists, led by Luxemberg and other jews, caused an uprising of communists in 1918 to take over Germany, just as their murderous brethren had in 1917 in Russia, where they mass murdered Christian Russians for decades until WWII broke out, partially as a result of this ongoing mass murder, but the jewish controlled media, hollywood, and schools will never tell you about that. Second, the jews and communists were banned from having arms in Germany under the NSDAP and Hitler specifically because of this prior uprising they caused and the other communist uprisings they caused else where. Unfortunately, again, most people are so utterly ignorant of history they don’t know these facts and they believe the lies of the jews that they were quite simply innocent victims.

          Dave, would you see to it that declared enemies of the United States, who are within our borders, say, La Raza for instance, the jewish indoctrinated mestizo communist movement, would you allow them arms? Hell no. And it is not a violation of the 2nd amendment because these people are declared enemies and have every intention of pushing the agenda they were trained with, which is called “Aztlan”. They believe they are going to “Reclaim” parts of the USA. Only a fool would allow these people to be knowingly sold arms. Just as only a fool in Germany would have allowed jews and communists to be armed.

          Dave, you have the right idea about the law, but you clearly don’t know who your enemies truly are. Better get that sorted out because they want you dead.

      20. avatar Mike says:

        How is anyone letting this go on? People do not understand what is going to happen if these globalist elitist are ‘successful’ in overthrowing our Constitution with those that are ignorant; the FICA Courts were put in place to do what they did to President Trump to protect the Globalist in the event that an outsider was able to resist the Deep State and expose it. Trump is the last hope for our Country. That is why the Globalist media and the Bolsheviks in the EU and Paris hate him, they had planned to rip off the American taxpayer for billions a year to fund their lifestyles. If they, DNC Bolsheviks are successful in destroying our defense of America, it will fall and it will lose God favor, you can write that down and that will come past. People voting for these evil people brainwashed. Illegals brought in by Obama’s programs are electing their masters to power; that was their plan in open borders.

        1. avatar John Donovan says:

          It’s entirely disheartening seeing how gullible many of you are. You still have not figured out that Trump IS an enemy to the people. He is jewish and tied in to the jewish mafia. Meyer Lansky was a connection. Look up Trump’s jewish mentor Roy Cohn. He was a degenerate pervert who used children for sexual blackmail against politicians and other powerful figures.

          The so called left right divide is controlled by jews at the top. You people are fools for not realizing this yet with all of the evidence on the internet. I genuinely don’t know how to get people like you to stop hero worshiping people like Trump and actually research his background to help you come to the realization that he is not your ally, just as most idiot liberals can not figure out the Clintons and Obama were not their allies.

          Just because people say what you want to hear does not make them an ally. For God’s sake LOOK at their history and their actions. Actions ALWAYS speak louder than words.

          Trump, Clintons, Bush’s are all on the same side and they are against US, the common people. Get this through your thick cowardly skull. I honestly think most of you are cowards and that is why you refuse to jettison these people as “leaders”.

    2. avatar little horn says:

      America died when JFK’s brains hit the trunk. it showed the psycho’s of this world that all you have to do is kill the people you don’t like and all is good. since his death this country has done nothing but go down hill and it will never recover.

      1. avatar Ralph says:

        I could be wrong about this, but I seem to recall that JFK wasn’t the first President who was assassinated.

      2. avatar JOHN B THAYER says:

        The arrest and assassination of Ngô Đình Diệm, the president of South Vietnam, marked the culmination of a successful CIA-backed coup d’état . . .

        What goes around comes around.

    3. avatar Rivahmitch says:

      Too bad he didn’t kill at least one of the Gestapo to reduce the number others will face later. MOLON LABE!!

  2. avatar bob says:

    This just escalates an issue. What starts out as an argument turns to manslaughter via law.
    How many will have to die before we “do something”?

  3. avatar rt66paul says:

    Due process should be the key here and this is the incident that the NRA should use to file suit against the states that have these red flag laws. At the very least a judge should sign off on the confiscation with a mandatory hearing in open court within a week or so to prove that the gun owner is unfit to have firearms.

    The NRA could provide the legal defense for those that can not afford it.

    Or else they could change the name to the National Association of FUDDs

    1. avatar Fudds McKenzie says:

      It’s always just one more thing and the NRA are fudds. So weak and transparent. The NRA is in favor if GVROs, they already said it. Of all people, the deceased, the family, the police, the NRA and its members have blood on their hands today.

      No wonder the RKBA cause has stalled. You think you can act like that and lobbyists and politicians won’t see through it? Why, because they’re dumb or care about you? Yeah right.

    2. avatar John Donovan says:

      No a judge should immediately release the stolen arms and any people falsely arrested for not committing any crimes. Their justification is that the state statute is unlawful. No one even has to challenge these statutes for judges to do the right thing, but you low IQ idiots haven’t figured out that the judges in this land are completely against us and they are doing slow progressive maneuvers to increase their power as a class and to decrease our powers as the class of citizens. I’m sick of idiots ceding ground on these issues. Most of these issues wouldn’t be issues if you people would turn off your televisions, study some books such as law on a normal basis, and organize to establish recalls of these judges and to pass voter initiatives banning treasonous organizations such as the BAR association.

  4. So what you’re saying is he was basically murdered by law enforcement. Becuase they had some form of convoluted domestic family dispute. The relatives now turn to the police to settle internal family squabbles leading to deaths of family members.

    1. avatar LarryinTX says:

      Yup, that’s about it.

  5. avatar Michael Buley says:

    It has crossed my mind that this could happen to me. My family knows that I am a fervent gun rights advocate, and that I own a number of guns. I carry all the time. This makes a sister, in particular, uncomfortable. She has ‘forbidden’ her husband to have ‘political discussions’ with me … apparently she wears the pants in that family. It doesn’t seem far-fetched that, if she had the option — I’m north of Seattle, so these ERPO’s aren’t law here — she might do something similar.

    So you lose your guns, and you incur legal fees to the tune of thousands of dollars — if you have the money — just to get your guns back. And you may never get them back. All because someone is ‘concerned’ — all without any due process. Just a ‘concern,’ unproven.

    Yes, this is going to happen again. And it won’t be just the homeowner who is killed. Of course, that will justify SWAT teams coming to homes to illegally confiscate weapons. And the masses will go … wow, that was a really bad guy, good thing they took his guns. See what happens? And we have ‘additional reasons’ to ban private gun ownership.

    Incremental. Always. ‘Shall not be infringed’ means nothing to these folks.

    1. avatar Manse Jolly says:

      Agree…and the use of possible ‘revenge motivations’ using so-called ‘red flag laws’has been discussed on TTAG as well.

      An arrest should come first, if situation arises to that level. If not, “no red flag” guilty until proven innocent BS. I know what the President has said in the past, however someone must have corrected him since he has not repeated it.

      More of these incidents are going to happen IMO

    2. avatar CarlosT says:

      Actually, these are the law here in Washington state, with the passage of I-1491. So, yes, this very thing could happen to you and your fellow citizens were glad to facilitate it.

    3. avatar Garrison Hall says:

      “This makes a sister, in particular, uncomfortable. She has ‘forbidden’ her husband to have ‘political discussions’ with me.”

      My advice is to fire your sister. Sever all relationships with her, don’t attend family events where she is present, don’t speak to her or her husband, don’t talk about her or her husband to other family members. These are pretty drastic steps, I know, but the alternative is having the cops show up at your door demanding your guns.

