California town pays for info on gunowners...

Status
Not open for further replies.
A

Autolycus

Member
Joined
Feb 13, 2006
Messages
5,456
Location
In the land of make believe.
I am stealing this from a thread over on Glocktalk.

Originally posted by Taurus_Dude
I'm copying this from the Offtopic.com Weapons of Minor Destruction Forum. I thought you guys would be interested Everything below is not my words but was posted by TL1000RSquid:


S1-IKEA_Sign_1K_Gun_Reward.JPG



Palo Alto Ca.

While I was driving south on 101 I passed by the Ikea store which has a big electronic sign.

There was one ad that said: "$1000 REWARD For info on people with guns.

The sign had a silhouette of an AR and the logo for a police dept.
The sign advised people to report gun owners at the following number 650 321 1112. Ikea appears to own the sign but they use a company called Smart Sign Media to take care of the ads that run. (800-549-7300)

I called Smart Sign Media and was told by "Cheryl" that the ad was
placed by the East Palo Alto Police. They were offering up to $1000.00 reward. I called the 650-321-1112 number and was routed to a lady in police admin at 650-853- 3160. I could not get the lady's name, but she told me that the program was designed to get the public to report young men who were seen with guns in the street.

When I asked her what happened with these reports she said that these were only considered "incidents" until an officer checked them out.
When I asked her what she meant by checking them out, she said they would dispatch an officer to the address and see if the person had the "proper paperwork" for the weapon. If not, they would confiscate the gun and hold it pending further investigation. At this point, a true report would be filed.

When I asked her to define "proper paperwork", the process for getting a gun back, etc., she got very evasive and said I had to talk to a sergeant. I was then left on terminal hold. I called back twice with
the same result.

I need the following from all of you:

A. Include a request to have as many people as possible call 650 853
3160 and ask to speak to the sergeant on duty. Get as much info as you can about the program and the details.

B. Get people to start calling Ikea in East Palo Alto and find out why
they are allowing this to go on.

C. Get this information out to as many other 2A groups as possible.

You can get a PDF of the notice that includes a picture of the sign
here: http://www.gs2ac.com/flyers/PAPolice...Collection.pdf and on our web site.

Many thanks,
Mark Towber
President
Golden State 2nd Amendment Council"


Gave the number on the sign a call. It's a 911 dispatch number and they just told me to call 650 853 3160. That second number rang busy.

So, the Palo Alto police are not only infringing on your 2nd and 4th ammendments (right to bear arms and protection against illegal searches and seizures), but they are also encouraging people to call a 911 center frivolously.
Click to expand...
 
can i report myself? i'll take 1000 bucks, everything i have at is legal. :evil:
 
That looks like an AK-47 to me.

I think he means Assault Rifle, not ARmalite.
 
Grand Rapids Michigan

Grand Rapids MI has ads like that on a few of the public busses. It's been a few months since I've seen one, but something like:

Report illegal guns -
Phone ###​

I've always been in traffic and haven't been able to copy the ###.

I want to call them and ask them how to tell if a gun is illegal.
 
The police will determine if the gun is illegal after they haul in the owner, take him out in back of the police station and put a bullet in his head. The new America.

Jim
 
Well, this topic is seemingly spreading from one forum to another.

I try to avoid becoming involved in threads like this one, but some of what I've read has compelled me to offer some comments.

Having browsed through the threads on this subject on a few forums, perhaps some folks need to get unbunched and use some common sense ...

BTW, the city of East Palo Alto is located within San Mateo County and the city of Palo Alto is located within Santa Clara County, and while they may share a small common border, defined by a creek, they are not the same.

The sign is one of those electric signs which quickly changes, cycling through a range of various images. Did someone think this displayed image was being left up 24 hours a day?

Have you considered the possibility of any potential criminal activities occurring locally which might be linked to the unlawful possession and use of firearms within the specific locality?

Is it possible this is a subject of interest, and potential benefit, to the local residents and visitors to this area?

