Quantcast
  1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

CavArms Update: Public Notice on Asset Forfeiture in WSJ

Discussion in 'Legal' started by Bubbles, May 1, 2008.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Bubbles

    Bubbles Member

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2004
    Messages:
    3,152
    Location:
    Eastern Panhandle of West Virginia
    Page 8 under legal notices. All claims for property must be made by May 25th or the property will be disposed of according to ..... . Has hundreds of guns listed - machine guns, suppressors, everything from their inventory.

    The link to a scan of the notice is in the first post of http://www.ar15.com/forums/topic.html?b=1&f=5&t=705115. It runs for almost two complete columns.
     
    Last edited: May 1, 2008
  2. Beagle-zebub

    Beagle-zebub Member

    Joined:
    Dec 18, 2006
    Messages:
    1,482
    Location:
    Moscow, Russia
    Are any news outlets even running a story on this?

    And call the ACLU! They are the saintly protectors of all tyrannized social pariahs, right?
     
  3. Ergosphere

    Ergosphere Member

    Joined:
    Jan 10, 2008
    Messages:
    227
    That is absolutely outrageous. Surely this is a violation of the fifth amendment. Has no court ever seen it as such?

     
  4. Picard

    Picard Member

    Joined:
    Apr 30, 2008
    Messages:
    974
    Location:
    Illinois
    So what's the story? The ATF just raided and took their guns for no reason? Were they even found guilty of anything?
     
  5. Ergosphere

    Ergosphere Member

    Joined:
    Jan 10, 2008
    Messages:
    227
    Picard, last I heard they haven't even been charged with anything.
     
    Last edited: May 2, 2008
  6. Kharn

    Kharn Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2002
    Messages:
    3,999
    Location:
    Maryland
    The really stupid part of this announcement is that CavArms' bound book should list who owns the weapons that were on-hand for consignment or repair...

    Kharn
     
  7. Henry Bowman

    Henry Bowman Senior Member

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2002
    Messages:
    6,717
    Location:
    Cincinnati, Ohio
    This is just the first step in the forfeiture process. CavArms and/or any third-party owners of property in their possession that was taken have to file a claim and then prove that the property was legal and not used criminally. I expect that CavArms will claim all of it since what they did not own was legally in the possession. If it is not "claimed," often because (in other cases), it is stolen or illegal or its value is less than the cost of trying to get it back, then it will be forfeited by default.

    We need to pray for a judge who recognizes this as BS.
     
  8. MakAttak

    MakAttak Member

    Joined:
    Sep 6, 2007
    Messages:
    898
    Location:
    VA
    This makes me so outraged.

    And now I have to decide if it's even worth it to contact my senators. (My congressman is a gun grabber, so it would be a waste of my time).

    Perhaps the White House, though.
     
  9. bogie

    bogie Member

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2003
    Messages:
    9,569
    Location:
    St. Louis, in the Don't Show Me state
    It's never a waste of time. Keep reminding them.

    Even Chuck Schumer has to worry about reelection.
     
  10. Old Fuff

    Old Fuff Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2002
    Messages:
    23,908
    Location:
    Arizona
    It is interesting (and outrageous) that we have arrived at the point where private property can be confiscated by the government, without the need to first file criminal or civil charges against the owners, let alone get a conviction. But it should also be remembered that the BATF was a core player in the Clinton White House’s attempt to take over the handgun industry by engineering the filing of superfluous lawsuits in mass to force the companies to either submit to an unconstitutional settlement or be forced into bankruptcy.

    Fortunately there are statutes that allow the government, and even their individual agents, to be sued for malicious persecution. Judgments or settlements can be quite large, but unfortunately it is the taxpayers that end up paying them.

    Everyone should write they’re Senators and Representatives. Hopefully we still have at least some left that can demand an investigation.

    Of course a President Obama would put a stop to all of this… :rolleyes: :banghead:
     
  11. sqlbullet

    sqlbullet Member

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2008
    Messages:
    445
    Except, of course, weapons. They interpret the 2nd to protect the right of the government to keep arms, not the people.
     