      1. avatar doesky2 says:

        Fvck that.
        Go on the offensive.
        Show up at all the family events where she is at with gun themed shirts, hats, and guns. Invite every relative for a quick trip out to the range or LGS.

        1. avatar Matt(tx) says:

          Nope. If the doorbell rings look out. If it’s the cops don’t answer. Get your long gun ready. If they bust in shoot to kill.

    4. avatar Nunya says:

      So, how would it play out if cops come to your door under the guise of the red flag law and you answer the door unarmed but refuse to confirm or deny that you have firearms. Essentially, refuse to admit having any and can’t understand why they would think so. Of course you wouldn’t grant them entrance and your goodies would be locked in your safe or closet.

      1. avatar Anonymous says:

        They would go in anyways.

        1. avatar Joatmon says:

          Yep and you have 2 choices only.
          1. Hand over your firearms.
          2. Fight.
          I’m not anti law enforcement but they will do what they are sent and ordered to do.

  6. avatar Andy Buckmichael says:

    Typical murdering scum cops.

    1. avatar Jonathan-Houston says:

      Most cops are on traffic duty enforcing ridiculously low speed limits and other poorly designed traffic laws. The most typical thing about them is that they’re basically tax collectors for the welfare state.

      Set that aside for a moment. These cops were executing a lawful order. You may disagree with the law. The law may be struck down the first time it’s challenged in court. Neither of those is hinders its legality today.

      The cops were confronted by an irate man wielding a weapon and then pulled into a scuffle with a discharge. What would you do?

      1. I wouldn’t open the door. And ask to see the warrant. No warrant no entry. I certainly wouldn’t comply with something that’s arbitrary and capricious. CCTV peepholes a plus. Matter of fact, recently I called the police in my Township because there was a car accident in front of my building. It was getting a little bit heated and other people in my neighborhood from another apartment building were joining the session outside. I was a bit concerned, so I dialed nine-one-one, and informed them what was happening. So, the 9-1-1 police dispatcher in my small Township ask me stick my head outside and see if anybody had anything in their hands that look like weapons. So I peeked outside my main door with all the commotion going on. I observed a couple people (smartphones in hand only.) from the different vehicles. Other people from a building across the street getting involved, and the female operator from the other vehicle damaged and blocking the street. She was screaming obcesnties and acting belligerent. Someone in the small crowd saw me standing at the entrance to my building. An unidentified person yelled, ” F**K OFF! And Get lost! Mind your own F***King Business. Police dispatcher who asked me to observer the situtaion from a safe distance heard what was said through my smartphone. They asked who said that. I said I DON’T know but I was threatened. I said I am retreating to the safety my apartment. The P/O. Dispatcher asked me to at least stay by the window to inform them when officers arrive on scene. And if see any weapons (only phones.) As soon as I notice officers on site. I saw local police immediately rounding up people near the accident scene. They began “confiscating” anything in anyone’s hands that looked like it could be a weapon, or used as a weapon…It DIDN’T matter to THEM who accerted what right…For the victims, or the offenders…

      2. avatar LarryinTX says:

        Aaron, I think he was asking what you would do if you were the *cop*. Personally, I would not have accepted the assignment, because this was OBVIOUSLY going to happen, and I don’t want to be on either side of a killing which I can see coming.

      3. avatar Cloudbuster says:

        The Nuremberg Trials and subsequent prosecutions of even fairly low-level Nazi camp guards make clear the standard that “just following orders” is no excuse when ordered to enforce an unethical law.

        1. avatar Sam I Am says:

          “The Nuremberg Trials and subsequent prosecutions of even fairly low-level Nazi camp guards make clear the standard that “just following orders” is no excuse when ordered to enforce an unethical law.”

          You need context. The war trials were an aberration in the long history of warfare: you don’t “try” the losers, you execute them forthwith. Second, the trials were simply victors getting revenge. Most important, the victors wrote the rules about following orders. They write the rules today. Think the victors will let archaic trials and principles determine justice today? Following rules in righteous causes (disarming the public) is not a crime at any level.

        2. avatar John Donovan says:

          The Nuremberg trials were an outrage. Any one who actually investigates them will be disgusted by what they find. First, the Americans led these trials and the people who ran the entire thing were ALL JEWS. Second, they tortured the Germans into saying what they wanted them to say. They had Germans who only spoke german and only read german signing entirely english documents confessing to all sorts of outrages. Now most of you are belligerently ignorant when it comes to history, but if you did have any knowledge of the jewish bolsheviks, you would know that during their murder spree of killing 10s of millions of Russians, they did the exact same thing. They tortured non-jewish Russians and made them sign confessions and then murdered them.

          There are hundreds of non-jewish officials and dignitaries who have written about the disgrace that was Nuremberg. The jews even murdered Julius Stricker for nothing more than writing the truth about them and their ways. To translate that for those of you who are infinitely thick, the jews put people to death for SPEECH against them and nothing more.

          Stop citing the Nuremberg trials since you don’t know any thing about them, and go read about them. The same people who conducted the trials are the same people who are trying to ban and control our guns. Time to wake up.

      4. avatar Sean says:

        “No one shall be deprived life, liberty or property without due process of law.”

        That makes the seizure an unlawful act. All bets are off.

        1. avatar Sam I Am says:

          “That makes the seizure an unlawful act. All bets are off.”

          The SC already ruled that asset forfeiture is constitutional. Rather doubt they would even blink at a case trying to overturn property confiscation resulting from a TRO.

      5. avatar Nope says:

        It’s NOT a lawful order.

        It’s CLEARLY violates the Constitutional rights GUARANTEED in SEVERAL ways. Due process, the right to keep and bear arms and the right to privacy in your own home just to name a few.

        You’re CLEARLY brainwashed if you think it’s lawful in any way shape or form.

  7. avatar frankw says:

    This time it was the person subject to this confiscation who was murdered. Sooner or later it will be the police officers themselves who will be killed. Then what? More calls for more confiscations leading to more deaths? Where will it end?

    1. avatar DesertDave says:

      Looks like that is the plan. Either kill off gun owners, or, when a POPO bites it, more restrictive regulation to kill more gun owners. Either way it is more people dying for no good reason, other than restricting out God given rights.

      1. avatar LarryinTX says:

        And notice that it is NOWHERE in there that the folks demanding these stupid laws who are dying because of them. They are all giggling and messaging each other about how their plans are working so wonderfully. Sooner or later, if this crap is ever going to end, they are going to need to be targeted.

  8. avatar Timothy says:

    Now, I have been told that all people of the gun would just wet themselves and comply when cops come door to door collecting guns. How is it possible that someone stood up for themselves?!?!?! Could it possibly be that the keyboard warriors trolling gun owners…. are cowards with no idea what they’re talking about?!?!

    1. avatar Hannibal says:

      Unless you’re out there literally fighting with him, your distinction is largely meaningless.

      1. avatar Timothy says:

        You got me bud. I received notice of the warrant even though I live in a different state and then chose to ignore it because I’m weak and cowardly. Couldn’t be that people would stand with him if they knew. Has to be that the local police advertise warrants to all POTG who then choose to do nothing…. right?!?!

        Funny how you knew who my statement applied to though.

    2. avatar CZJay says:

      1 out of 114 in that state since October 1st. That’s like 0.877% so far? That’s about as much “native American” DNA Elizabeth Warren has.

      1. avatar LarryinTX says:

        I think concerning Pocahontas, you’re off by a factor of 10.

  9. avatar Adub says:

    This is why you bury some of your guns: so you can dig them up afterward and catch your enemies by surprise.