Anybody wonder whether the company which controls the sign has offered the briefly displayed message as a public service? Perhaps out of courtesy to the citizens of the city where it hopes to continue successfully conducting business? Being a good neighbor, as it were?

Is it possible that the image of the "AK47-type" weapon displayed on the sign was intended to portray a type of weapon which may most easily be identified with potential unlawful, criminal behavior by local citizens? Why wasn't a lever action rifle or duck gun (shotgun without an extended magazine & pistol grip) displayed? Coincidence, maybe?

Now, let me offer an example of something which happened a while back and of which I have some small degree of personal knowledge. The location (county/city) is unimportant.

As the result of an incident which was non-criminal in nature, a man was discovered to be in unlawful possession of several firearms. A couple of them were unregistered 'assault weapons' under CA law. One was an AR15 clone and the other was a SKS design. The fellow was also armed with a concealed & loaded handgun in a public place.

The fellow had previously been convicted of several felony charges.

Oh yeah, and he was also presently under restraint by a criminal protective order.

He was prohibited from possessing firearms (as well as the ammunition, body armor and high capacity magazine which was also found in his possession).

It was later learned that this individual had been scaring and intimidating residents of an apartment complex where he lived, having been seen by different residents running up and down the hallways carrying and waving at least one of the unregistered assault rifles. The residents had apparently been too scared to report the incidents to the local police.

Now, what if the inducement of a public reward for reporting suspected criminal behavior involving firearms had been in place at the time, and had been just enough to influence someone to report this fellow's conduct?

What if the eventual non-criminal contact with LE hadn't occurred when it did, for unrelated matters?

What if the fellow's criminal possession of firearms had only come to the attention of local LE if they were used in a future criminal act, one in which they were fired?

What if that future criminal act had involved a shooting situation where an innocent citizen, or citizens ... or a cop ... had been seriously injured, maimed or killed?

For those folks who look at even reasonable enforcement of firearms laws as an attack upon their 'rights' ... and may tend to look at things from what might be considered a somewhat limited world view and personal perspective ... what if a tragedy had occurred which was then broadcast nationally, and used as impetus to motivate politicians to create the next 'assault weapons' ban on a national level?

Now, let's think about the folks on forum postings who have advocated calling the listed number and deluging the agency with calls to express their displeasure, among other things ...

What if the agency was a very small, under-staffed agency which didn't have the luxury of a lot of staff to handle what might be charitably considered a 'denial of services' effort when it came to a phone-in effort not intended to help prevent local crime?

What if that advertised reward was just enough to induce a concerned, frightened citizen to make a call about someone they had seen carrying a SKS around, seen either running around the hallways or driving around the city with it in their vehicle?

What if a number of upset people trying express their ire over a perceived 'attack upon their second amendment rights' swamped the listed phone number with calls, preventing that concerned citizen with a valuable tip from ever reaching the agency?

What if that 'tip' not reaching the number resulted in a criminal act not being prevented? One which resulted in the serious injury or death of one or more persons? How about the resulting national coverage thing, and further attention to firearms deaths, for those folks more interested in that perspective?

Granted, it would be a nice world if folks were influenced to report criminal behavior out of a desire to be a good citizen, protecting their neighbors and their societies, but let's face it, rewards apparently have their place in our world.

Maybe a little common sense is in order, folks ...
 
Last edited:
As the result of an incident which was non-criminal in nature, a man was discovered to be in unlawful possession of several firearms.
Click to expand...

Interesting, though disconcerting. It a good thing a bad guy got busted. Did he beat the case on technical grounds?

I have another one;
A bad dude was terrorizing the inhabitants of a small Missouri town. The law did nothing about him. Seems he had some power. He was shot to death in his truck on main street in broad daylight. During a town meeting, with the whole town present. Nobody saw nothing.

How about letting people keep their guns, and the government staying out of peoples business.
 
Fastbolt: What if the fellow being investigated is you? What if someone saw you had a gun in your house and they called the police? What if the police sent a SWAT team to investigate? What if they thought your wife was reaching for a gun and shot her? What if she was just reaching for her wallet to give them ID? What if the police officers were exonerated because it was in the line of duty? What if they did this in front of you? What if...

