Judge Denies Gun Seizure Request Under Colorado ‘Red Flag’ Law

By Victor Westerkamp

A Colorado judge has denied a Temporary Extreme Risk Protection Order (ERPO) to confiscate an individual’s gun under the State’s Red Flag Law.

The Red Flag Law allows law enforcement to temporarily seize someone’s guns if a judge rules these create an imminent danger for the individual himself or his environment.

When a request is granted, another hearing must be set within 14 days to determine whether the arms confiscation will need to be extended to a 365-day term.

guns in colorado
School teachers and administrators fire guns during a three-day firearms course sponsored by FASTER Colorado at Flatrock Training Center in Commerce City, Colo., on June 27, 2018. (Jason Connolly/AFP/Getty Images)

A woman from Limon in Lincoln County reportedly filed the request, attesting that her partner verbally and physically threatened her by means of his gun, CBS reported.

Although more than 30 Colorado counties have opposed the state’s Red Flag Law and have declared themselves “2nd Amendment sanctuaries,” the judge’s rejection is not necessarily an endorsement of the 2nd Amendment. It is determined in the ruling that it’s up to the judge to decide whether the defendant truly is a threat to himself or the environment.

So far, four such requests have been put forward since the Grand Canyon State implemented the Red Flag Law on January 1; three of them, two in Denver County and one in Larimer County, have been granted, but the fourth, in Lincoln County has been denied.

Although the reasoning behind the judge’s denial has not been made public, many gun owner rights activists celebrated it as a victory.

“Red flag laws just allow for harassment of legal gun owners,” Jak Gruenberg, a gun enthusiast said, according to CBS.

Lawmakers in Colorado signed the “Red Flag” gun bill into law on April 12. Law enforcement, family, and household members are all able to petition for the temporary removal of a person’s right to possess a firearm after proving with facts that the person poses a significant risk.

The bill HB19-1177, called the Extreme Risk Protection Order (ERPO), went into effect on Jan. 1, 2020.

According to the bill, “The petitioner must submit an affidavit signed under oath and penalty of perjury that sets forth facts to support the issuance of a temporary ERPO and a reasonable basis for believing they exist.”

After a petition is filed, the court is obligated to hold a temporary ERPO hearing in person or by telephone on the same day, or the court day immediately following the filing day.

Once a temporary ERPO is issued, a second hearing must be scheduled by the court within 14 days following the ERPO to determine whether a continuing ERPO is necessary.

If that is indeed the case, the Bill further stipulates: “The ERPO prohibits the respondent from possessing, controlling, purchasing, or receiving a firearm for 364 days.”

Epoch Times reporter Jeremy Sandberg contributed to this article