    1. avatar GunnyGene says:

      I’m an old dog, and old dogs don’t bury bones in the backyard. No point. We’d forget where we buried them.

    2. avatar Ing says:

      Some people say that when we get to the point where we need to bury our guns, it’s actually time to start identifying targets and shooting them.

      I don’t think we’re at that point yet…but I am starting to think a contingency plan might be in order.

    3. avatar Nunya says:

      If it’s time to bury them it’s time to use them.

  10. avatar little horn says:

    god this is fucked up. no surprise though since we accepted no-knock-warrants.

    so now they can get your guns from an “anonymous tip”.
    and when they show up and just burst in, that little no-knock thing ( thank you REPUBLICAN Tricky Dick) they will shoot you if you try to defend you home against the intruders in police uniforms that didn’t identify themselves.

    well, i would say the anti-gun liberals work is complete.
    now they just make fake “tips” and sit back and watch us all get shot.

    1. avatar Garrison Hall says:

      You don’t need fake tips. All you need is an angry wife who wants to get back at her husband for doing something she didn’t like. That’s all it takes, really. And there’s no consequence for lying that someone you don’t like is suddenly “dangerous”. With a law like this mistakes like this will regularly happen. The gun controllers supporting the rad-flag laws just think these things are acceptable social costs.

      1. avatar Matt(tx) says:

        I have an ex who tried to murder me at least three times. Glad this wasn’t an option then. She would have collected the 1/4 million insurance policy. The police would have savedher the cost of an assassin.

  11. avatar ROBERT Powell says:

    this is the first step toward rampant takeover by the communist left .pelousy and her clinton-obamaite communist goon squad is pushing for a real civil war .. these are NOT ORDERS FROM AN AMERICAN GOVERNMENT, IT IS FROM A TOTALARIAN COMMUNIST CABAL OF TRAITORS,AGAINST THE CONSTITUTION, THE BILL OF RIGHTS AND AMERICA IN GENERAL VOTE REPUBLICAN, OR GET READY TO FIGHT LIKE YOU HAVE NEVER SEEN BEFORE…..

    1. avatar Salty Bear says:

      None are more hopelessly enslaved than those who falsely believe that the Republican Party cares about their rights.

  12. avatar former water walker says:

    Man this is effed up…basically murdered on a whim. We are ALL at risk from Big Brother😖

  13. avatar GunnyGene says:

    Congratulations Auntie, your “temporary” GVRO worked – Permanently .

  14. avatar YT says:

    The next time the Cops may not get to the door. They have not honored their sworn oath to the Constitution of The United States of America.

  15. avatar Nanashi says:

    His blood is on Chris Cox’s hands.

    1. Well then…By all means…Send the NRA and Chris Cox a link to TTAG article. Also, CC. to GOA and SAF….

        1. Yup! Those guys from YouTube (Gun and Pawn.)

        2. Hope everyone remembers this on election day and VOTE [email protected] !

  16. avatar DaveL says:

    Unintentional side effect? Or intentional?

    1. avatar Matt(tx) says:

      Intentional.

  17. Here’s how a RED FLAG could go the wrong way. Where using the police as marriage counselors, or welfare workers…Could result in death, injury, and lose of Rights/Property. [An small example. I remember reading about this in an online entertainment blog. I’ve watched this series, its an ok future post-apocalyptic end-of-the-world scenario.]

    The 100’s Marie Avgeropoulos Charged After Domestic Violence Arrest..

    https://www.eonline.com/news/960008/the-100-s-marie-avgeropoulos-arrested-for-felony-domestic-violence

  18. avatar SurfGW says:

    Are you implying the law is bad because criminals get aggressive with cops and refuse to comply with the law?
    If that is the standard, we must repeal a lot of laws because it is rare that criminals gladly comply with laws.

    1. “Criminals?” This man committed no crime. He was not being arrested. He’d apparently gotten into a dispute with family members, one of whom got the confiscation order issued.

      Police knocked on his door at 5:17am, before dawn to confiscate his guns. It isn’t clear if he’d even been notified that the confiscation order had been issued. I’m sure that will come out after the fact.

      1. avatar SurfGW says:

        The fact stands that the man refused to comply with a lawful order from a Police Officer and started a struggle – this fact alone makes him a criminal.

        There is also the possibility (maybe never find out for sure now) that it was an assault that led to the relative seeking the GVRO.

        Fight to change the law; don’t fight the cops.

        1. avatar FedUp says:

          What lawful order from law enforcement are you talking about?
          All I see here is two armed robbers coming to the home of a man who has not been formally accused of any crime to STEAL HIS PROPERTY.

          If these oath breaking piles of feces don’t want to get into fights to the death with innocent citizens, they have the option of not trying to rob them.

        2. avatar Chris T in KY says:

          How many years does a 60 year old have to wait to get their guns (property) back from the government?
          Assuming they have the money to spend on lawyers.

        3. avatar Andy Buckmichael says:

          The guns will never be returned. They will eventually go into the personal collections of the scum cops.

        4. avatar CZJay says:

          Do not go to a black neighborhood and tell them slavery shouldn’t have been forcibly resisted because it was the law. You might need your 2nd Amendment to get out of there the same way you came in. Make sure you don’t upset anyone enough to get your guns taken from you before you chastise those law breaking African slaves.

        5. avatar JD says:

          Unconstitutional orders have zero force of law. It’s as if they were never given. Defending your property with force is actually many times more lawful than what these agents of the government did.

        6. avatar Anonymous says:

          The fact stands that the man refused to comply with a lawful order from a Police Officer and started a struggle – this fact alone makes him a criminal.

          We should ban all guns, and damn it, SurfGW better comply. Or he is a “Criminal.” When they show up for you to toss them in the dump truck, you better comply, or you are just a “criminal.” It’s a lawful order, Surf, do what you are told! Comply. Don’t be a “criminal.” You fought the law, not the cops, and you lost. So comply. It’s a lawful order.

        7. avatar SoBe says:

          “Unconstitutional orders have zero force of law. It’s as if they were never given,” however, JD, while this is right in principle, until some appellate court (or the Supreme Court) rules on ones specific case, one will have to swallow ones pride (if not anything else), do what the (not so) nice police officer says (in Florida it is illegal to resist in any way a police officer, even if he/she is acting illegally), risk being needlessly tased and/or shot depending on his/her mood that day despite not resisting and complying, get a free ride sitting on your handcuffed numb wrists, to some smelly station, have your new yearbook portrait taken, have your name plastered all over the internet, wait a day in a cell with a bunch of strangers to be transported to the municipal jail to be booked. If you are lucky and the phone they let you use actually works, most don’t, you might get a minute in which to convince a bail bondsman to take your case. Unless, you are a regular, they will likely hang up. So, once you get assigned a cell, you have to bunker up. Hopefully within a day or two your will have a bond hearing, you will not be allowed to contact your attorney and will have to opt for a public defender (for which you will be billed) or represent yourself. Since you were not bonded out, now you have to hope that your state has some program for “first offenders” or other monitored release program. If you manage to be released, you will lose most of your civil rights, including possession of any dangerous objects, ability to travel out of one’s home county (not country, county!), use of alcohol, and so on. Meanwhile, you will lose work meeting with you attorney (don’t even think of a public defender, they will likely try a plea). 10’s of thousands of dollars later, you finally get to trial, but if you are innocent and very lucky, the prosecutor will realize it (don’t hold your breath) and at least one of the police present will realize it and refuse to testify against you. So, according to the legal system, no harm done since justice prevailed. Congratulations, you are not a criminal (very important), but no one gives a sht about the time money, and work you lost nor the damage to you reputation.
          I know, been there done that.
          Best to just have these laws not passed in the first place or thrown out. I don’t want to be Mr. Test Case Guy.

