Misleading information opposing the 2nd Amendment

[Taurus 66]

My uncle attended a firearms safety course here in Monroe County, NY approximately a month ago. After completing this, he called me and said the course was ok, but when the deputy speaker talked about armed citizens protecting their life and property, and after an incident has occurred and been reported, the local LEA will come in and "confiscate", not just the gun used, but EVERY weapon in the household, including all ammunitions, accessories, air guns, and their ammunitions, leaving a homeowner feeling bare and vulnerable.

I could agree with taking the "weapon(s) involved", but not in taking every firearm out of the home.

More troubling was when a Monroe County Sheriff Deputy Speaker tried convincing everyone in class that: "The legal ownership/possession of a gun is a privilege..." I just about went through the roof! Is the Bill of Rights now to be considered "The Bill of Privileges" in modern-day? I tried on two e-mail attempts to get in touch with this deputy, but there was never a return response. My guess is that he doesn't want to chance debating anything related to the 2nd Amendment because he knows what he says is not true. Still, the idea that cops could come into my house and take every weapon and round of ammunition over one incident still sounds troublesome.

 

[B yond]

It sounds like that instructor didn't know what he was talking about.

 

[mnrivrat]

Sounds like a Deputy has the big head syndrome .

 

[Standing Wolf]

...here in Monroe County, NY...

Very different standards apply in the United States.

 

[tasco 74]

just another reason not to live in NEW YORK city or state.............

 

[loneviking]

Remember New Orleans? Think the cops don't make up whatever law they want too in some places? Then go over to the opencarry.org forum and see how those folks get harassed and sometimes have their weapons taken unlawfully. Check out the many unlawful and/or unconstitutional gun laws are out there in such places as Philadelphia, Penn. despite statewide pre-emption. Increasingly, there seem to be many LEO departments that do whatever they want too.

 

[Tyris]

Firearms should be secured against theft from both illegal thieves and government goons.

Hidden safes are probably the way to go. A patsy safe filled with some beaters like Mosin Nagants and some Jennings pistols couldnt hurt so they dont go home empty handed.

Police like to steal guns, it is no secret. Take the appropriate percausions.

-T

 

[RaspberrySurprise]

Sounds about par for the course in NY.

Police like to steal guns, it is no secret. Take the appropriate percausions.

No, thieves like to steal, thats why we call them thieves. Some thieves happen to also be police officers. Assuming police officers like to steal guns is no more intelligent than assuming black people like to steal TVs.

 

[crankshop1000]

They can't take what they can't find.

 

[RPCVYemen]

and after an incident has occurred and been reported, the local LEA will come in and "confiscate", not just the gun used, but EVERY weapon in the household, including all ammunition, accessories, air guns, and their ammunition, leaving a homeowner feeling bare and vulnerable.

A long time ago - when doing research for a detective novel - I read a police procedural manual. According to that manual, if a weapon is discharged at a crime scene, the responding/investigating officers are supposed to secure all weapons at the scene for ballistics testing. The issue was twofold:

1. Witnesses sometimes lie and/or are confused about which weapon was actually discharged. Witnesses may be confused, may try to protect the person who did the shooting by claiming someone else did the shooting, etc. For example, if a boy friend who is a convicted felon shoots a burglar, girl friend may claim she shot the burglar. If the weapon involved is illegal/sketchy, witnesses may claim that another weapon was used. If the prosecution has to explain how a .22 revolver shot a 45 caliber bullet, that's bad news.
2. Ballistics can be used to exclude weapons. No prosecutor wants a defense attorney to hold up an untested weapon from the scene of shooting and ask, "Can you testify with certainty that this weapon did not fire the fatal shot?" The prosecution wants every weapon that could possibly have been used in the altercation tested - preventing any "second shooter" inferences by a defense attorney.

I wonder if the instructor heard of that policy, and expanded it a bit.

Mike

 

[Taurus 66]

The only reason I am bringing this up is because a friend and co-worker recently broke up with her boyfriend, who was abusive to her. She got an order of protection against him and one day the sheriff's dept arrived at her home to have him evicted. During that process, a deputy asked her if there were any guns in the house. She said, "Yes, my son has a .22, but his door is locked and I don't have a key. He's at work right now." It didn't matter to them because they broke the lock on the door and took the rifle.

 

[Tyris]

Assuming police officers like to steal guns is no more intelligent than assuming black people like to steal TVs.

Dont be naive. If the police or blacks break into your house they're going to steal from you.

Numerous police agencies (typically in large cities and national organizations) have shown a rabidly anti-gun bent and are more than willing to confiscate, threaten and intimidate gun owners into giving up their firearms.

Assets must be secured and hidden.

-T

 

[crebralfix]

What, you thought you had a right to keep and bear arms?

Heller states that it is subject to limits, regardless of "shall not be infringed."

