Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 32

Thread: Loveland, CO pays $15,000 to settle open carry lawsuit

  1. #1
    Campaign Veteran
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Thornton, Colorado, USA
    Posts
    136

    Loveland, CO pays $15,000 to settle open carry lawsuit

    Didn't post the link to the original thread, but some good news.........

    http://www.denverpost.com/breakingnews/ci_17628424

  2. #2
    Regular Member entartet17's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Aurora, Colorado, USA
    Posts
    206
    Good to hear. Opencarrybilly is a great guy.
    "There are those who still think they are holding the pass against a revolution that may be coming up the road. But they are gazing in the wrong direction. The revolution is behind them. It went by in the Night of Depression, singing songs of freedom" -- Garet Garrett, The Revolution Was (1938)

  3. #3
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Loveland, Colorado, USA
    Posts
    164

    Thanks, entartet17. I think that my lawyer, Nelson Boyle, is also a great guy.

    Sorry I have been absent for so long from the forum. But, now I am free to talk about the case, so, please ask questions, and I will try to give some helpful answers :-)

    I have been here daily, reading and learning. And, I do appreciate all of you.

  4. #4
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Nashville, Tennessee, United States
    Posts
    592
    Quote Originally Posted by opencarrybilly View Post
    Sorry I have been absent for so long from the forum. But, now I am free to talk about the case, so, please ask questions, and I will try to give some helpful answers :-)

    I have been here daily, reading and learning. And, I do appreciate all of you.
    The burning question that must be asked (but doesn't have to be answered): How much did you ACTUALLY get?

    Even if you don't answer my first question, what is the first gun you will buy with your settlement?

  5. #5
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Fort Collins CO
    Posts
    34
    use some of the money to buy the biggest pistol you can find,
    then lets all have a OC BBQ in loveland!!

  6. #6
    Campaign Veteran since9's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Colorado Springs, Colorado, USA
    Posts
    6,787
    Quote Originally Posted by js5439 View Post
    use some of the money to buy the biggest pistol you can find,
    then lets all have a OC BBQ in loveland!!
    Excellent idea! Any chance we can kick it off around 4pm or 5pm on April 14? I'll be in that neck of the woods all day! Save some gas and tire money...
    The First protects the Second, and the Second protects the First. Together, they protect the rest of our Bill of Rights and our United States Constitution, and help We the People protect ourselves in the spirit of our Declaration of Independence.

  7. #7
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Lakewood, Colorado, USA
    Posts
    1,250
    "The motivation of the city of Loveland and the Police Department in settling the lawsuit for a nominal amount is to avoid the excessive cost of on-going litigation at the expense of Loveland's taxpaying residents," the city said in a statement.


    Why did you settle?
    Last edited by cscitney87; 03-18-2011 at 12:02 AM.

  8. #8
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Loveland, Colorado, USA
    Posts
    164
    Quote Originally Posted by WCrawford View Post
    The burning question that must be asked (but doesn't have to be answered): How much did you ACTUALLY get?
    Thanks to Nelson Boyle's skill and wisdom, I came out OK on the $$. They offerred $5,000 more for my silence. I declined.

    Quote Originally Posted by WCrawford View Post
    Even if you don't answer my first question, what is the first gun you will buy with your settlement?
    I don't plan to buy any more guns.

  9. #9
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Loveland, Colorado, USA
    Posts
    164
    Quote Originally Posted by cscitney87 View Post
    "The motivation of the city of Loveland and the Police Department in settling the lawsuit for a nominal amount is to avoid the excessive cost of on-going litigation at the expense of Loveland's taxpaying residents," the city said in a statement.


    Why did you settle?
    From: http://www.reporterherald.com/news_story.asp?ID=31593

    “Miller’s Denver lawyer, Nelson Boyle, said the settlement was likewise the wisest move for his client because of the uncertainty of the trial’s outcome.”

    “The problem was the economics of it, from the plaintiff’s side,” Boyle said. “You could easily spend $10,000 to $20,000, on the cheap side, for a case like this. Odds are that a jury is not going to make a substantial award in a case where there was no personal injury.”

  10. #10
    Regular Member Gunslinger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Free, Colorado, USA
    Posts
    3,855
    That is great news. My sincere congatulations!

    They wanted to "save the taxpayers money." 15 large may be nominal to them, but I'll take it! And if I was a taxpayer, I'd want some answers right now, or the resignation of the head stormtrooper. The cops acted properly..." after all, they only violated Bill's rights a little...$500 a minute for their 30 minute 'little' violation.
    Last edited by Gunslinger; 03-18-2011 at 12:51 PM.