      2. I agree. Things in many states are getting out of hand. This can only get worse if the political battlefield changes in certain areas. Red Flag/ERPOs/STOP laws are dangerous, unconstitutional travesties purposely design to do an ‘end-run’ AGAINST due process and the Bill of Rights… The Architects of such things should be exposed to the General Public.

      3. avatar SoBe says:

        I agree with Mr. Zimmerman, what criminal? There is no criminal. Where was the trial? What was the adjudication? There was a violation of constitutional rights executed by the police, but no one has been tried. The founders of this country abhorred this very scenario and for that reason added the 5th Amendment to the constitution and just in case some local bozo at some state or other low level government decided to take the law into his/her/its (the local government or official) own hands, the 14th Amendment was nailed to the Constitution.

        1. avatar Sam I Am says:

          “The founders of this country abhorred this very scenario and for that reason added the 5th Amendment to the constitution and just in case some local bozo at some state or other low level government decided to take the law into his/her/its (the local government or official) own hands,”

          Not quite. The founders wrote the constitution to restrict the federal/national government. The States remained Sovereign (supreme for those in Rio Linda), controlling their own affairs as their State constitutions provided. The powers delegated to the central government (only a “superior” can delegate) that applied to the States were specific (hence the 9th and 10 amendments proclaiming that the central government could not even intrude on State powers that had not been enumerated in the constitution as belonging to the states. The 14th amendment put chains upon the states equal to those placed on the central government. The founders never imagined the States would willingly become vassal states to the central government.

        2. avatar SoBe says:

          The states were not initially explicitly asked to be vassal states; however, the were expected to act as signatories to a (con)federation (the Continental Congress). Since that idea failed miserably, the states were in effect made “vassal states” by the Constitution, as long as they did not supersede federal law they were allowed to act as they wished and when the federal government was in need of military service, the states were to fill the ranks. If this is not the definition of a medieval vassal, tell me what is. The obligations of the federal government and the states were initially expressed in the body of the Constitution. The 14th Amendment was necessary to reinforce the authority of the Constitution as it applied to the states because many were refusing to follow applicable constitutionally defined federal perogative.

        3. avatar Sam I Am says:

          The States were not bound by federal restraints, except as specifically called out, and the States, not the central government, could change the contract (constitution). The federal government was the inferior element at the beginning. There is no statement in the constitution, nor the writings of the founders that indicate any notion that State constitutions were immediately null and void, nor required to be altered to incorporate all the restrictions on the federal government (until 1868). The States were not “permitted” to do anything; they were Sovereign within their borders. The Congress was not constituted to intervene into every facet of an individual’s life.

          The means for changing the authorities/powers of the central government was not simple legislation, but constitutional amendment, which the central government could not do without specific permission from the States (ratification). Over time, the representatives of the States could not constrain themselves and began to encroach on individual rights and liberties. Trying to alter the constitution without an amendment was the very cause of the Civil War – the central government was not delegated the power to regulate the moral decisions of the individual States. The moral issue of slavery could not be settled by constitutional amendment (insufficient number of States to secure ratification – until 1868), so the abolitionists sought to use legislation limiting the constitutional guarantee of full powers of new states, equal to the founding States. As a result, certain southern States, believing they were protecting their constitutional right to keep, and ensure new states could keep, slaves.

          Seeing clearly that the non-slave states were intent on forcing unconstitutional mandates upon sovereign States, certain southern States decided they could not remain in a union that refused to adhere to the constitution because they were offended by the actions of equally sovereign States. Interestingly, three slave states remained in the Union (Kentucky, Delaware, Maryland), after “the secession”. Apparently, they believed they retained their rights to hold slaves as a trade for remaining in the union (which is a whole ‘nuther story), which may be why the “Emancipation Proclamation” applied only to the states in rebellion.

          To wrap it up, the original States joined a compact (actually two) whereby the States agreed to certain common needs (or goals), but yielded not other power to the central government. It is the failure of US education that people today believe the arrangement between States and the central government was always a matter of the central government being superior to the individual States.

    2. avatar Hannibal says:

      How far will you take that logic? If the government decides to carry out warrantless searches of every house because someone might have an illegal gun, is that okay if they pass a law saying it is?

    3. avatar Anonymous says:

      Are you implying the law is bad because criminals get aggressive with cops and refuse to comply with the law?

      We need a law that allows me to have the enforcement arm of the government issue mandates to SurfGW so I can go in his home and take stuff I voted for. We hand him a warrant, he does what our votes demand. End of story. And!… he better comply, or he is just a worthless “criminal.”

      1. avatar SurfGW says:

        I enjoy shooting (mostly range rental guns) and this site because it is a nice hobby, but there are no guns in my house for anyone to take because I have minors under 25 in the household.
        Please don’t resort to ad hominem attacks because it does nothing for your viewpoint.
        Hobbes said there is anarchy when the state loses the legitimate monopoly on violence.

        1. avatar LarryinTX says:

          If those searching your home for guns do not find any, they will destroy your home while continuing to search, until you finally give up your guns to save the roof. If you have no guns, I hope you are renting, since the house is gone. That’ll show ’em, huh?

    4. avatar Gralnok says:

      I’m going to come out and say what everyone else is thinking. Surfgw, you are part of the problem. Leave. Now. Get off this site and go to one more suitable for your kind, like the Brady Campaign site, or Gobshite Gifford’s site, whatever they are. The police are in the wrong here, you should know that.

      1. avatar Matt(tx) says:

        @SurfGW is just a troll.

  19. avatar Woke says:

    This law was in effect before the “Red Flag” Bill. Anyone subjected to a protective order is required to turn in firearms to State Police. As long as the process to obtain a protective order is performed properly this is a good law. Good job trying to push the agenda though…

    1. avatar Ing says:

      According to the news articles, no actual protective order was in place. This was one of the new “red flag” confiscations. No evidence presented — just one person siccing the police on somebody else.

    2. Read the linked story from that notorious right wing rag, the Baltimore Sun. They specify that this was a red flag law order that was being enforced. But good job obfuscating the facts to fit your narrative.

    3. avatar LarryinTX says:

      Punishment of any sort, which does not require a conviction, much less even a trial, is most definitely NOT a good law. Think about it!

    4. avatar Anonymous says:

      We need a law “for safety” or whatever, so I can go in “Woke’s” place and take his stuff. We’ll use the enforcement arm of the government to do the dirty work for us. They show up with guns, show “woke” the warrant, then we go in and take what we voted for.

      Yay. Liberty. Welcome to America. Land of the free, Home of the Brave.

  20. avatar HP says:

    Way to go, family! I wonder if they’re happy that they now have a dead relative.

  21. avatar Don says:

    Security doors people. Never open your door to anyone, especially police, without seeing a lawful warrant signed by a judge. If they force the door you can die defending yourself lawfully at least, some comfort that is. There’s a reason building codes mandate all residential doors open inward, it’s so the agents of power can easily force their way in.

    1. avatar daveinwyo says:

      Doors open to the inside for a good reason. Put this under DUHHH. Doors open to the inside so that the door can be “barred” or a cross piece put in place wider than the door to keep others OUT. I.E. the term “bar the door”. I know, a hard concept. Only barn doors and doors used by the disabled open outwards.

