California town pays for info on gunowners...

Status
Not open for further replies.
Hi Stu.

Haven't heard from you in a while. The new year has been passing very, very quickly, hasn't it?

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.)

I certainly get your point. Having been involved in this career for a while, though, it's just hard to imagine the commonly thinly stretched and strained LE resources being a hazard to "ordinary folks if taken a little too proactively" in this particular instance.

Here's something to chew on, though, and it involves a matter of perspective. The following statements obviously mean different things to you ... but they could very easily be construed to mean the same thing under some circumstances. Context and perspective.

"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.

I think we have to be careful when it comes to that "Perception is Reality" slogun ... from ALL perspectives.


torpid

I answered the specific question that was asked.;)
 
SMMAssociates:

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.)

I would not make or advocate the making of frivolous reports.

The sign I saw depicted at the beginning of this thread is clear and unambiguous. It offers "$1000 reward for info on people with guns."

Whatever interpretation you have of that sign is likely to be of great interest but is irrelevant to the offer made by that sign.

Police officers are people. Police officers with guns are people with guns. Providing information about each of them qualifies for the reward.

The sign does not say "Not police officers" or "Only bad people" or "Everyone but Sarah Brady" or have any such limitation. It also does not say "Phone this number for info on how to make $1,000 from info on people with guns."

I don't understand what you mean by "I'd bet they've got some kind of protection built in for people like Sarah Brady...." Nobody needs "protection" from the offer made by this sign. I absolutely do not believe that any law enforcement agency would do anything to harm anyone. Why do you think anyone would need protection from the offer made by this sign?
 
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,

There it a lot of evidence that this is not true.
Just ask the old lady in Atlanta. Oh, thats right, you can't , she's dead.
How about the Facts.
http://www.cato.org/raidmap/
 
FB:

I've spent roughly the last year keeping track of mom. She had an argument with a piece of steak last May and has been in and out of the hospital since. At 91, it's been kind of interesting.... (She's 91. I just feel that way some days :) .)

IAC, she's doing fine - we were out for supper last night - her first time out in some months. Naturally, it was raining and snowing, and guess who has to put the wheelchair in the trunk, etc.

Anyway, we don't really disagree.... My concern is in two areas. Too much "reaction" by the PD is the first. The local kids have enough time and resources to respond to all kinds of stuff during the day watch. (They're short on money right now and may have to cut back, though.) It's kind of interesting when the MDT lights up with "You're Going To DIE!" when they run a CHL holder's registration.... (That was fixed - wild when OH's CHL program kicked on in 2004, though.)

The City PD, OTOH, are lucky they've got cars, and wouldn't have Officers if this wasn't the Rust Belt. They sometimes can't respond to "I've got two BG's on the ground at gunppoint." (Or so it's said by a buddy who's spent some weekends trying to catch a guy that wants to burn down the neighborhood.) The result is that some PD's will do a full court press on a "man with a gun" call without thinking about it. Drop by the OFCC board (http://www.ohioccw.org) and look at the forums area.

I really think that common sense on the PD's part would probably be all that's needed. There are two cases on the OFCC board of interest. The first is over a year old, and involves a Felony Stop on a guy reported to be wearing two unconcealed Bersas at a gas station. (Dan Sayers. Open carry is legal in OH, if a little risky.) Dan was a pizza driver, and worked a really bad area. OH's idiotic plain sight made uncovering when in the car, and covering up when getting out enough of a PITA that he just tended to leave things open. Somebody called him in, and the local PD (Oregon OH) grabbed him up a few blocks away. Here's where it gets upsetting. The Officers on-scene reacted a little badly (Dan didn't keep his mouth shut either) and after some consultation found out that Oregon OH had a "no weapons" ordinance. They confiscated the guns (and the holsters?!), and cited him on that basis. Oregon still has the guns. (OH's new HB347 blows that Oregon ordinance away, but it's not retroactive.)

Another case - still pending too, but too recent to really comment on, runs similarly. This one sounds like "Contempt of Cop", too.

The other concern is more important to the general public. If a drug dealer sets up across the street, there are some serious hazards should you try to get the local PD to take action. Even if you walk around wearing two Bersas, the BG's may not be deterred, and should you act in your own defense, OH's very fuzzy Castle Doctrine (inside your own home), makes it nearly as dangerous as letting the guys sell the drugs. "Rat on your neighbor" can open up some nasty consequences where the PD (and the Citizen) can't defend.