  11. #11
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    1,187
    Quote Originally Posted by opencarrybilly View Post
    Thanks to Nelson Boyle's skill and wisdom, I came out OK on the $$. They offerred $5,000 more for my silence. I declined.
    It's the principle more than the money, IMO. You made them feel it enough to get the principle and publicized the issue. We'll consider that $5k a donation to the cause. Thanks, Billy!

    '“Our officers are going to have to make informed decisions, but quick decisions. They have to take the Second Amendment, the Fourth Amendment, the public safety and their own safety into account right now, and make a decision right now.”

    Miller was sitting on a lakeshore bench when officers approached him, took his gun and emptied it, then ran the serial number through a police database.

    Hecker said police were correct in acting to empty ammunition from the gun to ensure public safety.

    “They had the obligation to determine what his intent was, what his state of mind was,” Hecker said.'

    BullbullbullBULLpuckey! Contacting him? Sure. A 70 year old man eating an apple and enjoying the sunset? Unusual sight, I'll grant you. I don't know if people in Loveland tend to hate apples and sunsets. You might want to just say hi. He's got a gun? Sure, look him over and see if his behavior indicates anything untoward. IF he gets beligerent (not saying Billy was), maybe you'll do an official contact. Is he acting like a lost mental patient? Yeah, MAYBE then you want to do due diligence and check his ID. Is he agressive? Sure, disarm him if it's in procedure and you have RAS.

    But....the SERIAL number???? WHAT RAS did they have to check the SERIAL NUMBER??? They don't have RAS to "check everything out". Did they also take a vial of blood for BAC and make sure he wasn't wearing black market Calvin Klien chones?? Contact could MAYBE be justified. Disarming probably not. Running the serial number hangs them with harrassment and not looking for anything "suspicious" and instead looking for anything to give them an excuse to interrogate him further. I don't give a damn if they did it "too make sure he's okay". They didn't have RAS. Our system of law does not allow them to "make sure things are okay" preemptively.

  12. #12
    Centurion
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Yuma, Arizona, USA
    Posts
    923

    There is a poster on freerepublic.com who is casting aspersions on you

    Quote Originally Posted by opencarrybilly View Post
    Sorry I have been absent for so long from the forum. But, now I am free to talk about the case, so, please ask questions, and I will try to give some helpful answers :-)

    I have been here daily, reading and learning. And, I do appreciate all of you.
    I have been defending your actions, but if you could personally respond, it would be quite helpful. You obviously know more about the case than anyone else.

    The discussion is taking place at this thread:

    http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2690873/posts

    You have to sign up to be able to post, but I find freerepublic to be a valuable resource, and I would love to have you defend yourself against the poster IrishCatholic.

  13. #13
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Loveland, Colorado, USA
    Posts
    164
    Quote Originally Posted by Gunslinger View Post
    That is great news. My sincere congatulations!

    They wanted to "save the taxpayers money." 15 large may be nominal to them, but I'll take it! And if I was a taxpayer, I'd want some answers right now, or the resignation of the head stormtrooper. The cops acted properly..." after all, they only violated Bill's rights a little...$500 a minute for their 30 minute 'little' violation.
    I hadn't thought of it that way. Makes me feel good. Thanks.

  14. #14
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Loveland, Colorado, USA
    Posts
    164
    Quote Originally Posted by mahkagari View Post
    It's the principle more than the money, IMO. You made them feel it enough to get the principle and publicized the issue. We'll consider that $5k a donation to the cause. Thanks, Billy!

    '“Our officers are going to have to make informed decisions, but quick decisions. They have to take the Second Amendment, the Fourth Amendment, the public safety and their own safety into account right now, and make a decision right now.”

    Miller was sitting on a lakeshore bench when officers approached him, took his gun and emptied it, then ran the serial number through a police database.

    Hecker said police were correct in acting to empty ammunition from the gun to ensure public safety.

    “They had the obligation to determine what his intent was, what his state of mind was,” Hecker said.'

    BullbullbullBULLpuckey! Contacting him? Sure. A 70 year old man eating an apple and enjoying the sunset? Unusual sight, I'll grant you. I don't know if people in Loveland tend to hate apples and sunsets. You might want to just say hi. He's got a gun? Sure, look him over and see if his behavior indicates anything untoward. IF he gets beligerent (not saying Billy was), maybe you'll do an official contact. Is he acting like a lost mental patient? Yeah, MAYBE then you want to do due diligence and check his ID. Is he agressive? Sure, disarm him if it's in procedure and you have RAS.