      1. avatar LarryinTX says:

        Well, sorta, or maybe not. Also *all* commercial buildings, due to fire codes, have doors which open out.

    2. avatar Anonymous says:

      Don,

      If my doors opened outward, then they would have access to my door hinges. They could just tap the hinge bar out and take the door off.

  22. avatar Michael says:

    And this is different from SWATing, how? It seems like lately everything is having unintended consequences. That really pegs it. The JFK killing should have been handled like the local homicide it was. Not flipped to the likes of warren and specter, he of the bullet that changed direction 180 degrees theory that they used to “prove” everything else. I want my Country back, damnit. Everybody, please vote, OK.

    1. avatar Anymouse says:

      Thete was no “magic bullet.” Connally was seated in a jump seat that was lower and inboard of Kennedy. Conspiracy nuts show them seated directly inline with each other at the same level to claim the bullet path wasn’t straight. The also claim the head jerk back was a direct transfer of momentum, not the reaction of the high speed ejection of his brain from his forehead (Newton’s 3rd).

    2. avatar Anonymous says:

      And this is different from SWATing, how?

      It’s legal and supported by leftists who voted for it.

  23. avatar H says:

    You want it both ways. All he had to do was comply. We passed these laws. Don’t like them elect someone else. Everything that happens isn’t a violation of our 2nd. Every nut job like the Florida Yoga shooter should have had his guns taken away. If you can’t be civil then lose your rights. Big difference between this and the grabbers making up new laws every time something happens.

    1. avatar Hannibal says:

      “All he had to do was comply”

      While I understand the idea here, you say this phrase as if it’s not the same one uttered by every totalitarian state, ever.

      1. avatar Garrison Hall says:

        Exactly. And well said. We are a lot closer to that totalitarian state than we might think.

    2. avatar CZJay says:

      It’s been over 3 decades, I’m still waiting for positive change or the supreme court to save me. Any day now, right? There is no way I will be waiting decades more, right?

    3. avatar Agreed says:

      “All he had to do was comply”
      I guess “Abeit” really does make you free as well huh?

      1. avatar Scoutino says:

        Der Arbeit.

    4. avatar Scoutino says:

      “You want it both ways. All he had to do was comply. We passed these laws. Don’t like them elect someone else. Everything that happens isn’t a violation of our 2nd. Every nut job like the Florida Yoga shooter should have had his guns taken away. If you can’t be civil then lose your rights. Big difference between this and the grabbers making up new laws every time something happens.”

      Comply! Bend over and take it! And then what – spend all his money and rest of his life fighting to get his property back and proving that he is not dangerous?

      I sure as hell didn’t pass these unconstitutional laws. Politicians voted in by majority of ‘low information’ voters under promise of government handouts did.

      Who decides whether you are a dangerous nutjob before you do anything illegal? Anyone who doesnt like you?

      Are you really sugesting that my human rights depend on me being civil?
      How is this different from the rest of gun grabber’s schemes aimed at getting the number of legal gun owners as low as possible before final total disarmament?

  24. avatar Jay in Florida says:

    I myself have gone to my front door at 2am gun in hand. Who here wouldnt??? In my case it too was a cop. My upstairs neighbor had complained my TV was to loud. Fortunately I saw it was a cop through the peep hole and all went well. Knock at my front door at 5am. Expect a gun in my hand…..

    1. avatar Matt(tx) says:

      I don’t care what time it is. I will answer the door armed if you are not expected.

  25. avatar Sal Chichon says:

    I don’t think I have anything to worry about (who can be 100% certain of anything?), and yet this story makes me slightly distrustful of people around me, to include family and friends, who knows of my guns.

  26. avatar Jon says:

    Guess than I would be a dead man to. Never broken the law. Always respectful to our Flag an Veterans. 🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸Love my country. Many United States Veterans in my family an friends. Try disarming me. I wouldn’t comply as well.

  27. avatar burley says:

    If we don’t SOON organize, show up at the capitol, ARMED, ready to put to rest all corruption, and by that, I literally mean HANG all politicians who have voted to remove and or limit LIBERTY, the corruption will simply eat us out from the inside, onesey-twosey until there aren’t enough of us to put up a meaningful fight.

    1. avatar burley says:

      Let’s not beat around the bush: you all know a cop that calls himself a patriot, probably even calls himself your friend but he WILL execute YOU just as surely as these guys executed someone who resisted their thuggery. They had no consitutionally justifiable cause to be there and they will say “We were just doing out jobs”. Let me translate that for you: the cops are more concerned about their paycheck than they are about your life.

      1. avatar CZJay says:

        This guy deserved it because he crossed the street illegally. Cops got to enforce all the laws and escalate when they receive resistance. Comply or die. It doesn’t matter he wasn’t armed or didn’t have any warrants.

  28. avatar craig says:

    Are you really arguing against what the cops were doing even after the guy tried to kill them?

    1. avatar LarryinTX says:

      Yes. They should have refused, and explained why. Whoever gave them that assignment could then go do it himself, or send the order back to the judge who issued it and tell HIM to go enforce it. Eventually, with luck, the responsibility would find its way back to the jackass who asked for the order. You go on, now. Now that I think of it, those possibilities should be spelled out in any law which allows punishment without due process.

      1. avatar craig says:

        Yeah, normal people don’t try to shoot cops regardless of why they are there. Obviously something was wrong with this guy!

        1. avatar jwtaylor says:

          Craig, yes, they do. Good people, honest people, law-abiding people who have never hurt a person in their life do exactly what this man has done.

        2. avatar CZJay says:

          True, the average/normal person does not stand up for themselves. The U.S. was created by those not so average/normal people by shooting the King’s men when they came to serve their orders. There was a lot of shooting, so much so they put a few amendments into law to make sure it doesn’t happen like that again. Those crazy men even wrote open letters of their intentions and celebrated their killings. What the fuck was wrong with them?

          Maybe the guy should have been in a mental institution. We don’t know that yet because the government refuses to give information until ordered by the government. If he should have been committed then there are laws already for that. There is a process if you are crazy or if you committed a crime.

        3. avatar Chadwick says:

          Some people are just willing to die for the rights that man neither can give nor take away. I’m sincerely sorry you can’t grasp that. Innocent until proven guilty at your own front door. If you see nothing wrong with that then you are the problem here. There are plenty of third world s hole countries that are run by the police and they would love to have another blind follower. I suggest you look into what paradise is to you and seek the closest one.

        4. avatar LarryinTX says:

          Of course you don’t try to shoot the cop. Once they tell you why they are there, you tell them to go away and close the door, especially at 5 am. If they attempt to illegally FORCE their way inside, that is when you are forced to shoot them.

  29. avatar Chris T in KY says:

    I like the police. I think they are good people. But I will not be sorry if one or more of them is killed, breaking the civil rights of an American citizen. A Red Flag law does not need ANY LEGAL proof to take your property away. There is no difference when a white person would call the police and say “that black person has a gun”.

    “I FEEL UNCOMFORTABLE. Please come and take that n*ggers guns away officer.”

  30. avatar Curtis in IL says:

    This particular case may involve a “red flag” law, but that’s not the reason the dude got perforated.

    Cops knock on the door. You don’t like the reason the cops are there. You pick up a gun? Only people who are mentally ill or industrial grade stupid would do that, regardless why the cops are there.

    Maybe the “red flag” law is an unconstitutional pile of dung. Whatever. Cops bang on doors every day, all over this country, for good reasons and bad reasons. The person who threatens those cops with a gun puts his life in serious jeopardy.

