The obvious question would be: "What does the ex-GOP Chairman for Weld County, Colorado have to do with the state house bill HB26-1285?" Well nothing, and that is the simple point here. The young man, who brushed elbows with people (or one in particular) who are known on national level, wasn't ever diagnosed with any kind of psychiatric disorder. (I'm sure it would've been disclosed by now if that was the case.) He was caught red-handed, as it were, attempting to commit atrocious crime that the Colorado House Bill 26-1285 generally focuses on, but yet not since it wouldn't have applied to him.

The real point is here that "statistically", there's about equal likelihood (generally speaking) that a person diagnosed with a psychiatric disorder and one who is not will attempt to perpetrate crime against a child.

The truth is that there are people who cannot imagine any sort of "psychiatric disorder" other than one which will more likely cause a person (or a man actually, let's not mince words here) to commit sexual offensive crime. There is no scientific evidence to support the ideology. It's all about stigma.

Being that only about 26% of the population is diagnosed with psychiatric disorders, and many of those would be automatically excluded from the group of being considered dangerous because of their gender (females), then the portion of citizens the proposed law is focusing on is roughly half. Democracy doesn't account for a low populated demographic who would be adversely affected without proportionate cause. Representatives for the people, in general, are supposed to know enough about sociology & law to compensate for the lack of awareness about the subject that pervades in public debate.

The people who get jobs working for the government are concerned about their own job security, primarily, and there are those in the general public who sympathize with that posit, primarily. A person's ethics and integrity are supposed to keep them in check if they are public officials. Of course nobody is perfect and so are allowed digression from that but again, if they're mainly concerned with appealing to the masses, or at least a vehement vocal minority, self-proclaimed "representation" of those masses, and by very nature of the topic no one can oppose, regardless of logic, reasoning and rationale, then innocent citizens are at risk of being targeted for violence.

Then let's not forget the fundamental attribution error in which a targeted individual, who is innocent but only "looks" a certain way (which of course is not always within a human being's complete control), could become distressed over false accusation and their reaction is "misconstrued" as a sign of guilt. Note that I quote the word since in reality people already understand the truth but count on the plausible deniability factor. They can be mean & ridicule others and it's all gov't sanctioned.

I'd like to point out here that there is a similar ideology present with the actions of the man who yells racial slurs (epithets) at people and insists that he has a right to free speech and it's only words, after all.

The similar argument could be made defending the practice of burning crosses in somebody's yard since wood on fire has been necessary for the advancement of humankind. What on earth is the problem then?

So the late Officer Paul Gesi, City of Northglenn PD, didn't make a call to reach out for help. Knowing the law as he did, I speculate that he understood what would happen and his life would dramatically change since he'd have to submit to psychiatric care. He'd be labeled as "mentally ill". The preceding link is to some ebooks with user va and then vets to access. There's an old copy of Anne Rogers "A Sociology of Mental Health and Illness" so there can be no more plausible deniability. People might want to know that the woman speaking in the video below isn't alone because there are people who are labeled "mentally ill" who share similar categorized experiences but are unable to be so candid about their history.

7News-clip-grant-st

I have more information concerning the Colorado HB26-1285 and its inherent problems at https://kylemullica.org/