Maryland: Cops Shoot Man to Death In His Home For Resisting Gun Confiscation


#1

By: Chris Menahan | Information Liberation

Police in the Democrat haven of Maryland shot and killed a man in his home on Monday while serving a "protective order" under a new law which allows them to seize people's guns without due process.

Since the new gun confiscation law went into effect on October 1st, police have carried out 19 such confiscation orders, which comes out to around one such seizure every other day.

From The Baltimore Sun:

Two Anne Arundel County police officers serving one of the 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 the gun 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.

Read more: http://planetfreewill.com/maryland-cops-gun-confiscation/


#2

Are you using this site to promote your own?


#3

That’s not good at all. This is how it all starts. If we allow these types of laws to pass, then this will spread across the country and will stretch into other aspect of the law until none of us are able to have firearms.


#4

more info is needed. Did the cops feel threatened… no, wait… WERE they objectively theratened?


#5

He asked permission to post here. We try to support other small independent outfits when and where we can.

He made and introductory post to the community.


#6

The pros and cons of gun confiscation notwithstanding, answering the door with a gun in your hand is a bad idea when the cops come a knocking.


#7

LOL

but of course not funny… just sounds funny


#8

Sounds funny? How so?


#9

bc it is something that should not have to be said… you know, a Captain Obvious type of thing

so I was laughing at the apparent sarcasm…


#10

Anyone banging on my door at 5:17am is going to be met by an angry man with a gun.


#11

They would be met by my dog.


#12

There was a time in this country when warrants and such could only be served during daylight hours and on weekdays.


#14

Good to see you. I’m still learning my way around.


#15

Yeah, but some genius decided that cops would have a tactical advantage if they rouse people out of a sound sleep and thus be confused and not thinking clearly. It turns out they are right, which makes serving such warrants more dangerous both for the cops and for the servee.


#16

It was people like Darryl Gates and besides the “tactical advantage” it was to “preserve evidence”.


#17

If a person is considered a danger to themselves and others, enough so that their gun can be confiscated, then they should have a mandatory mental health examination first.

Taking a gun away is not going to prevent suicide nor is it going to deter someone from harming others. It only changes the means of delivery.


#18

Hey Samm,

Good to see you here :smile:


#19

There are too many grey areas to determine if someone is mentally capable to own a firearm of if they are a danger to themselves or others. These grey areas could be used to confincate weapons from a majority of us. Even if they did do this, it still wouldn’t be able to catch those individuals who just snap.


#20

As you quoted, I agree.

However, I am emphasizing IF you have cause to think someone is going to be a danger, they should be subject to a mental health evaluation first and foremost. I don’t agree with gun confiscation from anyone who legally owns a gun.

In Florida, we have the Baker Act:
The Baker Act allows for involuntary examination (what some call emergency or involuntary commitment). It can be initiated by judges, law enforcement officials, physicians, or mental health professionals. There must be evidence that the person: possibly has a mental illness (as defined in the Baker Act ).


#21

That is the scary part cuz anyone can say anything about you. This is what I mean by grey areas. If it were based on black or white, yes or no accusations and evidence then yes it could work. But it’s the greys and mabey’s that can cause problems and the govt could use these to confiscate more weapons than they actually need.