Encounter with Jefferson County Sheriff AT GUNPOINT!

My son-in-law is a Paramedic, has been for many years. The level of care a paramedic can give is greater than other EMTs including drugs they can administer and procedures.

There are wannabes in lots of professional areas, but "pretend" has no business where a life is at stake.

The key here is whether he had actually given any medical treatment, administered any drug, even advised medical treatment without proper accreditation. Just wearing the uniform, hey, maybe he was wearing his Halloween costume early.

Falsely identifying himself as a paramedic to avoid arrest adds problems for him.

The firearm charges - need to see more details. If he is indeed prohibited, how did he acquire the pistol?

Sincerest Apology and a lesson in HIND SIGHT

yotebuster223 said:

The response of the deputies encourages me even more to carry. It probably took them what ten minutes or more to mobilize and come up with a plan to get you off the bus. Now if this was a man with a GUN with bad intentions how many people would said MWAG have killed or severely injure in that amount of time. This is exactly why I carry because a MWAG isn't going to wait while the playing field is leveled i.e. "the cops get there."
And one of the Oath taking DEFENDERS of the Constitution of the state of Colorado actually said to you "what gives you the right to carry a gun" He definitely isn't living up to his oath and needs to be taken off the streets and put back into the academy until he can truly DEFEND the Constitution of the state of Colorado.

Click to expand...

First I would like to extend my SINCEREST APOLOGIES to the Jefferson County Sheriff Department and to all Deputies involved in this matter. My comments to this thread shows how dangerous these forums can be when my guard is let down and I believe what posters are writing. I appreciate Oath Takers and respect the job all of you do.
Now for the HIND SIGHT
Ten police cars: Last time I saw ten police cars in one place was at the police station. Ten patrol cars in Jeffco are spread out all over the place it would take longer than the bus took to travel 3 blocks for ten out of one sector to arrive on scene.
Originally Posted by wthornton0206(It goes deeper than that, but thats the simple way for me to explain my goals here): What the HELL ARE YOUR GOALS SON?
One of the officers actually asked me "what gives you the right to carry a gun?" Im an idiot for actually believing this line of crap.
It was all to good to be true wasn't it Wayne Thorton. Since you have admitted to your guilt on these forums not once but twice enjoy carrying your new Super Soaker cause thats all you will be allowed to carry after your adult conviction. Hey Wayne do you think they make a Serpa for a Super Soaker?

Team X said:

Not looking good for OP

http://www.9news.com/news/article.aspx?storyid=149104&catid=339

Click to expand...

Unbelievable. And to post bald faced lies on this forum about it!

Lmfao. I usually lurk but I'll offer two comments:

1) Why do so many of these incidents involve 20-somethings? Children, for lack of a better term.

2) Based on what I've read here and on other forums this guy kwikrnu is one seriously screwed up individual.

jdlong said:

Once again, being a tactical paramedic DOES NOT qualify you to carry a firearm. TEMS is NOT a LEO position. Being POST certified DOES NOT extend the privelidges of firearms carry. The stunt he pulled looks bad for ALL law-abiding citizens that want to exercise their Right to personal carry.

Click to expand...

Exactly, even if this guy is POST certified it does NOT make him a LEO. You have to actually be employed with an agency for that. Anyone (that doesn't have criminal charges prohibiting them from doing so) can go to the community college and get POST certified in like 8-12 weeks.

zach said:

I would stop posting about the event until you've spoken with an attorney.

.02

Click to expand...

Yea me too ROFL

http://www.9news.com/video/default.aspx#/Paramedic impersonator/591046926001

Wow. Just wow....

To the Jefferson County Sheriff Department and other LEOs looking at this thread:

Thanks for looking into this guy. I'm completely supportive of weeding out any nutjobs that may have snuck into the OC movement, and sincerely thank you for looking deeper into this felons criminal activities. This is one of the first cases of a felon open carrying and posting as one of us that I've heard about. I guess we should all be a little more careful of supporting someone when we really have no idea if what they say is the truth. This guy, according to the news report, was a convicted felon who shouldn't have had a gun in the first place. It sounds like his motive for wearing that paramedic uniform wasn't sinister (faking a job so family doesn't get pissed that he's not working), but is still completely inexcusable what he did under the OC flag, so to speak.

I am not familiar with laws in Colorado. I do not know how much of this mans story was true. I do not know how much of the PR release from the PD was true.

My concern is that many on here seem to think it is perfectly OK to ban OC on Public Transportation.

I guess that in Colorado, only those that choose to pay the king for a permit can carry on the bus.

I would hope that no one would ever get convicted and labeled as a felon for exercising their rights in public.

jdlong said:

Once again, being a tactical paramedic DOES NOT qualify you to carry a firearm. TEMS is NOT a LEO position. Being POST certified DOES NOT extend the privelidges of firearms carry. The stunt he pulled looks bad for ALL law-abiding citizens that want to exercise their Right to personal carry.