The approach should be "turn in criminals".... With some protection for those who make legitimate complaints, and some protection for those who need to defend themselves....

Turning in "me", OTOH, since I'm not a protected minority, and don't have any criminal record, means that I may end up in a world of (legal and financial) hurt, and the caller won't be at any risk.

Robert Hairless: Sorry if I upset you.... To some extent I was razzing you.... What I meant was that if you call in Sarah Brady and the other criminal and terrorist friendly folks (like Rosie O'Donnell, Chuch Schumer, etc.), they're not likely to ever hear of the call, or at least the PD won't bother. Call in the guy down the block with a beard, and plan on seeing how many black & whites the local PD has.... He's not "priveleged".... The sign in question is too general. We all know that it means "support Bloomberg".... (One of my buddies' gun store got hit by his Felons.... I gotta support him by buying a couple more guns.)

The ArchDuke: Even if the sign is fake, the attitude isn't. Maybe not "right there", but just look at the threads about Bloomberg and "illegal guns"....

Regards,
 
That picture is photoshopped.

The bus in Grand Rapids MI wasn't photoshopped.
The one with the placard sign that said "Report Illegal Guns"

It's not photoshopped.

Page 36 of this document produced with the cooperation of the BATF wasn't photoshopped here is a link to the reference-

New York City's operation gunstop - It's not photoshpped - although that example isnt the best. Guns are illegal in NYC, if I understand correctly, therefore absolving the reward seeker of the need to determine what constitutes an "Illegal" gun.

Orlando, FLA


Wicomico County

Phillidelphia

Howard County, Maryland

I could go on, these were the first half of Page 1/4 from a dogpile search.

Rat on your neighbor programs are in full force, and are coming soon to a town near you.
 
The bus in Grand Rapids MI wasn't photoshopped.
The one with the placard sign that said "Report Illegal Guns"


Or this progam in Indy,
It's not photoshopped.

Page 36 of this document produced with the cooperation of the BATF wasn't photoshopped here is a link to the reference-

New York City's operation gunstop - It's not photoshpped - although that example isnt the best. Guns are illegal in NYC, if I understand correctly, therefore absolving the reward seeker of the need to determine what constitutes an "Illegal" gun.

Orlando, FLA

Wicomico County

Phillidelphia

Howard County, Maryland

I feel the need to point out those all specificly say Illegal firearms
thats alot different from report people with guns
and I still say its photoshopped
 
Get a clue.

I feel the need to point out those all specificly say Illegal firearms
thats alot different from report people with guns

And the question remains, as first stated in post #12

"How do you tell if a gun is illegal?"

Or is the public to assume that all guns are illegal?
Or is the public being asked to call the authorities and let them determine the gun's legality?

The theme of this thread is that there are municipalities offering rewards to people who turn in other people based on possession of a firearm.
The rewards, ostensibly, are funded with your tax dollars.

This fact remains, as proven in post #31:
There are several, if not hundreds of municipalities already funding such Gun rat programs.

We ought not give a hoot about photoshopping trolls. Citizens need to recognize is that there are institutions that want to let the sponge headed public make judgments as to what constitutes an illegal firearm. Don’t think for a moment that any law abiding gun owner is immune to the possibility of search and seizure based on ignorant reports.

Soakers, disgusted.
 
SMMAssociates:

Robert Hairless: Sorry if I upset you.... To some extent I was razzing you.... What I meant was that if you call in Sarah Brady and the other criminal and terrorist friendly folks (like Rosie O'Donnell, Chuch Schumer, etc.), they're not likely to ever hear of the call, or at least the PD won't bother. Call in the guy down the block with a beard, and plan on seeing how many black & whites the local PD has.... He's not "priveleged".... The sign in question is too general. We all know that it means "support Bloomberg".... (One of my buddies' gun store got hit by his Felons.... I gotta support him by buying a couple more guns.)

Thanks for the apology, Stu. (Forgive me if it's inappropriate to use your first name since we don't know each other.) You didn't mortally wound me and, I confess, I didn't understand your point. Now that I do understand it I agree with it.

