California's new law allows for gun confiscation without notice

oneounceload · Dec 30, 2015

As someone already mentioned are thought crimes next on the list of "crimes" that gun owners will be charged with?

They already are in some circumstances. Then internet is both a blessing and a curse

Starting not to trust our public servants.

I started back with LBJ and the "Great Society".............most folks in CA will give up EVERYTHING if they think it will make them "safer from THEM" (you decide who the THEM are)

pharmer · Dec 30, 2015

clutch said:
How do you prove you are not a danger?

Therein lies the rub. Joe

200Apples · Dec 30, 2015

.

evan price

Eh, it's California. I'm kind of ambivalent about whatever kooky laws they pass. They have the government they elected.

oneounceloawd

Unfortunately, whenever CA sneezes, the rest of the country catches the cold

Yeah, yeah...

As a 2nd Amendment supporter and resident of The Golden State, I am again embarrassed for this state government's actions. I certainly did not vote for these people.

In the meantime, while I think this is yet another egregious anti-gun law, however it is to be carried out first has to go through a judge. But will it be as simple as it seems when portrayed in a television drama? Just simply "call the cops" and then within 30 mins a judge signs a warrant? then "the raid" to have whomever's firearms confiscated?

I think the most far-fetched yet plausible scenario was just posted by 22-rimfire:

An example..... I don't like old Joe next door. He gets mad when my kids get in his yard or my dog wanders over there. I know he has guns because I see him put them in his pickup from time to time. I don't feel safe with him next door and he's a loose cannon waiting for the right moment to explode and hurt my kids or me..... confiscate those guns....

There may be several "old Joes" on every block, in every neighborhood, in every suburb, of every city of The Golden State.

Helidude · Dec 30, 2015

Little miss victim has herself a gun to defend from ex husband / boyfriend /stalker abuse.
Said aggressor or his representative gets her gun confiscated.
Now she is unarmed for him to do his horror.

How soon will that play out?

Or.....

Average Joe guns are confiscated.
This will be observed by unrelated unsavory persons through public record, the media, or just by watching law enforcement tote them from the house.

Joe, his family, and house will now be victim to burglary, violence or death.

********** and up north laws have a way of affecting us here in Texas also.
I can't buy a usable gas can because of them.
Thanks for the jacked up traffic lights ( red and green at the same time), toll roads ( that were supposed to be free after the road payed off Lies!)
and that damn train thing with the left turn lanes on the track....

JSH1 · Dec 30, 2015

460Kodiak said:
I've never seen this number before. Do you have a source, or data to back that statement? Just wondering.

The number of no-knock raids per year varies by source. I've seen numbers as low as 20,000 and as high as 80,000. I picked 50,000 since it was in the middle.

20,000: http://www.vox.com/2014/10/29/70833...-police-killed-civilians-dangerous-work-drugs
50,000: http://www.csmonitor.com/2006/1129/p03s03-ussc.html
80,000: http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/nation/2011-02-14-noknock14_ST_N.htm

The second two links site Professor Peter Kraska, at Eastern Kentucky University. Professor Kraska's papers:https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=R44yPyUAAAAJ&hl=en

M1key · Dec 30, 2015

California Law Allowing Seizure of Guns without Notice Begins Jan. 1

http://nation.foxnews.com/2015/12/2...wing-seizure-guns-without-notice-begins-jan-1

Gun-safety legislation going into effect in California next week will allow authorities to seize a person’s weapons for 21 days if a judge determines there’s potential for violence.

Proposed in the wake of a deadly May 2014 shooting rampage by Elliot Rodger, the bill provides family members with a means of having an emergency “gun violence restraining order” imposed against a loved one if they can convince a judge that allowing that person to possess a firearm “poses an immediate and present danger of causing personal injury to himself, herself or another by having in his or her custody or control.”

I guess they will give them back if nothing happens? Riiight.

M

oneounceload · Dec 30, 2015

“poses an immediate and present danger of causing personal injury to himself, herself or another by having in his or her custody or control.”

Especially during a nasty divorce scenario...........

Mitlov · Dec 30, 2015

RugerBob said:
If a person has their firearms removed via false accusations...oops , wrong guy type situation.

How much money will they have to spend and how much time before they get said firearms back?

This law provides for confiscation without due process for a maximum of 21 days. Within 21 days of the confiscation, the court must hold an evidentiary hearing to determine whether a restraining order (not to exceed one year in duration) should issue. At that hearing, the party seeking the restraining order would bear the burden of proof, and the burden of proof is clear and convincing evidence (not merely preponderance of the evidence). Several people here have complained that the burden of proof is on the person subject to the restraining order to prove they're not a danger, but that's not how the burden of proof actually pans out under the procedure described in the law.

The law also makes it a crime to knowingly seek such a restraining order under false pretenses or for harassment.

The text of the law can be found here: https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id=201320140AB1014

Mitlov · Dec 30, 2015

22-rimfire said:
Me too. Add another tool to their tool kit. Bet they won't enforce it with illegals or minority folks. It is all about having the "legal" means of disarming the American public. The folks that control "the world" know that the guns have to go somehow in the US. But that is just my opinion.

Onmilo is correct. Law Enforcement would do it when nobody is home or they think nobody is home.

I actually suspect that 20-something and 30-something minority men will be the #1 target, just like they are with stop-and-frisk in New York.