Click to expand...

Carrying a firearm is a RIGHT, not a PRIVILEGE. It has nothing to do with POST certification or anything else.

I would ask, what does qualify one to carry a firearm in your eyes? Do you have to be in the "chosen one" groups such as a policeman or perhaps a government agent?

kubel said:

Wow. Just wow....

To the Jefferson County Sheriff Department and other LEOs looking at this thread:

Thanks for looking into this guy. I'm completely supportive of weeding out any nutjobs that may have snuck into the OC movement, and sincerely thank you for looking deeper into this felons criminal activities. This is one of the first cases of a felon open carrying and posting as one of us that I've heard about. I guess we should all be a little more careful of supporting someone when we really have no idea if what they say is the truth. This guy, according to the news report, was a convicted felon who shouldn't have had a gun in the first place. It sounds like his motive for wearing that paramedic uniform wasn't sinister (faking a job so family doesn't get pissed that he's not working), but is still completely inexcusable what he did under the OC flag, so to speak.

Click to expand...

I will wait until he is charged and found guilty before I will assume anything about his guilt. The news media is notoriously inaccurate in firearms matters and in this case it would appear that they are being spoonfed information from one side.

It would also appear that this forum is getting many newcommers jumping on to flame this guy. Now, I do not know, but from the posts I am reading on here, this is very fishy. Almost like they would like to ruin this guys reputation, taint the jury pool, and generally keep the negative publicity to a minimum.

rscottie said:

My concern is that many on here seem to think it is perfectly OK to ban OC on Public Transportation.

Click to expand...

Not I. But carry on public transportation is already banned here in Colorado:

I guess that in Colorado, only those that choose to pay the king for a permit can carry on the bus.

Click to expand...

No, not even with a CHP. Contrary RTD Reed's comment, "It is a felony to carry weapons aboard public transportation, unless the passenger is a law enforcement officer or has a valid concealed carry permit," there is NO defense in the CRS which allows the carry of any firearm on public transportation, whether one has a CHP or not, and regardless of mode of carry.

I think that's a BAD LAW, and I've been working with regulators to get it changed to at least allow CC on public transportation.

I would hope that no one would ever get convicted and labeled as a felon for exercising their rights in public.

Click to expand...

So long as a law exists on the books which conflict with 2A rights, there is no such "right" from a legal standpoint. Even if a bad law is later overturned, unless the repeal/modification thereof is grandfathered, you'd still be up the river.

Best bet: ID bad laws and work to get them changed!

since9 said:

No, not even with a CHP...there is NO defense in the CRS which allows the carry of any firearm on public transportation, whether one has a CHP or not, and regardless of mode of carry.

Click to expand...

That isnt true.

18-12-214. Authority granted by permit - carrying restrictions.
(1) (a) A permit to carry a concealed handgun authorizes the permittee to carry a concealed handgun in all areas of the state, except as specifically limited in this section...
(2) A permit issued pursuant to this part 2 does not authorize a person to carry a concealed handgun into a place where the carrying of firearms is prohibited by federal law.
(3) A permit issued pursuant to this part 2 does not authorize a person to carry a concealed handgun onto the real property, or into any improvements erected thereon, of a public elementary, middle, junior high, or high school; except that:
(a) A permittee may have a handgun on the real property of the public school so long as the handgun remains in his or her vehicle and, if the permittee is not in the vehicle, the handgun is in a compartment within the vehicle and the vehicle is locked;
(b) A permittee who is employed or retained by contract by a school district as a school security officer may carry a concealed handgun onto the real property, or into any improvement erected thereon, of a public elementary, middle, junior high, or high school while the permittee is on duty;
(c) A permittee may carry a concealed handgun on undeveloped real property owned by a school district that is used for hunting or other shooting sports.
(4) A permit issued pursuant to this part 2 does not authorize a person to carry a concealed handgun into a public building at which:
(a) Security personnel and electronic weapons screening devices are permanently in place at each entrance to the building;
(b) Security personnel electronically screen each person who enters the building to determine whether the person is carrying a weapon of any kind; and
(c) Security personnel require each person who is carrying a weapon of any kind to leave the weapon in possession of security personnel while the person is in the building
(5) Nothing in this part 2 shall be construed to limit, restrict, or prohibit in any manner the existing rights of a private property owner, private tenant, private employer, or private business entity.

since9 said:

18-9-118. Firearms, explosives, or incendiary devices in facilities of public transportation.

A person commits a class 6 felony if, without legal authority, he has any loaded firearm or explosive or incendiary device, as defined in section 9-7-103, C.R.S., in his possession in, or carries, brings, or causes to be carried or brought any of such items into, any facility of public transportation, as defined in section 18-9-115 (4).​

Click to expand...