    1. avatar KenW says:

      Crack of dawn someone knocking on my door?
      I must be one of those nuts then because I will be armed if I go to the door and ask what you want while I am standing behind the locked door.

      1. avatar LarryinTX says:

        I think I’d actually prefer to get the front door in my sights and NOT answer it, at 5 am. Possibly find a bigger gun to point at it. If the door comes in, it is on.

        1. avatar Matt(tx) says:

          Bang on my door at 0500 there will be a shotgun.

    2. avatar Garrison Hall says:

      “Cops knock on the door. You don’t like the reason the cops are there.” If someone pounds on my door at 5AM in the morning and I don’t think I’ve done anything wrong, I’m going to be totally suspicious of their claim to be “cops”. Criminals love to shout “we’re cops” to get their victims to open their doors.

    3. avatar burley says:

      “If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, go home from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains set lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that ye were our countrymen.”
      ― Samuel Adams

      It’s all been said before. Choose now whether or not you will be free.

  31. avatar Jared says:

    If it saves just one life…..

    This is not the life they’re looking for….

  32. avatar Sam I Am says:

    OK. This is the case we have all been waiting for – unconstitutional suppression of due process (TRO), cops enforce it, gun owner effectively challenges with Molon Labe actions and gets dead. Somehow I don’t think the cops fear any retaliation for their actions.

    Another example of armed government agent forcefully denying a citizen his constitutional right to due process. Anybody seen the Minute Men set about rectifying this illegal act?

    Or is it acceptable to not ride to the defense of someone who may, might, could have done something that justifies taking his guns away, and we are waiting for a more righteous (pure) case of government amok? Like the Bonus Army March, Waco, Ruby Rodge, Bundy 1&2.?

    1. avatar LarryinTX says:

      Maybe one of the LE supporters could explain why this could not have been done at 5 the evening before, or 5 hours later at 10 am? Why did it have to be at dawn? When you figure out the reasons, see if you still support LE’s actions.

  33. avatar RCC says:

    Where to start – bad law and bad police “work”.

    Where I worked back in the 1990’s regulation said we could not serve administration type warrants before 08.00. Always tried to phone people to save time (rural area no point in driving an hour if they were not home).

    At 05.17 am I would expect people to be armed with a locked door.
    Politeness also goes a long way.

    Bad law overall –
    I’ve seen the Australian version abused by ex wife etc. One friend had an order taken out by female teacher girlfriend who admitted she hit him. Cost him 1000’s to fight it.

    1. avatar jwtaylor says:

      This is the way my department still does it today, and I think a lot of departments still do. We only deliver warrants during business hours. We don’t deliver warrants after dark. Why? Officer safety.

  34. avatar Kap says:

    they are going to have to enforce these orders with a SWAT team and kill a lot of gun owners. To many killings and the enforcers will probably have a full blown revolt on their hands,
    this was a Possible sister requesting the gun removal, this killing is on her head, direct blame because she got into a pissing contest with this guy!

    1. avatar CZJay says:

      You can’t just send two law enforcers if the guy is willing to put up a fight:

      1. avatar Matt(tx) says:

        Good on him.

      2. avatar TheTruthBurns says:

        Put a Bullet in that piece of Garbage. I prefer Brazil where they Kill All Criminals on the Street when caught in a commission of a crime. Should have Firebombed that Cracker’s House.

        1. avatar Scoutino says:

          Cleanup in isle 3. Can we get this racist post removed, please?

  35. avatar 2a suxs sucks says:

    Believe in something even if it cost you everything

  36. avatar Anymouse says:

    Rule 1: don’t fight the police. There’s more of them, and they’re all armed. Fight it in court. We all think these laws are unconstitutional, but I know of no court case ruling one way or another. A win in court wipes out these laws. Going out in a blaze of glory just makes people think that the dead guy is a dangerous weirdo who shouldn’t have had guns, and it’s a good thing the police were there to take them away. I think if there’s enough evidence that a person is a danger, they should be arrested and charged or put in a rubber room.

    1. avatar FedUp says:

      There’s more of them?

      There’s more oathbreaking murderers in this country than there are patriotic gun owners?

      Let’s do the math, there are around 800,000 people in this country with arrest powers, and around 100 million who own guns…

  37. avatar Rusty Chains says:

    The left sees these ERPO/red flag laws as a win-win-win: They win the most when a cop gets killed as this somehow proves that all gun owners are dangerous nuts. They also win when the gun owner gets iced by a cop enforcing an unconstitutional order (I vas just following orders). They still win when the guns are just stolen, and the victim has to spend more than they are worth to defend himself and his reputation just to get them back. All at no cost to the vindictive relative who pulled the trigger on him.

    If you live in one of those states, you would be well advised to review who has standing to attack you in this manner. Are any of them this level of nut case? If so you would likely be better off to cut those people out of your life.

    1. avatar CZJay says:

      Are any of them this level of nut case? If so you would likely be better off to cut those people out of your life.

      Which is another win for the left: Breaking up families.

      I don’t see how any pro 2nd Amendment person can argue these unconstitutional/unlawful laws to be a good thing. Gets cops killed, gets gun owners killed, it’s gun confiscation, no due process, breaks families up, increases militarization of police, etc. I guess if you are pro fascist government, it’s a fantastic idea worth supporting.

  38. avatar Mack The Knife says:

    There’s knives, hammers, baseball bats, umbrellas, cars, crow bars, you name it that are common household objects to do the deed. And on top of that, someone that might have cooled down from the prior nights spat may even be more apt to make the kill after his guns are confiscated. Pure political nonsense where the left expects the kill to take place to further their agenda. The safe thing is to always remove one of the individuals from the home.

  39. avatar Jbw says:

    The cops are not your friend when they show up at 5 am. No warrant no entry, don’t answer questions, don’t know anything about guns, call your attorney as soon as possible. If they take anything get pictures, video tape everything, get a receipt for anything taken, if they refuse ask for the watch commander, get names, what ever you do don’t fight with the cops

    1. avatar CZJay says:

      And make sure to take out a large loan to pay for all the court costs. Might as well see if you can get some kind of gun confiscation insurance policy just in case one day they come for you.

      They probably won’t allow you to stay in the house while they search for your guns.

  40. avatar Ralph says:

    The law worked exactly as it was supposed to work, with a dead gun owner as the logical result. The whole point of the Red Flag law is to kill us.

    1. avatar CZJay says:

      I figure it is meant as a step towards total gun confiscation. This is there “in” on the process. Cops will get used to rounding up guns from armed Americans and armed Americans will get used to complying. It’s a lot of good practice for the next increase in confiscation and registration [universal background checks].

      It keeps marching on:

    2. avatar Anonymous says:

      Turn your guns in or die.

      “Cold dead hands” instantiated.

  41. avatar Just Following Orders ... says:

    Demonstration tonight in Annapolis at Governor mansion / Lawyers Mall

    Patriot Picket on Facebook or MD shooters .com for more info.

  42. avatar Brewski says:

    Well, my scrutiny lies with the PD and the system that orchestrated and served this restraining order. But I’m guessing it was all hearsay, not vetted, no hard evidence, and all based off one person’s opinions. #metoobs

    It’s one thing if the person was increasingly becoming violent and danger to themselves or others, had a long history of violent mental illness or was planning an act of violence, or a combination of the two that was well documented and diagnosed.

    1. avatar Erik Weisz says:

      That would make him a prohibited person in the first place.