  12. Vaarok

    Vaarok Member

    Joined:
    Dec 13, 2006
    Messages:
    1,887
    Location:
    Varies
    Feel free to use my letter-

     
  13. strat81

    strat81 Member

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2006
    Messages:
    3,912
    Location:
    Nebraska
    Excellent letter.
     
  14. mp510

    mp510 Member

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2006
    Messages:
    3,045
    Location:
    PRKt
    And, notice the key words
    .

    This notification is simply a part of the process.
     
  15. Ergosphere

    Ergosphere Member

    Joined:
    Jan 10, 2008
    Messages:
    227
    I remain unconvinced. The property has already been seized, and BATFE is now looking to dispose of it... and up to this point there has been no opportunity for Cav Arms to make itself heard in court.

    This is not proper due process.
     
  16. TexKettering

    TexKettering Member

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2007
    Messages:
    216
    Location:
    San Antonio/Charleston
    Thanks... I just wrote my Senators. :D
     
  17. mp510

    mp510 Member

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2006
    Messages:
    3,045
    Location:
    PRKt
    Now, cav has a choice to make- are they going to submit a claim for the property before the date in the notice, or are they going to not submit a claim and forefeit their rights to the property. If they choose to submit the claim then there will be a contest over whp gets the property. If cav chooses not to submit a claim for whatever reason, they are forbearing their rights to the property, without contest.
     
  18. hrgrisso

    hrgrisso Member

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2007
    Messages:
    623
    Location:
    Valley of the Gun
    Contacted my Senators and Congressperson

     
  19. brighamr

    brighamr Member

    Joined:
    Nov 28, 2006
    Messages:
    1,179
    Location:
    somewhere between utah and canada
    E-mails sent
     
  20. Ergosphere

    Ergosphere Member

    Joined:
    Jan 10, 2008
    Messages:
    227
    You're missing the point. (I think?)

    Their property was taken, with a warrant. No charges were filed, no explanation given. Now, BATFE is listing the property to initiate forfeiture proceedings... again, no charges, no explanation. Cav Arms must now petition in order to regain possession of their property. That will cost a great deal of money. And they likely don't have much money, since BATFE essentially put them out of business by confiscating everything.

    In other words, their property, and indeed their livelihood, has been taken, with no explanation, no criminal or civil judgment -- not even a hearing. They will lose -- no, they have already lost -- their property, and won't get it back unless they can make a successful argument in court.

    What ever happened to the presumption of innocence? This is not due process, it is simple highway robbery. Surely their entire inventory is not being held as evidence, especially as BATFE is looking to dispose of it. I can understand property being seized with a warrant and held as evidence. On the other hand, civil forfeiture without preceding substantive due process or a trial judgment is... well, the only word that comes to mind at the moment is tyrrany. (Oh, and IMO, substantive due process would require a chance for both sides to be heard.)
     
    Last edited: May 4, 2008
  21. guntotinguy

    guntotinguy Member

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2008
    Messages:
    573
    Location:
    Las Vegas,Nevada
    Me too,and even though 2 are gun grabbers,2 others I e-mailed are not.
     
  22. Don Gwinn

    Don Gwinn Moderator Emeritus

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2002
    Messages:
    6,385
    Location:
    Virden, IL
    I'm guessing this is where they hold a trial in which the various guns and suppressors are accused of a crime of some sort.
    Maybe witchcraft.

    U.S. vs. 154 AR-15 rifles, 32 AAR suppressors, 987 AR-15 barrels, 3,425 assorted metal springs . . . . .
     
  23. mp510

    mp510 Member

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2006
    Messages:
    3,045
    Location:
    PRKt
    I believe that the difference comes from the perspective we're taking this from. Your looking at this from a more ideological/theoretical position whereas I am looking at it from a more procedural perspective- that it is working its way through the system under the existing frame of due process.
     
  24. Erik

    Erik Member

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2002
    Messages:
    1,660
    Location:
    USA
    I would agree. Confusing types of procedures, criminal, civil, etc, isn't going to help anyone. Your elected officials will pick up the phone, find that due process IS being followed, and hang it up, and most likely stop being interested at that point.

    Asking your elected officials to look into things is certianly a good idea, though. The looking process often shines light on things folks didn't realize were in the shadows.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page