Recent California Horror story..True!

[John Sabato]

Gentlemen,

We can discuss nearly ANY topic with strong opinions on this forum... but let's keep it on the civil side please... before this thread gets out of hand and I am forced to nuke it...

Thanks... the admin staff...

[colcolombo]

John,

You're the man but I disagree with you.

I haven't seen anything so far that is "uncivil" and I think this thread is healthy for all, pro or con.

But, as Jerry Burney says so often, "But that's just me."

I gave the Kentucky State Police 33 years so I can relate to all that has been said and so far, I have kept my opinion to myself other than to recommend contacting the NRA. And believe me, it is hard for ME to keep quiet on an issue that I have strong feelings for. But, if you "nuke" the thread, I guess history will show that I never responded.

Best regards to you,

Joe Hill

[John Sabato]

Joe,

I guess I should have said LOCK the thread... you are right... things haven't gotten strong enough to nuke it just yet, but from my experience it was headed that way... Just trying to head off trouble... we have enough to worry about these days without squabbling amongst friends...

have a great weekend.

[Roadkill]

This direction is nothing new, just hasn't come up here before. It has shifted from California State law enforcement that obviously legally confisticated firearms (as did the legal authority in Germany in 1938) and possible remedies to an attack on police who may or may not have taken weapons illegally. Then follows the situations presented of perceived illegal actions and righteous defense by those who deny it would happen. What it shows me is a basic distrust that many gunowners have of law enforcement.The common links are the same: firearms, protection, law and order, defense of home and property. But the the flash point is that one group has the authority to control the other based on laws which are not seeen as legitimate. Law enforcement sees a man with a gun as a threat to society and and person. Disturbing part is that many gunowners are seeing law enforcement as the same.

rk

[bbqjpw]

Gentlemen, my point is this. I fully agree that their are some bad officers out there and that corruption is real in some areas. What I have a problem with is that this person went into California with illegal weapons, at least in California. Knowingly or not he broke the law of California. Whether that law is correct or just is irrelevant. Ignorance is not a defense. To immediately assume that based on the driver's actions the police are immediately wrong and corrupt for enforcing the law is ludicrous. I do hope the person gets his weapons back, but it was a result of his own decisions that this situation developed.

[AGE]

Federal law supercedes state law. Look at Barry's link. I think it is obvious the traveler was legally in the clear if he was passing through KAL.

However, obviously it isn't too smart to travel into (or through) an area with prohibited weapons. Of course, I live a long way away but one should avoid KAL whenever possible.

[colcolombo]

Well, as John hasn't locked the thread yet, I am preparing a response to BBGJPW but I want to get it right before I post it so stand by. I don't want to "squabble" with anyone. I just have some thoughts.

JH

[colcolombo]

James (BBGJPW) in Everette, WA. and the rest of forum members that responded above. Please don't take offense at the remarks above. No one has accused you personally of being anything other than a first class police officer. I have no doubt that this is the case. I further see you as a young man in his twentys with less than five years service. You remind me of me when I started out at an early age. My attitude then was that either you were right or you were wrong. There was no middle ground. As I grew older, I realized that there were shades of grey moving in between the black and white. You often hear that ignorance of the law is no excuse but I take exception to that. In many cases, if I felt that the person, while in violation, had no idea or INTENT to break the law, I cautioned and warned them of their mistake and let them go on their way. Of course, I am not talking about felonys.

Now, to the Kalifornia case, here is what really bothers me as an officer. First, ALL his weapons were taken as opposed to just the AR-15, 50 cal. and whatever else was alleged to be illegal. He took them all. Nothing I read above indicates he was arrested or charged with any offense. Why was he not charged? Was there a police report made of the confiscation? An inventory? Was he given a receipt with serials for what was confiscated? If this incident violated Kalifornia law, why wasn't he arrested? I have to agree that FROM WHAT I KNOW this smells to high heaven. I hope the victim had serials on all his weapons for verification.

We have rotten police all over the country in all areas of law enforcement from a lowly county constable to the head of the FBI. J. Edgar Hoover should have been indicted on multiple felonys but..........well you know why he wasn't.