We can play this game all night. What about calling in cars on the street because they might be stolen? What if you saw someone with a case of beer? What if it ends up in the hands of a minor who gets behind the wheel and kills someone?

I am sorry but this is a stupid program. Why not just put that money for rewards towards criminals or gangs? How about you use it to get information on the actual people committing the crimes instead of the tools?
 
It a good thing a bad guy got busted. Did he beat the case on technical grounds?
Click to expand...

No.

Nothing technical to beat. The reason for contact was lawful and the LE involved were experienced veterans who knew how to lawfully conduct themselves during the course and scope of their duties. Several prior felony convictions apparently didn't educate the fellow. Looks like he may be gone for a very, very long time.

Just out of curiosity, why would it be disconcerting? That the several time convicted felon was caught violating several laws, or that several of the violations were firearms-related ... or that his activities were discovered during a non-criminal contact by some alert LE?

Sometimes serious and/or dangerous criminal activity comes to the attention of LE even when the reason for the contact is initially non-criminal in nature (civil matters, consensual contacts, vehicle enforcement stops, etc.).

My partner and I were involved in some non-criminal contact with a fellow one time, during which the fellow fumbled drawing a gun on my partner from one of his pants pockets. In this case awareness and training edged out fumbling. It seems the reason for his fumbling the draw may have been the bags of meth he had in the same pocket in which he kept his pistol. Second strike for him ...

Alertness, training, knowledge and experience can be their own rewards in this line of work ... for the involved LE and the law-abiding citizens of the society whom they serve.

Then, there's the whole luck issue, as well. Right place, right time. ;)

Does Palo Alto have high gun crime?
Click to expand...
Palo Alto, CA? Not to my knowledge. Likely not from their perspective, either. University town (Stanford University). Nice place. Affluent. I've known a number of cops from that agency.
 
Last edited:
The fellow had previously been convicted of several felony charges.

Oh yeah, and he was also presently under restraint by a criminal protective order.
Click to expand...

Gee. Sounds to me as though he should still be in jail.

If he'd paid his dues to society and was released by those in charge of his "keeping", then he still has every inherent, God-given right that any other free person has; contrary statements by people in black dresses do not trump the Constitution.


How about letting people keep their guns, and the government staying out of peoples business.
Click to expand...

Ah, paradise. :)
 
Last edited:
Just out of curiosity, why would it be disconcerting?
Click to expand...

Because of this statement.
As the result of an incident which was non-criminal in nature, a man was discovered to be in unlawful possession of several firearms. A couple of them were unregistered 'assault weapons' under CA law. One was an AR15 clone and the other was a SKS design. The fellow was also armed with a concealed & loaded handgun in a public place.
Click to expand...
If it was non criminal in nature, ie no crime apparent, Why was he searched.
What, the SKS fell out of his pocket?
What is to prevent "Joe Citizen" from getting the same treatment.
What is to prevent a lawful gun owner from being harassed by an anonymous tip.
 
pcosmar

If it was non criminal in nature, ie no crime apparent, Why was he searched.
Click to expand...

Why are you presuming he was 'searched'? 'Discovered' doesn't always have to mean 'searched'. Are you implying, or at least asking, why he may have been searched in a situation when he shouldn't have been? He wasn't initially searched. Why would he be? In the situation of this fellow's creation he had left unlawful contraband clearly visible someplace where LE had every right be. When the LE fellows realized they were viewing apparent criminal activity they took prudent, lawful action. During the course of the reasonable detention performed to investigate the possible criminal activity, involving a convicted felon in possession of dangerous weapons, occurring in LE's presence, it was discovered that he was carrying a concealed and loaded handgun.

What, the SKS fell out of his pocket?
Click to expand...
It may as well have done so. The presence of the AR15-type clone was certainly rather apparent because of an apparent oversight on the part of the fellow. Might as well have attached a "LOOK AT THIS" banner to it and waved it in front of LE.

