The Goat Pen

The Anne Arundel County police chief defended Maryland’s new “red flag” protective law Monday, just hours after a 61-year-old man was shot and killed while officers were trying to serve a court order requiring him to surrender his guns.

Chief Timothy Altomare said the fatal shooting in Ferndale was a sign that the law, which went into effect Oct. 1, is needed. There have been 19 protective orders sought in the county since then, tying Harford County for the most in Maryland, according to a report on the first month. Statewide, about half of the 114 orders sought have been granted.

“If you look at this morning’s outcome, it’s tough for us to say ‘Well, what did we prevent?’ ” he said. “Because we don’t know what we prevented or could’ve prevented. What would’ve happened if we didn’t go there at 5 a.m.?”
---------------------------------------------------------------


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 Willis’ guns.

Michele Willis said she had grown up in the house and had been there Sunday night to move out her son, who had been helping to care for her grandmother.

Her uncle, Gary Willis, lived in an apartment above the garage; she said other family members, including her grandmother, another uncle, two aunts and Gary Willis’ girlfriend were also at the home Sunday night.

She said her uncle “likes to speak his mind,” but she described him as harmless.

“I’m just dumbfounded right now,” she said. “My uncle wouldn’t hurt anybody.”

"Gary J. Willis isn’t dead because he tried to shoot someone. He is dead because someone convinced a judge that he might shoot someone, and now police are hailing this as a success"

Shouldn't have resisted and fired his gun. Like I said before but you said that was never stated. Which it was in your own post. He made a fatal mistake and the cop is right. What if the didn't show up at 5am and he got even more agitated at his family. It even states someone was moving out there son. Probably afraid if theyre doing it at 5am

Jungle Rat wrote:Shouldn't have resisted and fired his gun. Like I said before but you said that was never stated. Which it was in your own post. He made a fatal mistake and the cop is right. What if the didn't show up at 5am and he got even more agitated at his family. It even states someone was moving out there son. Probably afraid if theyre doing it at 5am

he didn't fire the gun, it went off when the cops struggled with him

what you aren't getting , or I expect you do and won't address it is, we only hear the cops side of the story that is being reported, and you are accepting it as fact

the only irrefutable fact is that Mr. Willis was a law abiding citizen who did not break any laws, yet had his constitutional rights infringed over nothing more than his sister making a phone call - and he died for standing up for that right to the police.

Are the police always right when your ex wife or daughter calls and reports you for something?

The story that you posted says he did fire the gun. His family called the police for a reason. The son moved out at 5am for a reason. I see your side, I just don't agree with it. No, the police aren't always right. But I didn't have a gun in my hand nor did I fire it. It's ashame the guy died. Are you sure he had a spotless record or is that just a guess? There was no history there?

Jungle Rat wrote:The story that you posted says he did fire the gun. His family called the police for a reason. The son moved out at 5am for a reason. I see your side, I just don't agree with it. No, the police aren't always right. But I didn't have a gun in my hand nor did I fire it. It's ashame the guy died. Are you sure he had a spotless record or is that just a guess? There was no history there?

there are articles that are posted after the initial one.

Your family called the police for a reason too. Were they justified?

Our system is setup for the purpose of not being able to place a simple phone call and the police take away your constitutional rights. If he was breaking the law he'd been arrested. He didn't break any laws and he died in his own home.

You piss someone off and they can red flag you with cops and have thousands of dollars of property confiscated without a trial. Just a horrible law. Quite the trampling of rights and due process.

Correct: Red flag laws are Constitutionally outrageous. Can you imagine laws that deprive you of your right to vote because somebody thinks you might abuse it? Or laws depriving you of access to an attorney because someone thinks it might be dangerous?

I can only imagine how many couples going through a divorce, and the bitter angry wife says her gun owning husband is a threat, and the cops show up to disarm him. That scenario could be in the millions.

Like I said, a federal red flag law was the worst option - even the ACLU makes noises about challenging that one. But it's probably the only measure the gun makers and NRA can abide economically. Reinstating the AW ban would cripple some manufacturers. Background checks and/or registries make some buyers skittish. Give a little to keep a lot will likely be their play - they know the public is demanding some kind of law.

I would actually be for a universal background check if it wasn't tied to every gun purchase

When I get a drivers license, its a license that is renewed on a regular basis with some supposed criteria, but its not connected with any car I purchase - and every time I purchase a gun, if the gun shop owner or individual using a smart phone typed in my ID and it came back as a simple yes or no - without entering in the gun information I would be OK with that.

The reason people are skittish about a universal ID check is because the way it is setup now, the government keeps a database (even though they say they don't) of every gun purchase you make, and its really none of the government's business how many guns I lawfully purchase, nor what kind - as long as I have a license or whatever that says I'm good to go.

now of course that leaves the license criteria in the hands of the government and so I would expect it to be at the federal level with some very exact laws about what the license can and cannot do - and specifically forbid it to address individual gun type, quantity or region.

The only reason there isn't universal backgrounds checks now is because the backers insisted that it be for every gun purchase which would easily lead to a national gun registry to the politicians (and NRA) against it mandated the gunshow loop hole which effective rendered a national gun registry useless.

but a background check is useless. The shooters in both El Paso and Dayton would have easily passed the most stringent background check in the nation, I believe that's New Jersey.
Background checks are designed to stop felons from legally purchasing guns - that's it. And felons aren't usually mass murderers.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/frightened-b ... 46924.html

I imagine people that 1) are upsait with the country and 2) need to Google something like this are going to be shocked what they find out about trying to emigrate.

I'm strongly considering retiring in a central American country

but only because I can live in a seaside community with a very high standard of living for $40K a year.

Just pick one that has some level of health care that isn't prone to a coup every 5 years.

My favorite guy is the one who rules out Australia because he hates spiders more than guns.

AlabamAlum wrote:You piss someone off and they can red flag you with cops and have thousands of dollars of property confiscated without a trial. Just a horrible law. Quite the trampling of rights and due process.

Same with drug laws...

eCat wrote:I'm strongly considering retiring in a central American country

but only because I can live in a seaside community with a very high standard of living for $40K a year.

Just pick one that has some level of health care that isn't prone to a coup every 5 years.

Better also check to see how powerful the drug cartels are and how corrupt the local public officials are in the area. That $40k figure may not include the expense of making ransom payments or making bail on trumped up police charges.

But I can certainly relate. Ireland is my backup plan.

Prison is mine.

Rat, you don't know any of the Clintons do you? For your personal safety, I hope not.

I hope you really don't believe that shit. Oh wait, forgot who I'm dealing with.

well somebody knew enough to take him off of suicide watch, disable the camera move his roommate out of the cell and ensure the guards didn't round every 30 minutes

If Epstein had anything on the Clintons you know damn well Trump would have had a guard on his hip 24/7.

crashcourse wrote:well somebody knew enough to take him off of suicide watch, disable the camera move his roommate out of the cell and ensure the guards didn't round every 30 minutes

yea, there is alot of stuff going on there - one or two things might be understandable, explainable - but c'mon, everyone knew this was coming and it happened anyway