So, would that mean that you can legally open carry, but unloaded? I'm not saying to do it, but the wording made me wonder. Also, isn't the Colorado definition of unloaded just no round in the chamber? Just thinking about this after reading through your post Since9...

Yeah, you could legally OC an unloaded weapon under that statute without a permit, but couldn't carry one concealed and loaded WITH one. The only time it came up with me was when I was bringing unloaded arms checked in bagage on the underside of the bus between Boulder and DIA, but it would apply to unloaded weapons being checked for a flight, carried in a backpack, or as you walk through a bus stop on the street. It really needs to be removed from the books altogether.

entartet17 said:

That isnt true.

18-12-214. Authority granted by permit - carrying restrictions.
(1) (a) A permit to carry a concealed handgun authorizes the permittee to carry a concealed handgun in all areas of the state, except as specifically limited in this section.

Click to expand...

Wow. To be true to the readers, I had to confirm on Michie's, but after reading it five times, it still appears 18-12-214(1)(a) specifically trumps that what I quoted earlier.

So we can CC on public transportation here in Colorado, provided we have a valid CHP.

Hmm... Why did the two folks I talked with in the legislature insist otherwise? Could it be our State Legislature is ignorant of this fact (like I was, despite the fact I pour over the regs, several times)? Or that they either simply ignored it, or worse, never read it, as we were discussing it on the phone? Far worse, were they merely trying to push an agenda?

I can't claim they buried it (no proof - just a memory). Following the path of the regs, it's fairly straightforward. I even remember coming across this section several times. For some reason, the first part just never stuck with me.

My bad! I'll try to be more attentive next time. In the meantime, entartet17, please feel free to double-check me and raise the flag as necessary.

Nice work.

BUT - Two more posts since your have raised some good points. It's late, so I'll have to hit this tomorrow.

- Mugs

ZackL said:

So, would that mean that you can legally open carry, but unloaded? I'm not saying to do it, but the wording made me wonder. Also, isn't the Colorado definition of unloaded just no round in the chamber? Just thinking about this after reading through your post Since9...

Click to expand...

Well you could carry unloaded but you cant have the bullets with you.

Half Live said:

Well you could carry unloaded but you cant have the bullets with you.

Click to expand...

Well, I think you can carry unloaded with the bullets with you. Someone correct me if im worng.



9-7-103. Definitions.
As used in this article, unless the context otherwise requires:

(1) Repealed.

(1.5) "Department" means the department of labor and employment.

(2) "Division" means the division of oil and public safety in the department of labor and employment.

(3) "Explosive" or "explosive device" means any material or container containing a chemical compound or mixture that is commonly used or intended for the purpose of producing an explosion and that contains any oxidizing and combustible materials or other ingredients in such proportions, quantities, or packing that an ignition by fire, by friction, by concussion, or by detonation of any part of the compound or mixture may cause such a sudden generation of highly heated gases that the resultant gaseous pressures are capable of producing destructive effects on contiguous objects, but shall not mean the components for handloading rifle, pistol, and shotgun ammunition and/or rifle, pistol, and shotgun ammunition.

(4) "Incendiary device" means any flammable material or container containing a flammable liquid or material whose ignition by fire, friction, concussion, detonation, or other method produces destructive effects primarily through combustion rather than explosion.
(5) "Molotov cocktail" means a breakable container containing an explosive or flammable liquid or other substance, having a wick or similar device capable of being ignited, and may be described as either an explosive or incendiary device. A molotov cocktail is not intended to mean a device commercially manufactured primarily for the purpose of illumination or other such uses.

wthornton0206 said:

gf

Click to expand...

OK, I want to pile on and that retraction by the OP is suspicious. But I will wait until the dust clears. But if he really does have a record, it is easy to believe.

And who said 10 cop cars besides the OP? Many people piled on with that one. Did anyone verify this? 10 seems a bit ridiculous and unlikely. Maybe 3 or 4? 6?

I read through 18-12-214 in it's entirety, and it does not appear that it trumps 18-9-118. Rather, these two appear to be in conflict.

However, 18-9-118 does state: "A person commits a class 6 felony if, without legal authority..."

The question then becomes, does 18-12-214's "(1) (a) A permit to carry a concealed handgun authorizes the permittee to carry a concealed handgun in all areas of the state, except as specifically limited in this section" constitute "legal authority?"

It would seem so, until you read the second sentence: "A permit does not authorize the permittee to use a handgun in a manner that would violate a provision of state law," and 18-9-118 is a provision of state law.

Thus, my take on the statutes as they stand is that neither CC nor OC on public transportation is allowed.

I'll talk to one of the folks in the CSPD later today, though, and ask them what they think, and why.