What is to prevent "Joe Citizen" from getting the same treatment.
Click to expand...
Uh, he wasn't treated as anything other than any other law-abiding "Joe Citizen" (such as you and me and most other folks) until his actions revealed themselves to appear unlawful and dangerous to the public safety. No unlawful actions, no consequences for those actions.

What is to prevent a lawful gun owner from being harassed by an anonymous tip.
Click to expand...
The same thing that generally prevents ordinary law-abiding members of our society from being harassed by anonymous tips that they're child molesters, sexual predators, drug dealers, tax evaders, keeping kidnapped persons in a basement & torturing them, domestic abusers, animal abusers and any number of other things. Receiving an anonymous tip is one thing, but investigating it and developing supporting information is something else. Judges aren't generally in the habit of handing out Search Warrants just for the asking, despite what you may see on TV or in the movies, and there can be severe repercussions for making stupid mistakes or misrepresenting facts when writing one (as is proper).

WeedWhacker

Gee. Sounds to me as though he should still be in jail.
Click to expand...
Not according to the Courts and sentencing laws. Also, although he had been previously convicted of some serious felonies which merited prison time, he was no longer on parole, either. Just because he's no longer a parolee, though, it doesn't mean he's no longer a convicted felon. Doesn't mean he can possess firearms (loaded or unloaded, concealed upon his person or otherwise, or other dangerous weapons, for that matter), let alone firearms which are defined as assault weapons under the state laws (and many other items prohibited for possession by citizens under state laws, even law-abiding folks not convicted of any serious or violent crimes).
 
Last edited:
Easy money. There has been an unqualified offer of $1,000 for each report of information about anyone with a gun. So don't make a big deal about this. Accept the offer and act on it. Simply report everyone you know who has a gun.

For openers, it should be a simple matter to identify and report each cop you see with a gun.

Firebolt presumably has one. Report him. Many people on gun forums presumably are people with guns. Report them too. Dick Cheney has a gun. Report him. Sarah Brady gave her son a gun. Report him too.

You get the idea. At $1,000 a report you should soon have either collected enough money to retire or enough at stake for a local gun owners organization to file suit for the money. Offer. Acceptance. Compensation.
 
Hairless:

As silly as this is (and as much fun as your suggestion might be) I'd bet they've got some kind of protection built in for people like Sarah Brady....

(Or just to be sure that frivolous reports are ignored.)

FB:

(Long time no see....)

Absolutely....

Unfortunately, I still think there may be a hazard to "ordinary folks" if taken a little too proactively. I wouldn't care to have the local PD advised that I had an SKS in my trunk....

(Not that I wouldn't want to have one in there, but you get the idea, I hope.)

"Rat on your neighbors" is a very unfriendly technique....

What's needed is to train the neighbors to know what is criminal activity, and to get them to report that without fear of retribution. To see to it that when Law Enforcement or armed citizens put down the animals, it doesn't become a nasty exercise in Political Correctness in the Criminal Courts, and a lottery win for the animal's family in a later Civil Action. To return to a respect for Law and for each other, not a habit of dodging idiotic laws that protect terrorists and criminals.

We shouldn't need rewards for that....

Regards,
 
Tecumseh

How about you use it to get information on the actual people committing the crimes instead of the tools?
Click to expand...

A well-intentioned question, I'm sure. LE has actually successfully used similar reward programs, and will likely continue to do so.

I'd respectfully submit to you, though, that in my experience during a LE career of 25 years I've often discovered that for some reason if you find one thing (someone engaged in suspected criminal activity) you may also find the other, meaning a ‘tool’ used in the commission of a criminal act (such as firearm, at times) upon occasion.

Conversely, when I've come upon the occasional suspected unlawful firearm it's often been in the possession or control of a restricted or prohibited person (convicted felon, parolee, etc.), or someone apparently involved in some form of criminal activity, sometimes even dangerous criminal activity. The weapons seldom seem to go out traveling on their own, but are often in the possession and control of folks who may be inclined to possess or use them in some unlawful fashion, and often to the detriment of law-abiding folks like you & me.

