California gov't seizes 500 legal ARs

[SIGarmed]

I beleive Ray Haynes is running for Treasurer of California since he's termed out of his current office. I will help fund that campaign if I can.

 

[SIGarmed]

Oh and for those scared people that want to do things that are perfectly legal and hide. If certain dealers like tenpercent firearms had felt the same way this opportunity may not be presenting itself now. You know the saying "Who dares wins"? Well it's true.

It appears that some, but not all of the confiscated lowers have now been returned. That's new news via Calguns.net.

Mistakes were made and people have learned their lessons. Let us not be afraid to do what is legal.

 

[madmike]

. I was also wondering if maybe the Cal DOJ could file some sort of civil lawsuit against the Nevada gunshops.

It would be illegal restraint of trade and violation of jurisdiction.

Basically, they're asking Nevada gun parts sellers, whether or not they are FFLs, to perform a check to abide by CA law. They have no authority to do so.

Actually, unless you plan to go to CA, you don't even need to file--just ignore it, or call and tell them to get bent. They can't file a warrant for arrest outside of their own state, and without proper ID, they can't even prove who you are well enough to arrest you IN CA, unless you have a very unusual name.

"Arrest every John Davis, just in case it's him!"

 

[jerkyman45]

California has essentially declared war on the second ammendment and gun owners. How long is it going to be before that sentiment spreads to the rest of the country? In San Francisco they want to ban all handguns, the state legislature has already banned .50 BMG rifles, and now these outrageous seizures? We need to step up and defend the rights of the American gun owner, whether he lives in California, Texas, Arkansas, or anywhere in this great nation which is now under threat from anti-gun zealots that will not rest until they have confiscated every firearm from ever law abiding citizen. We need to stop this outrage on our rights, and we need to do in together.

 

[ScottS]

Looks like the spotlight is on. Get them while you still can!

http://www.recordnet.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060410/NEWS01/604100333

 

[madmike]

"Lockyer is extremely good on the gun issue, and we generally trust his office," Hamm said.

:banghead:

 

[AJAX22]

where can we get a LEGR?

Does it work for firearms that are unregistered? i.e. confiscated because former roommate had hobbies that involved smoking green plants, and when they searched the entierty of the house they found them sitting in a case on my desk.

no weapons charges were filed, smith and wesson model 10 and a pre war colt woodsman were taken.

I didn't have anything to do with the herb in question, just made a poor choice of roommate.

its been a long time and I would like to get them back.

 

[madmike]

How long is a "long time" and was not registering them a criminal act?

If it's been more than a few days, and you don't have proper receipts to show purchase, or in some cases, to show you were the original purchaser, it's more than likely a case of you can't get them back and they were chopped up after a month or so. They would not have retained the weapons after prosecuting the case unless (And in CA, probably "Even if") there was a claim for them at the time.

 

[Creeping Incrementalism]

where can we get a LEGR?

Here's the PDF.

Firearms seized by California law enforcement are sent to a steel mill in SoCal to be melted down once a year, if they are no longer being held for evidence or any other reason. So if it has been longer than that, they might not still be around. Good luck.

 

[madmike]

I wonder what headlines we could make with Brady by buying some of that steel for receivers and barrels?

 

[AJAX22]

Thanks for the form, I'll get it in asap.

I'll cross my fingers and hope that they didn't get torched.

just a thought but wouldn't failure to return property that is legally posessed be embezlement and therefore be subject to illegal seizure legislation?

 

[Creeping Incrementalism]

It would be illegal restraint of trade and violation of jurisdiction.

Basically, they're asking Nevada gun parts sellers, whether or not they are FFLs, to perform a check to abide by CA law. They have no authority to do so.

I noticed that Mayor Bloomberg is suing gunshops in other states for not checking the IDs of "straw purchasers", so I imagine the California DOJ could potentially do the same thing with mags.

I think the point is not whether the state has a valid case, but whether a gunstore wants to deal with the hassle.

just a thought but wouldn't failure to return property that is legally posessed be embezlement and therefore be subject to illegal seizure legislation?

