Calling all PO-PO's, 10-25

[bruzer]

Here is my take on it.
Someone breaks into your house, you shoot and kill them. You call 911, police come, bad guy dead in house. Do the police take YOUR gun? There lies the answer to your question. If laws or protocol allow your gun to be taken when you use it for self defense in your home then imagine how it can be done in other ways. I use an extreme case and in the home because that will show what can be done.
Now if your gun will not be taken then congratulations. The 2nd Amendment is truely alive in your area.
Just my opinion and used for entertainment purposes only.
Mike

 

[apd193]

Here is my take on it.
Someone breaks into your house, you shoot and kill them. You call 911, police come, bad guy dead in house. Do the police take YOUR gun? There lies the answer to your question. If laws or protocol allow your gun to be taken when you use it for self defense in your home then imagine how it can be done in other ways. I use an extreme case and in the home because that will show what can be done.
Now if your gun will not be taken then congratulations. The 2nd Amendment is truely alive in your area.
Just my opinion and used for entertainment purposes only.
Mike

You know, unfortunately you're gun would be taken. It will be entered into evidence. At the conclusion of the trial (cause let's face it - you will be sued by the idiot's family) you will be able to get your gun back. It sucks, I know, but unfortunately a few bad eggs have claimed self-defense and it's not been found to be the case. One thing you may do is make a request to the DA to get your gun back before the trial. (In my opinion, a picture of the gun is just as good, once the ballistic tests are done).

Defense lawyers will do and create any reason to make you seem at fault. I would rather be without my gun for a while than be in prison as an innocent person, or successfully sued.

I know in my jurisdiction your gun isn't taken because it's a "gun round-up" but because it was the "tool" used in the incident (just as a knife, screwdriver, bat,...is a tool).

Just like LE has it's share of moron's so does the general public. If an officer shoots his weapon (with or without killing a person) his weapon is taken from him too. Always have a secondary weapon or two or three or four or....(you get the point).

I had a wife bring in a gun to me, she was claiming to be abused, I put the gun in our evidence room (labeled with the owners name), a few weeks later the guy comes looking for his gun, I call my chief who instructs me to run it and the man through NCIC, both return clean. The guy get's his gun back no problems.

(I'm sure this will be a real popular post here)

 

[Sasquatchvnv]

You know, unfortunately you're gun would be taken. It will be entered into evidence. At the conclusion of the trial (cause let's face it - you will be sued by the idiot's family) you will be able to get your gun back. It sucks, I know, but unfortunately a few bad eggs have claimed self-defense and it's not been found to be the case. One thing you may do is make a request to the DA to get your gun back before the trial. (In my opinion, a picture of the gun is just as good, once the ballistic tests are done).

Defense lawyers will do and create any reason to make you seem at fault. I would rather be without my gun for a while than be in prison as an innocent person, or successfully sued.

I know in my jurisdiction your gun isn't taken because it's a "gun round-up" but because it was the "tool" used in the incident (just as a knife, screwdriver, bat,...is a tool).

Just like LE has it's share of moron's so does the general public. If an officer shoots his weapon (with or without killing a person) his weapon is taken from him too. Always have a secondary weapon or two or three or four or....(you get the point).

I had a wife bring in a gun to me, she was claiming to be abused, I put the gun in our evidence room (labeled with the owners name), a few weeks later the guy comes looking for his gun, I call my chief who instructs me to run it and the man through NCIC, both return clean. The guy get's his gun back no problems.

(I'm sure this will be a real popular post here)

Seems perfectly reasonable to me. Putting myself in either of those situations, I can't think of anything to complain about this way of handling it.

 

[BSG 75]

About one third of American households own guns. They are never going to go house to house collecting all those millions of guns, that's too much work, so this hypothetical is a fantasy. All they would do is what they did in Britain and Australia: announce that you had to turn in the banned guns by a certain deadline or risk arrest. 98% of gun owners, being basically law-abiding, would meekly comply and bring them to their local police station, just as they did in the UK and Australia.

After the Heller and McDonald decisions there is no legal basis for broad gun bans in the US. The British and Australians don't have the Second Amendment, Heller, and McDonald. There will be no national door-to-door gun seizures in the US for practical reasons (yes, I know what happened after Hurricane Katrina), even if some kind of ban was passed and was found to be Constitutional (doubtful), so don't worry about it. There is no benefit to creating anxiety about or suspicion toward LEOs for something that will never happen in the US (i.e. national door-to-door gun seizures).

 

[Gunner3456]

About one third of American households own guns. They are never going to go house to house collecting all those millions of guns, that's too much work, so this hypothetical is a fantasy. All they would do is what they did in Britain and Australia: announce that you had to turn in the banned guns by a certain deadline or risk arrest. 98% of gun owners, being basically law-abiding, would meekly comply and bring them to their local police station, just as they did in the UK and Australia.

After the Heller and McDonald decisions there is no legal basis for broad gun bans in the US. The British and Australians don't have the Second Amendment, Heller, and McDonald. There will be no national door-to-door gun seizures in the US for practical reasons (yes, I know what happened after Hurricane Katrina), even if some kind of ban was passed and was found to be Constitutional (doubtful), so don't worry about it. There is no benefit to creating anxiety about or suspicion toward LEOs for something that will never happen in the US (i.e. national door-to-door gun seizures).

If we have a major meltdown, I can see martial law. I can see leaders right now who don't care about the constitution. We are all fully aware of the many who think our Constitution is a "living document" which must be interpreted for the modern times. We know that even the SC can't agree on what the constitution says and often splits 5 to 4.