    But....the SERIAL number???? WHAT RAS did they have to check the SERIAL NUMBER??? They don't have RAS to "check everything out". Did they also take a vial of blood for BAC and make sure he wasn't wearing black market Calvin Klien chones?? Contact could MAYBE be justified. Disarming probably not. Running the serial number hangs them with harrassment and not looking for anything "suspicious" and instead looking for anything to give them an excuse to interrogate him further. I don't give a damn if they did it "too make sure he's okay". They didn't have RAS. Our system of law does not allow them to "make sure things are okay" preemptively.
    You are SO "right on" - as we used to say. I am honored to know you.

  15. #15
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Loveland, Colorado, USA
    Posts
    164
    Quote Originally Posted by ccwinstructor View Post
    I have been defending your actions, but if you could personally respond, it would be quite helpful. You obviously know more about the case than anyone else.

    The discussion is taking place at this thread:

    http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2690873/posts

    You have to sign up to be able to post, but I find freerepublic to be a valuable resource, and I would love to have you defend yourself against the poster IrishCatholic.
    Yesterday, I read the forum you suggested and have done a lot of thinking about it. My conclusion is that I will decline, at this time, to engage in defending my actions. Otheers on that forum have a good job of answering the poster. And, from what I have been reading on this forum and in the newspaper, many people think think that Nelson and I did well in this case. Surprisingly, some even think that I am a "great guy." I don't think I need any defense.

    If you and your friends on this and other forums want to work toward similar cases coming out better in future, may I suggest that you look into the process - check on restrictions and obsticles that make pursuit of cases cost prohibitive and excessively time consuming for most ordinary people. Have a close look at court proceedures. Closely examing police training in your jurisdiction. Dig deep. Speek loud:-)

    Thanks. And, I'm glad you're engaged in this discussion.

    Best wishes.
    Last edited by opencarrybilly; 03-19-2011 at 10:23 AM.

  16. #16
    Regular Member MKEgal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    in front of my computer, WI
    Posts
    4,426
    Wow... wish your case had settled before mine; I would have gotten more from the city that harassed me, & I went through more!

    Good for you, though. That $5K extra would have been tempting. Telling the truth is more important.

    The officers briefly took the gun for their safety and those in the park, the city stated.
    HAH!
    When they started handling an unfamiliar pistol they made the situation MORE dangerous.
    It was perfectly safe sitting undisturbed in its holster.
    And since they gave it back, obviously he wasn't a danger... and hadn't been, so they had no reason to take it in the first place.

    Substitute "car" or "religious object" for "gun" and see how far that'd fly.
    Do they randomly stop people driving cars there, just to make sure they're licensed?
    Do they randomly stop people out & about with children, just to make sure they're not registered sex offenders?
    Quote Originally Posted by MLK, Jr
    The ultimate measure of a man is not where he stands in moments of comfort & convenience, but where he stands at times of challenge & controversy.
    Quote Originally Posted by MSG Laigaie
    Citizenship is a verb.
    Quote Originally Posted by Proverbs 27:12
    A prudent person foresees the danger ahead and takes precautions.
    The simpleton goes blindly on and suffers the consequences.
    Quote Originally Posted by Proverbs 31:17
    She dresses herself with strength and makes her arms strong.

  17. #17
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Nashville, Tennessee, United States
    Posts
    592
    If my previous tongue in cheek post didn't quite convey the point (and after a couple days it doesn't to me); CONGRATS!

    Job well done!

  18. #18
    Centurion
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Yuma, Arizona, USA
    Posts
    923

    Thanks for looking at freerepublic

    Quote Originally Posted by opencarrybilly View Post
    Yesterday, I read the forum you suggested and have done a lot of thinking about it. My conclusion is that I will decline, at this time, to engage in defending my actions. Otheers on that forum have a good job of answering the poster. And, from what I have been reading on this forum and in the newspaper, many people think think that Nelson and I did well in this case. Surprisingly, some even think that I am a "great guy." I don't think I need any defense.

    If you and your friends on this and other forums want to work toward similar cases coming out better in future, may I suggest that you look into the process - check on restrictions and obsticles that make pursuit of cases cost prohibitive and excessively time consuming for most ordinary people. Have a close look at court proceedures. Closely examing police training in your jurisdiction. Dig deep. Speek loud:-)

    Thanks. And, I'm glad you're engaged in this discussion.