Might just be coincidence, though.

Now, let me ask you a question. Being a normal, reasonable and prudent person, as I'm sure you are ...

If you saw that type of public service sign, similar to the one under discussion, what would you do? Would you immediately call the agency and report all of your law-abiding friends whom you know are in fact in legal possession of firearms, and aren’t committing crimes with those firearms ... or, would you think that the sign was intended to mean the LE agency wanted to learn about illegally owned firearms, such as those probably in the hands of criminals? Someone might even get their stolen gun back, if it were recovered from a criminal. Stranger things have happened.

As far as the rest of your hypothetical questions? I'd offer that they don't actually seem to be phrased, formulated and offered as though you expect reasonable answers.

Hypothetical questions can be self-fulfilling or self-defeating. Perspective can be involved, as well.

We can play this game all night.
Click to expand...

No, not really ... and that's because it's not a game once it extends out into the real world.

Coffee table, lounge, living room, dormitory or front porch debates ... (especially by folks who may have a sincere and honest interest in the subject, but little practical real world experience or involvement) ... may be enjoyable, entertaining and even philosophically fulfilling. Even occasionally allows for some good natured healthy 'venting' while among friends, too. I certainly enjoy them myself with friends and peers from time to time.

Doesn't mean it has any real involvement or connection with how things really happen, or should be done, though.

If you do decide to enter the justice system as either LE or an attorney after completing college, you'll eventually see that these sorts of questions may sometimes be useful for evoking an emotional response (perhaps a desired one, even ;) ), but that doesn't necessarily mean they're realistic.

What if the police sent a SWAT team to investigate?
Click to expand...

Please don't take it in a bad way, but that one made me chuckle a bit. :D

I've not yet worked with, or heard of, a Special Investigations And Tactics team. May be one somewhere and I just haven't heard of them. Dunno.

On the other hand, usually when LE investigate reports of possible criminal activities it doesn't require a SWAT team be assembled and dispatched to someone's door. Uniformed cops and plainclothes investigators still do a good job of basic police work. Really.

Now, if someone calls in the name of someone they've seen brandishing a "AK/SKS/AR15/M16/UZI-looking" firearm, and reports suspected criminal activity being committed by that person ... and the investigators learn via regular police work that the person alleged to be in possession of the firearm is either wanted, or has a known criminal history involving crimes of violence, and might be considered potentially inclined to violence when contacted by LE ... and especially when being contacted by LE while involved in some criminal behavior that might result in some rather lengthy incarceration ... well, that might seem as though it might change things, wouldn’t it? Other procedures might be better for some other circumstances.

This isn't some dark, all-pervasive conspiracy, folks. At least I don't see it that way.

Remember how folks cried and bemoaned the 'gun turn-in' programs? Did the sky fall?

Think about it.

Just relax and think about it.

At least don't make assumptions.
 
Last edited:
Does Palo Alto have high gun crime?
Click to expand...

fastbolt said:
Palo Alto, CA? Not to my knowledge. Likely not from their perspective, either. University town (Stanford University). Nice place. Affluent. I've known a number of cops from that agency.
Click to expand...

EAST Palo Alto.
In 1992, it had the highest per-capita murder rate in the US.

May have "mellowed" a tad since.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

C
  • Locked
California: "Result of crackdown may be increased violence"
Replies
14
Views
668
Jim March
J
G
  • Locked
Mt Lion in Oakland Ca,kills deer in zoo/gunfree utopia
Replies
2
Views
935
Standing Wolf
S
G
  • Locked
Mountain lion shot in Palo Alto,CA
2
Replies
31
Views
2K
Sven
S
W
  • Locked
Victories for VA Gunowners
Replies
4
Views
450
Leatherneck
L
2
  • Locked
Man calls yellow ribbons 'offensive'
2
Replies
30
Views
1K
XLMiguel
X
Back
Top