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

Unique law lets police seize guns before a crime is committed

Discussion in 'Legal' started by Zedicus, Aug 3, 2008.

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

    Zedicus Member

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2003
    Messages:
    1,976
    Location:
    Idaho
    http://www.rep-am.com/News/357596.txt

    :scrutiny:
     
  2. Guns and more

    Guns and more member

    Joined:
    May 6, 2008
    Messages:
    1,929
    Well don't that beat all. Good thing I don't have any guns.
     
  3. Z-Michigan

    Z-Michigan Member

    Joined:
    May 19, 2008
    Messages:
    4,047
    Location:
    Michigan
    Reminds me of "precrime" from the movie "Minority Report."

    If someone has actually made an illegal threat and there is credible evidence, that would also be assault and I can see a seizure there. But this sounds mostly like east coast idiocy in the common way. Glad I don't live there.
     
  4. Dr. Tad Hussein Winslow

    Dr. Tad Hussein Winslow member

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2007
    Messages:
    13,146
    Translation: "It certainly has not been abused. But we intend to change that."
     
  5. Speer

    Speer Member

    Joined:
    Oct 4, 2006
    Messages:
    338
    Location:
    USA
    And everyone one of those confiscations were peaceful?
     
  6. Picard

    Picard Member

    Joined:
    Apr 30, 2008
    Messages:
    974
    Location:
    Illinois
    Not a very unique law. This sounds like a prequel to the Katrina incident. It is scary that laws like this have a place in the U.S..

    Our rights are being eroded more and more.
     
  7. Kino74

    Kino74 Member

    Joined:
    Mar 21, 2008
    Messages:
    326
    Reading that article reminded me so much of 1984.

    Everything is ok. Don't worry about it, we'll let you know if we excessively abuse you. No worries as Comrade Lawlor, D-East Haven has your best interests at heart.
     
  8. Standing Wolf

    Standing Wolf Member in memoriam

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2002
    Messages:
    24,041
    Location:
    Idahohoho, the jolliest state
    Lenin is laughing himself silly.
     
  9. Tyris

    Tyris member

    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2007
    Messages:
    593
    Location:
    Oregon
    The moral of the story is, dont comply with registration, and store multiple guns off-site.

    -T
     
  10. jaholder1971

    jaholder1971 Member

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2007
    Messages:
    1,302
    Location:
    thehighroad.us
    A friend of mine went through something similar.

    Non violent domestic dispute between friend and his (insane) wife involved cops. Wife's made so many outrageous accusations against her husband, her adult kids and the grandchildren that the cops all have the woman's number.

    My friend's mistake was to tell the officer that, as a devout Catholic, he has been raised to reject the idea of divorce (even though his own priest said he should for his own personal safety) and that he was at the end of his mental rope.

    The cop asked him if he believed he was a threat to himself or others, he told the officer that he was nearly ready to end it all.

    They took him in to the ER for a psych eval and seized his 12 firearms, partly due to the psyche but mostly because they didn't trust leaving all his safe keys with a lunatic wife. He got them all back but it took a month.

    He finally divorced her and he and all his adult children ended up with PFA's against her.
     
  11. Drgong

    Drgong Member

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2008
    Messages:
    1,259
    Location:
    Ashe Co, NC and Gastonia NC
    Thought crimes...

    Shudder...
     
  12. ilbob

    ilbob Member

    Joined:
    Jun 14, 2006
    Messages:
    10,901
    Location:
    Illinois
    its not like the cops just up and decided to go steal these firearms. a judge actually had to sign a warrant to authorize it. there is at least some due process involved.

    like all warrants it is a one sided affair where the side seeking the warrant can claim just about anything with no proof required of anything, so it will be abused, but that is no different than warrants of other types that are frequently issued in dubious circumstances, much like orders of protection.

    there is still some due process involved, however slim, and better yet there is a record of what is being claimed.
     
  13. usmarine0352_2005

    usmarine0352_2005 Member

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2005
    Messages:
    2,797
    .


    Thus, never register your guns.


    Sad.


    .
     
  14. Funderb

    Funderb Member

    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2007
    Messages:
    2,104
    Location:
    Jacksonville, Bold new city of the south.
    Wow, when putting in a security system makes you a threat to others, and a seizable offense, it makes me glad I don't own any guns.
     
  15. romma

    romma Member

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2005
    Messages:
    3,208
    Location:
    Southeastern,CT
    Well, we keep fighting here in CT, but we have a long way to go.

    I wonder how this law would play out down the road butting heads with the Heller Ruling? I mean I know that people cite the Heller ruling for things that it doesn't apply to, but this law seems to be in conflict with the 2nd ammendment.