  43. avatar SoBe says:

    Let’s hope that the police don’t manage to kill everyone with a Gun Violence Restraining Order filed against them. Someone needs to survive to take these cases to the Supreme Court and have the unconstitutional laws repealed. Or, is this how they were planning to disarm the country?

  44. avatar Anonymous says:

    The order was apparently issued following a family dispute.

    She said one of her aunts requested the protective order to temporarily remove his guns.

    Good job family. You got him killed. Congratulations, give yourself a leftist pat on the back. You didn’t like him having guns. You didn’t believe he would say no to turning them in. You tried his patience anyways, and he f***ing died when you sent people with guns to steal his stuff, that you voted for. Good job. Revel in it, you worthless cowardly turds. I hope it torments you till you finally end.

    1. avatar Anonymous says:

      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.”

      But no scruples from you leftist blood sucking ticks sending men with guns to steal his stuff, which you voted for and whom you called to enforce your tyrant opinions on others.

      Reap it maggots. Reap it. Let it soak in, and then revel in it for all eternity.

    2. avatar Anonymous says:

      Willis said the officers should have continued to negotiate with her uncle.

      “They didn’t need to do what they did,” she said.

      Nope. They did exactly what they are trained to do. They enforced the law you voted for. It was you who should have negotiated with your uncle. You personally. You let them handle it, and now you reap what you sowed.

    3. avatar Ark says:

      One fewer gun owner in the world, I suppose she considers that a victory for the cause.

  45. avatar Erik Weisz says:

    If I’m not expecting someone at my house, I don’t even bother to see who it is knocking, much less answer it. I just don’t care to be bothered. Anyone who knows me knows to call first. I am ALWAYS armed, however, so kick in my door and you will get shot, regardless of who you are or what you’re wearing. I don’t even mess with double-tap to main mass, I practice head shots. I know there are no warrants out for me, and have no reason to think there ever would be. There is no such thing as the benefit of the doubt when my door is breached. Made a mistake? Fuck you, now you’re dead. Wrong address? Fuck you, now you’re dead. Someone sent you here based on a lie? Fuck you… you get the picture. Would it be worth it? Almost certainly not, but I’ll absolutely still do it anyway. If you can’t even stand for something in your own home, what is life worth anyway?

  46. avatar David Walters says:

    The situation and the results are certainly controversial and I wouldn’t argue with anyone on either side of this issue.

    But on this very site two minutes ago I watched a video of a man who nearly killed his wife with knife and was taken down by a citizen with a gun who didn’t have to fire. He too had a protective order against him which did exactly no good (I believe she survived the multiple stab wounds to the neck).

    The point? It’s that there are really dangerous people out there who would disregard protection orders and still do harm, armed with any sort of weapon.

    I’m still trying to sort out my thoughts on this.

    1. avatar Sam I Am says:

      “I’m still trying to sort out my thoughts on this.”

      Let me help with that….

      Protection orders protect no one. Same as GFZs. People determined to commit deadly assault or murder are not impressed by paper and posted signs.

      1. avatar Gralnok says:

        ^ This. The only defense against evil, are good men willing to fight it. Good guys with guns. The argument is the same because it doesn’t need to change.

    2. avatar LarryinTX says:

      Maybe I can help, too. Murdering or attempting to murder someone is a crime, and should be prosecuted. “Maybe someday you might try to murder someone” is NOT a crime, and should NOT be investigated, prosecuted, or punished. Mainly because it includes every human on the planet, allowing selective prosecution to control the world. Let’s not be that stupid.

  47. avatar Ed Schrade says:

    So this red flag law actually incited violence instead of prohibiting it, imagine that. This mans son should file a lawsuit.

  48. avatar Thomas says:

    I think the average IQ in the comment section is way below room temperature. Also, a link is available and you can read the FULL STORY, then you would understand (or not) how such orders work and what the criteria are. I am not sure you can figure out how to open the link, so maybe I am wasting my time.

    1. avatar Gralnok says:

      At first, I thought this was a murder committed by those who are supposed to protect us. I was outraged. Then, I read your post and decided to check the provided links. I would be lying if I said I hadn’t been played before, and I do tend to have a hot temper.

      The result? The police consider it a tool in enforcement of the law and keeping the public safe. In other words, it is EXACTLY as crooked as it’s made out to be.

      This was trespassing on someone’s property, assault, then murder. I would charge the aunt with murder.

      You should be ashamed for effectively sounding a false alarm.

      1. avatar Matt(tx) says:

        +100

    2. Really?! Do they follow the US Constitution/Bill of Rights!?

  49. CAN’T wait till the local/city/state police agencies are able to “issue THEIR own WARRANTS!” Talk about STASI and being declared an Enemy of the State!

  50. avatar Sora says:

    When you didn’t get out enough vote, ONE man did the “Cold Dead Hands”.
    You all talk, but how many volunteered at voter drives? Showed up at local #2A rallies?

    1. avatar Scoutino says:

      Not just local. I have been known to drive for 3-4 hours to attend a pro- rights rally that lasted less than hour and then drive 3-4 hours back.

  51. Here is the future of “Red Flag/STOP/ERPOs laws… All constitutional infringements under the disguise of public safety, crime control, and Homeland Security! We’ll all know what it feels like to become a Chinese dissident on the Run within the USA…If the Globalists/Lib TARD DemoCommies/SJW Marxists get THEIR way!
    Here’s today’s political news… oh look someone’s getting flagged by Big Brother!

    https://www.foxnews.com/tech/facebook-identifies-dozens-of-flagged-accounts-day-before-midterm-elections

  52. avatar Chadwick says:

    I guess at least they knocked instead of just breaking down his door. This guy was just unlucky enough not to have a dog in sight to catch the bullet for him. To protect and serve with extreme prejudice. They took the oath and shame on them. Yeah yeah I know… Just following orders. Well take your stand people of the badge. Choose your side wisely.

    1. avatar Clark Kent says:

      Then why don’t YOU become a police officer and show us all how it SHOULD be done, Chadwick? Put up or shut up.

  53. avatar Ark says:

    Well, there you go. It certainly didn’t take long for one of these orders to be used as a weapon in a petty argument by a person who wasn’t even an immediate family member. Legalized swatting, now with a body count.

    1. avatar Clark Kent says:

      ‘Legalized swatting’? With an armed suspect ready to shoot a police officer? Grow up.

      1. avatar Sam I Am says:

        “With an armed suspect ready to shoot a police officer? Grow up.”

        Really? There was an armed suspect? What crime had been committed, of which the armed citizen was accused? If the shotee was a suspect, where was the arrest warrant? If the shotee was a suspect, when were his Miranda rights explained? If the shotee was a suspect, where was the arrest warrant? Not being charged with a crime, hot being presented a warrant for arrest, what authority did LE have for forcing entry? No one is immune to pre-crime punishment. Are you happy with that status quo?

  54. avatar Mort says:

    The bottom line here is, if you want to put an end to these ‘red flag orders’ then stop voting democrat! Voting democrat is what causes these kinds of laws, unconstitutional laws that can get you killed! Remember that the democrat agenda is gun confiscation of the public!

  55. avatar John Davis says:

    Hi,

    It’s sad that you had to run this story with so little information made available to you.

    At the time the Red Coats were seen coming, all the masses were ready. Also, Hitler removed all the weapons, starting with his own people, before he began to invade other countries. “He was elected!”