Lord Teapot · Dec 30, 2015

i pity the orphans of widows of the LEOs in question

Warp · Dec 30, 2015

Mitlov said:
This law provides for confiscation without due process for a maximum of 21 days. Within 21 days of the confiscation, the court must hold an evidentiary hearing to determine whether a restraining order (not to exceed one year in duration) should issue. At that hearing, the party seeking the restraining order would bear the burden of proof, and the burden of proof is clear and convincing evidence (not merely preponderance of the evidence). Several people here have complained that the burden of proof is on the person subject to the restraining order to prove they're not a danger, but that's not how the burden of proof actually pans out under the procedure described in the law.

The law also makes it a crime to knowingly seek such a restraining order under false pretenses or for harassment.

The text of the law can be found here: https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id=201320140AB1014

So they only confiscate your firearms without due process for up to 21 days. Yay.

Mitlov · Dec 30, 2015

Warp said:
So they only confiscate your firearms without due process for up to 21 days. Yay.

I didn't say that was a good thing; I was just correcting some misstatements in the discussion because some people seemed to believe that the confiscation-without-due-process was either indefinite, or until the gun owner could prove he/she isn't a threat. Neither is an accurate discussion of what the law does. And as second amendment supporters, we lose credibility with fence-sitters (whose support is key on legislative issues) when we don't accurately summarize laws we oppose.

JSH1 · Dec 30, 2015

Mitlov said:
I actually suspect that 20-something and 30-something minority men will be the #1 target, just like they are with stop-and-frisk in New York.

As do I. This is not a new thing. No-Knock raids have been a fact of life in some communities for decades.

mdauben · Dec 30, 2015

Warp said:
So they only confiscate your firearms without due process for up to 21 days. Yay.

And of course we've all heard multiple reports of CA police departments refusing to return of confiscated fire arms unless the legal owner could produce the bill of sale, destroying firearms that should have been returned and generally making the recovery of legal property as difficult as possible.

Speedo66 · Dec 30, 2015

You know what will cause the mental illness? Your going crazy when you find out that they threw your priceless collection of mint guns all together into a duffle bag and threw them around after scratching their initials into them for an evidence chain.

DeepSouth · Dec 30, 2015

About 80% of personal property taken by police is taken form someone never charged with a crime, and about 80% of that is never returned.

If they get your gun, (or anything else) good luck.

Onward Allusion · Dec 30, 2015

California now but that State serves as the proving grounds for "forward" ideology.

Elkins45 · Dec 30, 2015

DeepSouth said:
About 80% of personal property taken by police is taken form someone never charged with a crime, and about 80% of that is never returned.

If they get your gun, (or anything else) good luck.

Source for this statistic?

alsaqr · Dec 30, 2015

The CA Gun Violence Restraining Order Law has been in effect for some time.

The law that goes into effect on 1 January, 2016 is AB950. It amends the existing Gun Violence Restraining Order Law.

Backers of the measure, which passed both the Assembly and Senate in unanimous votes last month, contend its one of many tweaks needed to the controversial restraining order practice, which has been characterized as the “turn in your neighbor” law.

“Today, we witnessed a rare victory for gun owners across California,” said Assemblywoman Melissa A. Melendez, R-Lake Elsinore, the bill’s sponsor. “By allowing a trustworthy alternative for gun owners to maintain possession of their firearms, we are preventing any unjustified gun grab against those who may be unfairly targeted by bogus allegations.”

Melendez’s bill, AB 950, codifies an exemption to state’s new gun violence order restraining laws put into effect after a disturbed man attacked the campus of the University of California Santa Barbara in Isla Vista. Before the incident, parents of the suspect in the incident tried unsuccessfully to get authorities to take away his weapons.

http://www.guns.com/2015/08/14/gove...n-violence-restraining-order-reform-into-law/

Text of AB 950:

http://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billCompareClient.xhtml?bill_id=201520160AB950

The Examiner is not a good source of factual information.

old lady new shooter · Dec 30, 2015

mdauben said:
And of course we've all heard multiple reports of CA police departments refusing to return of confiscated fire arms unless the legal owner could produce the bill of sale, destroying firearms that should have been returned and generally making the recovery of legal property as difficult as possible.

Thanks for reminding me to scan my bill of sale (and any future ones) into my computer.

fastbolt · Dec 30, 2015

Well, aside from the predictable knee-jerk reactions that could be expected in such a thread topic, having had some professional experience with such things over the years, this appears to be pretty much some clean-up legislation for the existing recent statute.

Frank Ettin · Dec 30, 2015

fastbolt said:
...aside from the predictable knee-jerk reactions that could be expected in such a thread topic,...

And a lot of posts have disappeared for that reason.

orionengnr · Dec 30, 2015

The law also makes it a crime to knowingly seek such a restraining order under false pretenses or for harassment.

So do lots of laws...unfortunately, these "crimes" (much the same as filing a false police report, or false charges of "hate crimes", domestic violence, child abuse, etc.,) are seldom prosecuted.

As so the jack booted storm troopers will start kicking down doors in the sunshine state?

Somebody has to go back to Geography class. Sunshine State is Florida. This law is in California--the Golden State. Yes, I have lived in both.

Frank Ettin · Dec 30, 2015

I can see that if I keep this thread open I'll be spending the next day or two deleting post that don't meaningfully contribute to understanding the law. But I have better things to do, so we're done here.

California's new law allows for gun confiscation without notice

member

Member

Mojave Lever Crew

Member

Member

Member

member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Random Guy

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Moderator

Member

Moderator

Similar threads