    Best wishes.
    Is there a source that I can use on freerepublic to show that you refused 5K to buy your silence? It is a powerful argument against those who claim that you did it for the money.

  19. #19
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    1,187
    Quote Originally Posted by ccwinstructor View Post
    Is there a source that I can use on freerepublic to show that you refused 5K to buy your silence? It is a powerful argument against those who claim that you did it for the money.
    Bah. ******* in the wind. Remember the rule of thirds. A third of the people will agree with you. A third will never agree no matter what you say. The middle can be swayed. The middle's already made up their mind by now. Surely you have more things to do than divide up the middle third of the middle third. What will you get if you convince them? What will you lose if you don't? I'm sure there are better places to exert energy in the 2A fight than convincing fellow 2A'ers of the motivation of one man in a 67,000 person Colorado mountain town.

    Thought occurs to me though, running the serial number on a legally carried weapon is not the same as running the plates on a car. The plates are a license. Get it, "license" plates? He didn't need a license so his "license" checked out. He wasn't forbidden from carrying based on his ID that would say he was a felon. Running the serial is more akin to the cop pulling you over in a routine traffic stop and saying, "I don't believe your registration, pop your hood and wait until I can get a mechanic here to inspect the VINs on your car." Additionally, there is ZERO information that can be gotten from running the serial number except the off chance that it was stolen AND the rightful owner recorded the serial number.

    I'll end the rant there before going into how that database wouldn't be accessible to "running" it, much less checking it for resale. Yep, that's right, for all the hooplah a huge percentage of stolen guns are resold despite being "run" at POS.
    Last edited by mahkagari; 03-19-2011 at 02:33 PM.

  20. #20
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    1,187
    Quote Originally Posted by mahkagari View Post
    Bah. ******* in the wind.
    Really? I can't say *******? "*******"? I mean, *******? Even in an oldtimey phrase like "******* in the wind"? I tried to think of something else, like spit in the air it lands in your face, or **** up a rope, or even talking to a brick wall. Nothing worked like ******* in the wind. Surely in such a context the word ******* is warranted for 1A? Come, on. Really? *******! *******! *******! *******! Nyah, nyah, nyah *******! *******! *******! Said it again! Nee! Nee! I'll say that too! Call me a ruffian if you will but I'll say "nee" to old women at will! Oh, that one's not censored, huh? NEE! NEE! Icky-Icky-Icky-Icky-Kapang-Zoop-Boing! What are you going to DO about i-

  21. #21
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Loveland, Colorado, USA
    Posts
    164
    Quote Originally Posted by MKEgal View Post
    HAH!
    When they started handling an unfamiliar pistol they made the situation MORE dangerous.
    It was perfectly safe sitting undisturbed in its holster.
    That's what I told the officer when he grabbed hold of it and said he was going to take it (against my denial of that permission).

    And, it was real scarey when cop #2 racked the slide as he held the gun (1911 cocked and locked) perpendicular to the ground just about 6" behind the first cops hind leg :-0 I winced in anticipation of the bang and the shouting. I was quite relieved when that last round ejected.

    Thanks for your post.

    (I'd be interested to know more about your experience if you want to share it.)

  22. #22
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Loveland, Colorado, USA
    Posts
    164
    Quote Originally Posted by WCrawford View Post
    If my previous tongue in cheek post didn't quite convey the point (and after a couple days it doesn't to me); CONGRATS!

    Job well done!

    Thanks for the congrats. Don't be concerned about the toung-in-cheek. I didn't "get it" anyway:-)

  23. #23
    Regular Member zwvirtual's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Loveland, Colorado
    Posts
    16
    This is my first post here. I also live in Loveland. Good job opencarrybilly. Do you know what training (specifically) they will be giving their officers? Also, do you know what other procedures about dealing with an OC'er they will be enacting?

  24. #24
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Loveland, Colorado, USA
    Posts
    164
    Quote Originally Posted by zwvirtual View Post
    This is my first post here. I also live in Loveland. Good job opencarrybilly. Do you know what training (specifically) they will be giving their officers?
    We have their outline (below). I am told that the DA's office does the training and will make it available to several LEAs in the area. Their outline:

    "'STRIKING THE BALANCE'

    A training session to explore the interplay between a citizens’s right to bear arms under the 2nd Amendment and a police officer’s right to conduct “reasonable” searches and seizures under the 4th Amendment for officer safety purposes.

