General Categories > Newsworthy

Loveland man's lawsuit says cops violated Constitutional rights

(1/5) > >>

lefty:
DENVER AND THE WEST
Loveland man's lawsuit says cops violated Constitutional rights
By Monte Whaley
The Denver Post
POSTED: 08/01/2010 01:00:00 AM MDT

A 72-year-old man claims Loveland police violated his constitutional
rights in 2008 when they confiscated his holstered gun while he was
enjoying a day at Lake Loveland.

Bill Miller alleges that police violated his First, Second and Fourth
Amendment rights during a 30-minute "shakedown," said his attorney,
Nelson Boyle.

The lawsuit, filed this week in U.S. District Court, names the city of
Loveland, Police Chief Luke Hecker and several police officers.

Miller wants the city and cops to admit they violated his rights
against illegal search and seizure and to openly carry a firearm in
Colorado. He also is asking for $100,000 in punitive damages.

Loveland City Attorney John Duval said he could not comment on ongoing
litigation.

The lawsuit says Miller was sitting at Lake Loveland, eating an apple
and enjoying his view. A passer-by noticed his holstered handgun and
called police.

Cops didn't charge Miller

A police officer approached, seized the gun, and detained Miller, the
suit said. The lawsuit says Miller carries a holstered weapon to
advertise his custom-holster business - and to spark dialogue about
Second Amendment rights.

Police removed the ammunition and ran the weapon through a police
database. After clearing the serial number, police returned the gun.
No charges were filed.

However, the suit said, an officer also told Miller "You have the
right to carry that (gun), but whenever you do, you can expect the
same treatment."

The suit seeks to answer, once and for all, whether law-abiding
citizens can openly carry a legal weapon in Colorado, Boyle said.

"The right to carry a gun on your hip hasn't really been played out in
Colorado," Boyle said.

Most cases dealing with the open-carry issue have arisen because the
defendant was arrested during the commission of a crime, he said.

"Here, no actual crime was committed, so we don't get into something
that muddies the water," he said.

Miller's encounter with police sparked protests from gun advocates and
the American Civil Liberties Union, which sent a letter to the
Loveland Police Department in 2009 criticizing its handling of the
incident.

Balancing rights, protection

"Based upon Mr. Miller's account and LPD's own reports, no reasonable
officer could have believed Mr. Miller was doing more on Oct. 7, 2008,
than 'lawfully exercising his right under . . . law to possess a gun
in public,' " the ACLU said.

Elliott Phelps, chief investigator for the Larimer County District
Attorney, said in a letter to Miller that the incident was an internal
police matter.

"While citizens have many constitutional rights, the right to possess
and carry a firearm is a right which, in the hands of the wrong
person, in the wrong circumstances, may cause harm to an officer,"
Phelps said in his letter. "There is a fine balance between the
protection of an individual's rights and the protection of a law
enforcement officer."

Duval said he didn't know if an internal investigation was ever
conducted.

Monte Whaley: 720-929-0907 or mwhaley@denverpost.com.




[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Bill:
I think this is the first time I've ever heard of the ACLU doing anything pro-2A.

bkoenig:
My bet is it's the local CO chapter.  The national ACLU is still rabidly anti-gun, but the locals are starting to wake up.

unfy:

--- Quote from: Bill on August 02, 2010, 02:32:11 PM ---I think this is the first time I've ever heard of the ACLU doing anything pro-2A.

--- End quote ---

I had to reread that section a few times as well...

WTF ???

hehehehe.

Hardwood83:

--- Quote from: Bill on August 02, 2010, 02:32:11 PM ---I think this is the first time I've ever heard of the ACLU doing anything pro-2A.

--- End quote ---

Me too- I prefer my villains remain one dimensional so they are easier to vilify. Oh well, I'm sure they'll rush to the defense of terrorists or pedophiles soon enough.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page