Most law enforcement doesn't understand the gun laws in California, and typically they just send everything that isn't being held for a trial to be melted down. I know of one incident where a guy found a legal rifle just sitting on the side of the road, and turned it into the local L.E. agency. When no one claimed it, the department didn't want to give it to him (as is normally done with the finders of unclaimed property), even though the law only says that guns used in crimes have to be melted down. The guy eventually had to get a lawyer to get it back.

 

[madmike]

Few guns would be worth spending that kind of money on. That's the State's bet behind seizures.

 

[Bartholomew Roberts]

I noticed that Mayor Bloomberg is suing gunshops in other states for not checking the IDs of "straw purchasers", so I imagine the California DOJ could potentially do the same thing with mags.

Different facts. Bloomberg is alleging that the gunshops in other states did not follow federal law. Because the lawsuit protection bill passed this past year to kill frivolous negligence suits allows lawsuits where a crime has been committed by an FFL, Bloomberg had to claim laws were broken to keep his suit from getting thrown out (and he had to handpick Judge Weinstein as well; but that's another issue).

California would be seeking to have an FFL in another state follow California state law, not federal law. That just isn't going to happen and without a crime, California cannot sue FFLs for negligence just because they sell legal products to people who take them to California.

 

[Creeping Incrementalism]

From the orinal press relase about this:

“The lawsuit also seeks compensation for the cost of abating the nuisance created by these defendants, compensatory damages to
New York City, and punitive damages in order to deter other rogue dealers from engaging in the illegal practices described in the complaint.”

What I'm getting at is not that the dealers are alleged to have broken federal law, but simply that their behavior is a nuisance--isn't that a civil suit?

 

[Bartholomew Roberts]

What I'm getting at is not that the dealers are alleged to have broken federal law, but simply that their behavior is a nuisance--isn't that a civil suit?

Yes, it would be a civil suit if such suits were allowed under the lawsuit protection act. Because of past abuses, claiming a nuisance is no longer sufficient to justify a civil suit on its own. There are several exceptions; but for the most part there would need to be a violation of state or federal law before a civil suit could be filed (unless you file it in Judge Weinstein's court).

A Nevada FFL can't be held responsible for violating California state law regarding sales... although I wouldn't be surprised to see them try.

 

[CombatArmsUSAF]

The California blissninnie logic is illogical. We can sit here and throw fact after fact based argument at them and they will never see the light. They are influenced by the Holy hollywood stars and all the other idiots. (People that are so detached from reality that they actually think the police are going to be able to protect them.

I know that the average response time in my hometown is around 1 hour, how 'bout you?

It is really getting to the point that I am sick of fighting with these idiots and I hope that somewhere down the line the police won't get there in time and maybe the genepool will get cleaned out a little.

 

[Sven]

Well, it's been about a year. Anyone surprised to hear that the DOJ is still holding on to my 6 AR receivers?

I'm taking bets... paying out currently at 10:1 against getting them back in my lifetime... any takers?

 

[madmike]

FOI request on the process? Demand for relief under 5th amendment, private property taken for public use without compensation? Report as stolen? Call ATF (long shot, but some of them ARE decent)?

 

[Sven]

Well, its all tangled up in a group buy gone sideways - until that matter is cleared up, my stuff is "evidence". At least, last I heard. CA DOJ must just love the fact that there are... what.... 50,000 new lowers in the state over the past year? I hope it keeps them up at night.

 

[js]

ELTacoGrande said =
"We need to educate our fellow non-shooting Californians and change the views here."

Yeah right, and a herd of cattle with wings just flew over my house. I guess you'll need to start with Diane Feinstein and Nancy Pelosi first.

 

[madmike]

50K off list receivers?

Sweeeeeeeeeeeet! Tell the hippies to put that in their pipes and smoke it

 

[Molon Labe]

the DOJ is still holding on to my 6 AR receivers

Go to your local PD and file a theft charge. I am serious.

 

[madmike]

Agreed. If you have a good sheriff, or even just one who doesn't like people playing in his jurisdiction, he'll give them a case of PITA.

 

[AJAX22]

On a side note, I did get my S&W model 10 and pre war woodsman back, they made me 'buy' them from my roommate, (they wouldn't believe they were mine)

but I've got them back.

I also ran out and bought a half dozen lower receivers for AK's and AR's as a result of this thread. just wanted to say thanks guys.