With all that's happened, I have no problem seeing martial law and an order to turn in all guns. If you're right and 2% don't obey, that's 1.8 million gun owners with about 4.5 million guns and who knows how much ammo. I'm talking about the hard core "from my cold dead hands" group.

Don't kid yourself. Things have really changed in this country.

 

[2506]

Guns? What guns? I don't own any guns, sorry.

 

[22many]

I was in New Orleans 4 days after Katrina, and up to 2 weeks after Rita. I can guarantee none of my guys were confiscating weapons. I was a logistics liason with FEMA with the TF Ponchetrain (4500 guardsmen), it may have been done by local law enforcement before we arrived on scene, but not when we escorted them. I know for a fact because I sat in on the daily briefs to the commanding general. There was no mention at any time of confiscating weapons.

I didn't state anything about military personal. I've seen the videos of police confiscating and destroying firearms. Not military.

 

[22many]

About one third of American households own guns. They are never going to go house to house collecting all those millions of guns, that's too much work, so this hypothetical is a fantasy. All they would do is what they did in Britain and Australia: announce that you had to turn in the banned guns by a certain deadline or risk arrest. 98% of gun owners, being basically law-abiding, would meekly comply and bring them to their local police station, just as they did in the UK and Australia.

They wouldn't have to go house to house. They would find out rather quickly that we all lost our firearms in "boating accidents".

 

[Father of four]

When the Nazis took over LEO's in Germany and the conquered countries participated in rounding up "undesirables". Are there enough Coppers with your attitude to say NO?

I don't think there are.
I hope there are/would be, but I don't trust them to do the right thing.

Howard

 

[Stomper]

I sold all mine to Richard Goesinya, go look him up!

 

[Key-Hay]

I already turned mine in officers. Got a $50 Fred Meyer gift certificate. Wanna see it?

 

[Nutty4Guns]

I sold all mine to Richard Goesinya, go look him up!

And his best friend Goph Yukersilf bought all of mine.

 

[Kevatc]

There will be no national door-to-door gun seizures in the US for practical reasons (yes, I know what happened after Hurricane Katrina), even if some kind of ban was passed and was found to be Constitutional (doubtful), so don't worry about it. There is no benefit to creating anxiety about or suspicion toward LEOs for something that will never happen in the US (i.e. national door-to-door gun seizures).

Rational thought. What a novel concept. Just the same there are those who buy into or profit from the paranoia and anxiety that this kind of hypothetical creates. All this doom and gloom crapola over the past three years is shameful but mostly just stupid.

 

[One-Eyed Ross]

well, some of the doom and gloom was before McDonald was decided, so up to that point we had no recognized national 2nd amendment right....we do now.

 

[RB87]

About one third of American households own guns. They are never going to go house to house collecting all those millions of guns, that's too much work, so this hypothetical is a fantasy. All they would do is what they did in Britain and Australia: announce that you had to turn in the banned guns by a certain deadline or risk arrest. 98% of gun owners, being basically law-abiding, would meekly comply and bring them to their local police station, just as they did in the UK and Australia.

After the Heller and McDonald decisions there is no legal basis for broad gun bans in the US. The British and Australians don't have the Second Amendment, Heller, and McDonald. There will be no national door-to-door gun seizures in the US for practical reasons (yes, I know what happened after Hurricane Katrina), even if some kind of ban was passed and was found to be Constitutional (doubtful), so don't worry about it. There is no benefit to creating anxiety about or suspicion toward LEOs for something that will never happen in the US (i.e. national door-to-door gun seizures).

I think its naive to believe that Heller and McDonald offer legal protection that will hold up in "extreme circumstances". Once they've passed that law and many turn in guns, they'll send out the cops, (fed, state, local) to round up any they think are still around.

Heller can just as easily be used to create more gun laws/rules as it passes that ability off to states not the fed. We're dealing with a government that wants to run everyone's healthcare here and is using taxpayer funds to buy guns for drug dealers.

 

[John H]

I was in New Orleans 4 days after Katrina, and up to 2 weeks after Rita. I can guarantee none of my guys were confiscating weapons. I was a logistics liason with FEMA with the TF Ponchetrain (4500 guardsmen), it may have been done by local law enforcement before we arrived on scene, but not when we escorted them. I know for a fact because I sat in on the daily briefs to the commanding general. There was no mention at any time of confiscating weapons.

Wasn't that what Blackwater was for??

 

[Adam12]

Wow, tin foil run out?

 

[moose]

"According to these Bills of Sale, you sold a 1911 to Jacques Strap, a shotgun to Ima Weiner, an AR to Hugh Jan Us, a Glock to Mike Rotch, and a .50 bmg to Heywood Jablowme? Well, everything seems in order here."

Using fake names would probably be a really bad idea.

Why would I have to prove anything? Since when did the burden of proof shift from them to me?

 

[Gunner3456]

Why would I have to prove anything? Since when did the burden of proof shift from them to me?

In a shtf situation where things change so fast and so much that officials are going door to door confiscating guns, forget what you now believe are your rights.

 

[NuthinFancy]

Why would I have to prove anything? Since when did the burden of proof shift from them to me?

The entire premise of door to door gun seizures relies on the suspension of not only the 2nd Amendment but the 4th and 5th Amendments, and the Habeus Corpus clause of Article I of the Constitution.

In the occasion that the Constitution goes through such a meat grinder, TPTB aren't going to be asking for jack-squat.

Wow, tin foil run out?

I prefer 12-Mil Food-Grade Mylar.