    “THE RED COATS ARE COMING! THE RED COATS ARE COMING! WAIT! WHERE ARE ALL THE GUNS? THE SOLD OUT POLITICIANS TOOK THEM CREATING UNCONSTITUTIONAL LAWS.”

    The Japanese feared invading the U.S. Not now. When U.N Troops are activated because of a created crisis it will be so easy. REMEMBER POLITICIANS IN CHICAGO REQUESTING FOREIGN TROOPS?

    Another thing. Why no info on the person shot? Was he a veteran? Was he unstable? What did he look like? Was he on drugs? Why did a relative want to see that person disarmed?

    I’ll tell you why there’s no further details released to the article writers, Stupid people who read it without checking any facts will believe every word. “He was an old unstable man who was a danger to the public.” This is another attempt to sensationalize a one in 1,000s of other circumstances and use it to remove the ability of countless citizens “WHO ARE” sane, law abiding, young, strong, and have the ability to defend this country from all ENEMIES FOREIGN, OR DOMESTIC.”

    John (Christan, Desert Storm Veteran, Father of 3
    one serves as an army ranger)

  56. avatar fteter says:

    We don’t have all the facts here. We don’t know what motivated the complaint under the “red flag” law and whether the facts met the standard for “extreme risk” required under Maryland law. Nor can we find out much more because, under Maryland law, anything related to a court order is confidential unless the court explicitly rules otherwise. What we do know is that a bad law (in my opinion, due to conflicts with the 2nd Amendment) has led to a terrible results that is likely to repeat itself.

    Personally, I’m grateful today that I don’t live in a state with a red flag law. Nevertheless, I will plan and act as though I did. There will be no individual confrontation with police officers if they knock on my door. I’ll allow them access to search and seize within the scope of their court order, because a confrontation with armed officers over a gun can only end badly. But I highly doubt they’ll find anything 😉

    1. avatar Gun Owner says:

      Shall. Not. Be. Infringed. red flag law is unconstitutional with even a cursory reading of the Amendment. Responses like this are why we have such an infringed right to keep and bear arms.

  57. avatar Fed Up says:

    Where was the Due Process guaranteed in the Bill of Rights? Effing stormtroopers showed up with papers from a corrupt government that passed laws which were unconstitutional. Now every gun owner in the beltway is going to have an itchy trigger finger when the police show up at their door – and rightly so.

    1. avatar Clark Kent says:

      Fed Up: Since you are so concerned with imaginary ‘stormtroopers’ hit the road for Canada and don’t look back. You won’t be missed. Buh-bye!

      1. avatar Sam I Am says:

        People who do not like this country because it is founded on freedom and liberty of the individual should leave.

        People who do not want to be inhibited by the constitution should leave.

        People who believe the government that governs best governs everything should leave.

        People who are dismissive of others who believe in the nation, and adherence to the constitution should leave.

        The rest of us want a government that is restricted in the extreme, permitted only to provide for the common defense, and resolving disputes (IAW the Constitution) among and between the states. A government whose agents are prohibited from even contemplating violating the constitution, and are removed for the mere thought.

        If you would love a smothering government, Canada and the rest of the world await you.

  58. avatar Notta says:

    The ‘Law is on the side of the law no matter how horrible or stupid whatever law it is.
    Careful out there.

  59. avatar Tim says:

    He will haunt those B!+ches that filed to violate his Rights.

  60. avatar Mzungu Writes says:

    Oh now the shoe is on the other foot and we understand the BLM feelings. So why don’t we riot and tear down businesses and set the town on fire? Because we are better than that. My advice is to not be a braggart, do not tell anyone anything about your gun collection even if it is a Red Ryder BB gun because, as we have seen, the world is full of ignorance and superstition when it comes to guns. If you have an antique 1911 you want to show to a grandson or a civil war collection piece consider who his parents are. If there is a Berkley Liberal in the home don’t show the boy anything but $5 to get an ice cream cone.

  61. avatar Ll83 says:

    Some of these people on here act like he was asking for it just because he answered the door with his gun in hand….If someone comes beating on my door at 5 o’clock in the morning then YES I will have my gun in hand…I do not trust anyone in this world… It could be anyone on the other side

    1. avatar Clark Kent says:

      Better ditch that firearm when you find out the police are at your door. OBEY NOW, LIVE TO SUE/COMPLAIN/FILE LAWSUIT LATER.

      1. avatar Rivahmitch says:

        Sieg Heil!! Ve must obey! Serfdom or dhimmitude will hang lightly on your neck, Clark!

  62. avatar Gun Owner says:

    The 2nd Amendment is a joke, and the government doesn’t respect the words within and the citizens don’t care enough to actually defend it. This man was murdered by the government. Our founding fathers would be forming a militia in response to this and going to take on the government enforcers… and anyone who thinks that’s not the case, doesn’t understand what happened on King Street, in Lexington or Concord…

    1. avatar Rivahmitch says:

      Yep. Those who will not fight for the 2nd Amendment will also lose all the others. The Founders clearly recognized that. Those stupid enough to depend on the government to protect them from government tyranny will not long enjoy freedom.

  63. avatar Fireman306 says:

    Also it says they were there to serve a warrant over the weapons, does that mean that they have a kick in the door search warrant? Or do they politely knock on your door and ask you if you have guns? And if so you say no and they go away or did they come in and check your place? Or you Plead your case at the front door and tell them “”I have had some trouble with some “family members” who are mad and being vindictive over family inheritance and said they will do whatever it takes to get me in trouble. So Lodi believe? I don’t have gallons but thanks for asking

    1. avatar Icabod says:

      Reading through the various articles, police knocked on the door. When Willis answered, he was armed. He put his gun down to read the paperwork. Reportedly he became upset, then retrieved his gun. Wheather it was his gun or apolice gun that next went off isn’t certain.
      There is mention that police were there the night before. His niece discribe it as “Family being family.” She reports her “aunt” made the complaint.
      The Maryland law went into effect 1 Oct 2018. Willis was the target of the 114th order. The county is currently tired for first place with 19 such orders. Police are build additional storage space.
      The law hasn’t gotten a lot of notice. Questions have been raise if Willis even knew of the law.
      No, there’s been no mention of any recordings.

  64. avatar Tim says:

    You can’t take our guns or our cars. You told us we can’t have a drink for 18 years, and you made Alcoholics out of us you told us we can’t smoke what we want now we can grow it and buy it at the store . if you make us fight another stupid War it will caused by tyranny and you will see a a pissed-off citizenry and you will be the ememy we all shall see

  65. avatar TheTruthBurns says:

    With “Family” members like these who needs enemies? Notice how it’s going to Overwhelmingly be Women who are “Scared” that will end up getting “Family” members killed by Police. Watch for this Next Scam – You want your “Family” member’s Money? Set them up to be Killed by the Police serving a False warrant. NEVER Answer the door to Police if you didn’t call them. Down here in Florida we have had Too many cases of Cops being Dumb going to the Wrong Addresses to serve a No Knock warrant & the law abiding citizen fearing for their lives gun in hand are shot down Dead by the Cops who Never Identify themselves & then it gets swept under the rug by the DA & Judges because the Cops were within their “Right to Defend Themselves”? What? I am a gun owner & I Don’t Advertise it but I take my gun wherever I want & Nobody is going to tell me different. Avoid the Cops unless you Need them – Don’t become a “Misunderstanding”.

    1. avatar Clark Kent says:

      Then why don’t YOU become a police officer and show us all how it SHOULD be done? Put up or shut up.

Write a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

button to share on facebook
button to tweet
button to share via email