    Just like restraining orders and no-contact orders also.
     
  16. fletcher

    fletcher Member

    Joined:
    May 19, 2004
    Messages:
    2,559
    Location:
    TX
    Wow. Due process much?
     
  17. Scoutsout2645

    Scoutsout2645 Member

    Joined:
    Jul 29, 2008
    Messages:
    95
    Location:
    NJ...How you doin'?
    "Lawlor said there have been no challenges on constitutional grounds because...a test case would be too costly for average gun owners."

    Seems to me that this would be an excellent opportunity for the NRA or some state-level 2nd Amendment PAC to step in on the behalf of one of these owners and take this law for Judicial review. That Torrington case, superficially, looks like an ideal one to take up, and the funds and lawyers these groups can provide would make it a fair fight.

    "The moral of the story is, dont comply with registration"

    Well, that IS a solution...but the problem is that, if you are then found in possession of said unregistered firearm, depending on the state you may be guilty of a felony-level crime. Then you WILL lose that firearm, any others you may have, and the ability to get more. If you're willing to take that risk, go ahead.
     
  18. ilbob

    ilbob Member

    Joined:
    Jun 14, 2006
    Messages:
    10,901
    Location:
    Illinois
    this is not really a unqiue thing. AFAIK, every state has provisions that allow a court to claim you are a threat to a spouse and take your guns. usually the standard of proof is extremely lax.
     
  19. Blackbeard

    Blackbeard Member

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 2007
    Messages:
    1,722
    Location:
    Behind the Daley Curtain (IL)
    I'm sorry, officer, I'm afraid you might shoot an innocent person with your sidearm. I'm going to need you to hand it over.
     
  20. burningsquirrels

    burningsquirrels Member

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2008
    Messages:
    1,562
    Location:
    Georgia
    sounds to me like they can whip up anything. hey look, someone lost their job and owns a pistol. let's go get it.
     
  21. ilbob

    ilbob Member

    Joined:
    Jun 14, 2006
    Messages:
    10,901
    Location:
    Illinois
    I'd bet most of the time the people who have firearms confiscated under this law are not people you would want to have firearms anyway.

    I would like to see more proof before guns can be confiscated under such a procedure, and a the very least some opportunity for the person in question to answer the allegations in advance. the 4th amendment still applies, and if they take your property and don't plan to give it back, they should have to pay fair market value for it.
     
  22. burningsquirrels

    burningsquirrels Member

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2008
    Messages:
    1,562
    Location:
    Georgia
    ^^^ you said it better than i did. they really need to use a lot of proof before they take stuff away. i was just being sarcastic.
     
  23. Poper

    Poper Member

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2006
    Messages:
    1,061
    Location:
    Approximately N33°18' / W111°48'
    Say What???

    Gee! And just WHO is accountable for this??? :mad: :fire:
    You folks in Connecticut need to get control of your state government before you lose ALL of your "inalienable" rights! Holy smoke!!! :eek: :eek: :eek:

    JMHO, but there is something elementarily wrong when you have to fear your government's denial of your inalienable right and then have to risk bankruptcy or depend on others to defend yourself against your own government! :eek: What the heck is "free" about that? :confused:

    How would you define tyranny? :scrutiny: Scary! Really scary!!

    Poper
     
  24. blackcash88

    blackcash88 member

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2008
    Messages:
    886
    Ah yes... The good old CT "turn your neighbor in" law has once again reared its ugly head. :rolleyes:
     
  25. Scoutsout2645

    Scoutsout2645 Member

    Joined:
    Jul 29, 2008
    Messages:
    95
    Location:
    NJ...How you doin'?
    "JMHO, but there is something elementarily wrong when you have to fear your government's denial of your inalienable right and then have to risk bankruptcy or depend on others to defend yourself against your own government! What the heck is "free" about that?

    How would you define tyranny? Scary! Really scary!!"

    I call it reality and a recognition that public fear, justified or not, will erode our rights faster than anything else. We only keep our rights as long as we are willing to fight for them...fear of crime, fear of terrorism, fear of all the random crap that happens and our desire to want to think we can "control" these things will push the public to endorse laws like this. We have become too soft, comfortable and complacent to want to endure anything that threatens our safety and "way of life" and therefore we are more than willing to "sacrifice liberty for safety".

    Tyranny is when the government does something you oppose, and all you do is gripe without taking actual, effective action to fight what they're doing. Getting the NRA to fight the law as our allies with deep pockets is effective--throwing lots of smileys onto my posts isn't.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page