Additionally, since it's not incorporated, the 2nd Amendment does NOT limit state action.

 

[rojocorsa]

I did not realize that police, people who work with guns, are so anti gun. I figured they would be more down to earth. Well I hope this only applies to certain LEOs anyway.

 

[Deanimator]

If the police or blacks break into your house they're going to steal from you.

So then if whites break into my house they're NOT going to steal from me? If not, why did they break in in the first place? Redecorating?

 

[tsidorus]

yes that comment was certainly not high road... I dont normaly put my two bits in but WAY out of line...

-Tsi

 

[ColinthePilot]

I think the point was whoever breaks into your house is there to steal something. Makes no difference if they're black, white, LEO, FBI, whatever.

 

[Blackbeard]

Trying to steer this back onto the High Road....

Did the instructor say "confiscate" or did he say "collect as evidence"? There's a difference. Confiscate implies you lose ownership of the weapons. Weapons seized as evidence are still yours once they are done with them.

 

[Taurus 66]

Did the instructor say "confiscate" or did he say "collect as evidence"? There's a difference. Confiscate implies you lose ownership of the weapons. Weapons seized as evidence are still yours once they are done with them.

Does it matter? If the police take all the homeowner's guns in one swoop, this goes back to my first post, tail end of the second sentence in the first paragraph:

...EVERY weapon in the household, including all ammunitions, accessories, air guns, and their ammunitions, leaving a homeowner feeling bare and vulnerable.

 

[Loosedhorse]

I would think that, around here at least, in the case of a self-defense shooting (attacker injured of killed), that pending completion of investigation, you would lose all access to firearms. After all, they've got a shot person, and a person (you) admitting you did it.

One of my local FFLs has told me he has sometimes taken possession of someone's collection during an investigation.

If a firearm was only presented, I think there would be a lot more leeway.

 

[DragonFire]

Lots of misinformation going on here. It is very rare for anyone giving a safety talk, or any kind of legal/gun talk to say "this will always happen". There are just too many variables.

Around here, Rochester NY, if you're involved in a shooting outside of your home, the police will not come to you home to collect all of your weapons, unless of course there's some other reason (like you're a wanted felon). If it happens inside your home, what they do will depend on what's actually happened. Was it domestic abuse, a break-in, attempted suicide...

The idea that they will take air guns is laughable. (if we're talking about your kids BB gun, and not the high-end, much more powerful target rifles that happen to use air).

I know for a fact that if a shooting happens outside of the home, the police will take the fired weapon, and WILL NOT TAKE other firearms, nor does the shooter lose his/her right to own/carry firearms.

From the lectures I've attended, usually there are people in the audience who are listening for the authority to shoot someone (if this and this happens can I shoot him?). They try all kinds of "hypothetical" situations to try to get the speaker to tell them that of course they can shoot in that situation (like that would give them some kind of support if they do shoot someone). Just as usual, the speakers are trying to impress the huge responsibility that comes with carrying a firearm. Even if you are legally justified in shooting, you probably don't WANT to shoot if there is any other way (due to civil actions that will follow, moral/religious guilt, etc.). Most times each side goes to extreme to get there agenda across, even if the truth gets stretched sometimes.

 

[JDoe]

Dont be naive. If the police or blacks break into your house they're going to steal from you.

I have no room for racists on my planet, breathing my air.

Consider your racist and offensive remark reported to the mods.

 

[DeathByCactus]

I wish we could convince everyone in New York to just pack up and leave. Move to other states and boycott the state.

Impossible I know, but wouldn't it be hilarious?

Seriously though, if there is a domestic abuse situation, more power to them. Attempted suicide, more power too them; keyword attempted. Self defense against unknown aggressor, I don't think an police officer could be that dumb.

I know assumptions are bad but, call it wishful hoping.

 

[Taurus 66]

The idea that they will take air guns is laughable. (if we're talking about your kids BB gun, and not the high-end, much more powerful target rifles that happen to use air).

Seriously DragonFire, my co-worker's son (18), who was not involved with the order of protection or eviction notice, had his .22 rifle taken right out of his room along with all .22 ammunition. Her younger son (who's 6) had his Daisy Red Ryder and BBs taken too. I kid you not! That's the story my friend told me. She watched the deputies take both guns and place them in the trunk of a patrol car.

Getting back to the "deadly physical force" situation in my home, if I had to use such force, I just believe it's ab-so-lute-ly wrong for the police to take any gun that's not involved and only the gun that is involved. I'm smart enough to know which gun to hand over for ballistics check and anything else they want to do. I would not interfere with an investigation by giving them the wrong gun. That's how it should be.

 

[BruceRDucer]

/

Sounds like a Deputy has the big head syndrome .
----mnrivrat

Yeah, that seems about all it is. /