    Topics to be Covered

    • A citizen’s right to bear arms under the 2nd Amendment as interpreted by the United States Supreme Court
    • A police officers right under the 4th Amendment to conduct “reasonable” searches and seizures.
    • The three types of police/citizen contacts.
    o Consensual contacts
    o Investigatory stops
    o Arrests
    • The constitutional underpinnings for those police/citizen contacts.
    o Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1 (1968).
    o Adams v. Williams, 407 U.S. 143 (1972).
    o Arizona v. Johnson, 129 S. Ct. 781 (2009)
    o Florida v. J.L., 529 U.S. 266 (2000)
    o People v. Ealum, 211 P.3d 48 (Colo. 2009)
    o United States v. King, 990 F.2d 1552 (10th Cir. 1993)
    o
    • The legal requirements necessary for a valid investigatory stop.
    • The legal limitations an officer must observe when conducting an investigatory stop.
    • The legal requirements necessary for a valid frisk for weapons.
    • The legal limitations an officer must observe when conducting a frisk for weapons.
    • The legal requirements for a consensual search for weapons.
    • The difference between probable cause for an arrest and reasonable suspicion for an investigatory stop.
    • Relevant Colorado statutes dealing with weapons offenses.


    Presented by Clifford E. Riedel
    Assistant District Attorney
    8th Judicial District of Colorado"

    Quote Originally Posted by zwvirtual View Post
    Also, do you know what other procedures about dealing with an OC'er they will be enacting?
    I don't know exactly. I can say, though, that recently I had a mid morning breakfast at Fatso's reseaurante. there were two LEOs in a booth there. One of them couldn't take his eyes off my gun. the look on his face seemed to express concern. He never said anything to me. When they finished their meal, they left separately. One of them stopped to talk with some other breakfasters accross the way. He didn't even look at me not even a nod in my direction. I heard him introduce himself to one of the other party by the same last name as one of the defendants in the case I don't know what all that means.

  25. #25
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Nashville, Tennessee, United States
    Posts
    592
    Quote Originally Posted by opencarrybilly View Post
    We have their outline (below). I am told that the DA's office does the training and will make it available to several LEAs in the area. Their outline:

    "'STRIKING THE BALANCE'

    A training session to explore the interplay between a citizens’s right to bear arms under the 2nd Amendment and a police officer’s right to conduct “reasonable” searches and seizures under the 4th Amendment for officer safety purposes.

    Topics to be Covered

    • A citizen’s right to bear arms under the 2nd Amendment as interpreted by the United States Supreme Court
    • A police officers right under the 4th Amendment to conduct “reasonable” searches and seizures.
    • The three types of police/citizen contacts.
    o Consensual contacts
    o Investigatory stops
    o Arrests
    • The constitutional underpinnings for those police/citizen contacts.
    o Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1 (1968).
    o Adams v. Williams, 407 U.S. 143 (1972).
    o Arizona v. Johnson, 129 S. Ct. 781 (2009)
    o Florida v. J.L., 529 U.S. 266 (2000)
    o People v. Ealum, 211 P.3d 48 (Colo. 2009)
    o United States v. King, 990 F.2d 1552 (10th Cir. 1993)
    o
    • The legal requirements necessary for a valid investigatory stop.
    • The legal limitations an officer must observe when conducting an investigatory stop.
    • The legal requirements necessary for a valid frisk for weapons.
    • The legal limitations an officer must observe when conducting a frisk for weapons.
    • The legal requirements for a consensual search for weapons.
    • The difference between probable cause for an arrest and reasonable suspicion for an investigatory stop.
    • Relevant Colorado statutes dealing with weapons offenses.


    Presented by Clifford E. Riedel
    Assistant District Attorney
    8th Judicial District of Colorado"



    I don't know exactly. I can say, though, that recently I had a mid morning breakfast at Fatso's reseaurante. there were two LEOs in a booth there. One of them couldn't take his eyes off my gun. the look on his face seemed to express concern. He never said anything to me. When they finished their meal, they left separately. One of them stopped to talk with some other breakfasters accross the way. He didn't even look at me not even a nod in my direction. I heard him introduce himself to one of the other party by the same last name as one of the defendants in the case I don't know what all that means.


    Will you or your lawyer be allowed to sit/view video of the some instances of the training to make sure what they are teaching is lawful?

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •