This Ought to Generate Some Discussion

[richp]

Hi,

 

Think about the implications this article represents.

 

http://www.mailtribune.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20100309/NEWS/3090315

 

Someone has a reason to think you may be a bit unstable, and they find out you are buying (or maybe already know that you own) guns. So they call the cops and you are arrested and your firearms are confiscated.

 

Option One: Sound move in support of public safety, in line with current laws that allow the authorities to detain someone who gives cause to think they may be a danger to themself or others.

 

Option Two: A dramatic infringement on personal freedom and Second Amendment rights, perhaps undertaken without regard to other rights as well.

 

This ought to be good for some lively discussion....

 

Rich Phillips

[BobbyT]

If you're arrested while armed, they obviously take your pistol and it goes into a locker somewhere.

If you're not charged, you get it back.

If you're a criminal and convicted, you don't.

 

If you're in a cell after arrest, you don't have access to your rifle or shotgun or whatever, so unless they're part of a crime, government has no business going after them.

 

Again, if you're not charged, you go back to your life with your rifles where you left them.

If you're a felon, you wouldn't be able to own them any more.

If it's a misdemeanor, you get out and go back home.

 

Seems pretty well handled by rule of law to me. But the ones pushing confiscation aren't exactly rule of law types...

[Johnnybgood]

Lawsuit.

[richp]

Hi,

 

You own firearms. You lose your job and are upset about it. Maybe if you didn't own a gun before, you go out and buy one around that same time. Someone in your former workplace worries -- without any other justifying cause -- that you might come back and shoot up your former workplace. They call the cops. The cops come and take you away for mental health evaluation, for no other reason than you lost your job and own a gun.

 

So now just owning a gun and losing your job becomes probable cause for detention and confiscation of your firearms.

 

Gotta think hard about that one.....

 

Rich Phillips

[anonymous too]

I can't seem to find the thread from a few years ago about a state employee who murdered his ex-girlfriend.

 

There was a very interesting press release from a pro-gun organization in response to the murder. I choose to believe someone spoke before they thought about their words. Well......that's what I tell myself to make it through the day.

 

If somebody can find it, you'll be shocked.

[spec4]

Unbelievable. I hope he gets a good lawyer and sues for a zillion dollars.

[anonymous too]

Found the thread I was looking for. Almost puked..........again. After 4 1/2 years too.

 

I can't link it. That press release is gonna come back to haunt us someday.

[Xwing]

I hope there was more to it than what was reported. The police have no right to take away someone's firearms based on the little bit of info...

[BadWaterBill]

I wonder what his neighbors think? Imagine looking out your window at 5:30 AM and seeing SWAT on the side of a vehicle in front of your house. Life for this person will never be the same.

[Don Gwinn]

There's no way to discuss this in depth in an intelligent way--the most important information is not in the article. The article only explicitly explains that the man lost his job and purchased the guns, so some are assuming that those are the only two factors that were considered. But there are claims made in the article that the man was "very disgruntled" and references to "very concerning information" that is probably separate from the gun purchases or the firing. My guess is that either they're making the whole thing up in an elaborate conspiracy to get him, or he made some comments, possibly in writing, that indicated intent to hurt people.

 

There isn't much to be done about it except to wait and find out what really happened. Unfortunately, by the time the truth comes out, most people will have forgotten the whole thing.

[seanmiller]

My understanding of this situation is that the man was released and his guns were returned. If there had be a written threat he probably would have been charged with some "intent to commit" crime.

 

As it stands, no charges have been filed. The best explanation for what happened is that it was "proactive" police work.

 

IMO such is a GROSS violation of civil rights. It definitely concerns me that such has happened and criminal charges against the officers have not been issued. If I was this man I would be contacting the FBI about federal Color of Law violation charges. These officer should have known better.

 

ETA: Link to story about guns being returned

 

Ive heard about seizing guns or other weapons from households after domestic disputes for "safekeeping", but there is actually a statute in TN that makes such an action lawful. Unless Oregon has some obscure law that allows them to seize weapons for safekeeping in cases of possible mental instability Im still in favor of charges on the officers.

[Xwing]

Ive heard about seizing guns or other weapons from households after domestic disputes for "safekeeping", but there is actually a statute in TN that makes such an action lawful. Unless Oregon has some obscure law that allows them to seize weapons for safekeeping in cases of possible mental instability Im still in favor of charges on the officers.

 

I don't know about Oregon. But it seems common in Illinois for the Illinois State Police to revoke FOID cards and confiscate all firearms for people merely charged with certain crimes (such as anything involving domestic abuse, among other things). I still don't see how it's lawful, but it happens. I don't understand what happened to "innocent until proven guilty."