I also didn't realize that the photograph was created in PhotoShop. Naughty, naughty. :)
 
This sickens me. Not many things do that, but this just gives me a dirty feeling.

This is exactly the same fear mongering and propaganda used by nazi germany. Change "people with guns" to "jews" and you have a world war.
 
I also didn't realize that the photograph was created in PhotoShop. Naughty, naughty.

That is still up for speculation, but irrelevant even if it is.

I must say, this duplicate thread on the same topic is by far MUCH more level headed and articulate in its discussion than the first.

Too bad not all LE officers can have 25yrs exp. and be as level headed and effective as Mr. Fastbolt has depicted. I have many acquaintances that would act in patrol LE roles just as some of us here would fear as they are ignorant of the specific laws pertaining to us legal gun owners. But most of us LGO's wouldn't be taking our "pet loads" out for a cruise at night and causing LE attention to ourselves either. :p

Justin
 
sorensen440,

I still say its photoshopped

It's NOT photoshopped. Call the number. They have no problems admitting it's an actual sign.

Here's my post from the other similar thread:

I just called the number and was told I and all of the hundreds of others calling, (good job guys), were harassing the police department

What a joke. Tomorrow I'm calling the City attorney's office and the state attorney general. I urge you to call too. Especially if you don't live there I don't.

California State Attorney General:
VOICE 1-800-952-5225
(Toll-free in CA) or
(916) 322-3360
TDY 1-800-952-5548
(Toll-free in CA) or
(916) 324-5564
FAX (916) 323-5341

City of East Palo Alto
Michael S. Lawson
Telephone: 650-853-5921
Fax: 650-853-5923
Email: [email protected]
 
right off the top of my head

i can safely say a gun carried by a drug dealer is illeagal or a convicted feloon or a number of other easy calls. and a gimme bust like that makes it easy to remove some pretty objectionable folks from the street. plus as has been pointed out it lets the cops get lucky with some not too swift bad guys. and don't downplay luck
 
Not photoshoped.

The glockforum people have numerious callers, and they admit to the sign.
 
Time to have fun

It's interesting that the phone number listed as the one to call to get a lady is the same as the Palo Alto California Police Department Admin and Records

Call and let them know you see people with guns at this address:

Palo Alto California Police Department Admin and Records
141 Demeter Street
East Palo Alto, CA 94303
650-853-3160

Ask when money will be sent :D
 
I see this going the other way, as well, with planted illegal guns, then called in. Drop a "scrubbed" HiPoint in the guy's backyard shed, and go get $1000. Great way to A) get rid of a crime gun, and B) get rid of a competitor, or even C) get rid of a neighborhood busybody who is trying to shut down your business, because D) the news media will try, convict, and "hang", in just a few sentances, and whoever it is will be ruined, both financial and reputation.

There is no feel good program that cannot be misused .
 
[blockquote]
i can safely say a gun carried by a drug dealer is illeagal or a convicted feloon or a number of other easy calls.
[/blockquote]
But how does some shmoe on the street know who is a drug dealer or a convicted feloon? People like that aren't tattooed or lit up with neon--not to mention that they're innocent until proven guilty, so the passer-by who says, "He's a dealer; he's a pimp; she's a ho" is playing a dangerous game. I certainly wouldn't call it an "easy call."

--Len.
 
fastbolt said:
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.

Unfortunately, that's not the way things typically work in the S.F. Bay Area. There was an incident recently, reported on CalGuns.net, where on nothing more than a report that a guy possessed an "assault weapon", the police came immediately, very aggressively arrested him in his own driveway, and he was then thrown in jail for the entire weekend. It took the police about six hours to even find the correct part of the penal code to charge him because California gun laws are so complex. The guy ended up hiring an experience firearms attorney and all charges were dropped, as the rifle he had was not actually an "assault weapon" under California law.

There is no way the average citizen in California will know what firearms are illegal. The firearms code is just too thick--about 10 times as long as the laws in your typical red state. I doubt that most law enforcement would know either, as the publication on CA gun laws distributed by the state attorney general's office for police is severly out of date.

Soliciting tips from the public for obvious crimes, such as acting clearly belligerently (randomly threatening people in your aparment building), or selling crack from your front door, is one thing. Tempting the public in the Bay Area to report guns, illegal or illegal, WILL lead to harassment of law-abiding citizens.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top