So, to wind this up, let me say what I would have done had I been called to his accident. I would have called him a tow truck and another truck to load up his belongings. My vision is not so good sometime so I doubt I would have seen the weapons.
I would have further made arrangements to store his personal property in a secure place till he could claim it and would have taken the family to a decent motel and pointed out a restaurant until they could get their wits together and dispose of their property. When you look at a husband, wife, child and dog, it is pretty apparent they are not "criminals" and have no criminal intent.
Under other circumstances, I might have acted differently.

So, James, as I said when I started, no one on this forum has anything but the highest esteem for you and your values. But, don't be so quick to defend your fellow officers because there are
quite a few out there that don't share your values. That, my friend, is known as REALITY.
I wish you nothing but the best in your career and I commend you but remember, there are shades of gray in your line of work.

Best regards to you,

Joe Hill
Kentucky State Police (Ret'd)
12 years as road trooper
21 years in criminal investigation
Last 13 years in glorious retirement

[tracyp]

Joe,

California could use a few good officers like you. California hires based on the color of your skin and your sexual preference, not on your qualifications or your character. Has anyone ever heard of the LAPD's Rampart division?

[colcolombo]

Tracyp,

Thanks for the kind words. I definitely wouldn't qualify for the job. I have seen tales of the Rampart Division.
Did you see the movie "L. A. Confidential"? Really scary. But then there was Kim.

Someone mentioned the fiasco shootout of that bank robbery in LA. I have seen it several times and I kept wishing I was there on a second floor with my BAR 30.06. I believe I could have ended it with two well placed head shots. The targets weren't 50 yards apart at times. Or....a well placed load of 00B fired at their feet under one of the patrol cars. Well, nobody asked me.

Just my opinion of course.

Joe (Easy John S. We are getting a little off subject but it is good for all who want to "vent" a bit and this is a "General Discussion Forum".
Did someone mention "LUGERS".

Joe

[bbqjpw]

Check your private messages Joe.

[John -Melb]

I cannot vouch for California, but here in the "Cabbage Patch State" the Victoria Police pose a significant threat to the lawful private ownership of firearms. A few years ago the Victorian "Registrar of Firearms" was quoted in the daily papers here saying "every firearms handed in is to the betterment of society"

I note that the fellow who had his arms confiscated recieved no receipt for those arms? Surely that presents significant evidence of something amiss with whole situation.

If the guns were mine, I would be taking all possible legal action to ensure their safe return, I would also be seeking compensation for the emotional trauma, and, if their had been wrong doing on the part of the officer who initiated the whole sorry saga, I would be demanding his removal from his employment.

With regard to the current "war" on the private ownership of firearms our policy should be simply "You're either with us or against us, and we don't take prisoners!"
Just my opinion!

[unspellable]

Federal law supersedes Kalifornia law. Period. The police are in illegal possesion of this guy's firearms. Any bets on whether or not they are prosecuted? They have done this under color of authority, another crime, Same bet? Since there is no reciept or any evidence of procedure they cannot claim any immunity on grounds that it was in the line of duty. Same bet?

Our friend may get his stuff back, but I WILL bet it will only be after a long drawn out legal hassel that will run up a big lawyer's bill. But I for one would be willing to toss in a couple of bucks for that. Maybe we out to do just a tad less ranting and take time to pass the hat.

[AGE]

I would kick in a few bucks, let us know. In the meantime, has anybody really contacted the NRA with the specific facts? Go to MYNRA.com and look for links or call 800-392-8683 and ask for a contact. The NRA has lots of resources and maybe a pro bono lawyer to suggest in KAL.

[JR.]

hello to all! I talked directly to the young man yesterday, and the military has stepped in on his behalf, and he believes that he will recover all his guns... they will be shipped to his next reporting station of duty from a CA. Law enforcement agency, (I suspect sherriffs office) directly to the military! As understood by him, he could not recover his guns personally from the state, under any circumstances! He said the Army really stepped up to the plate on this deal, and are helping him same as family! I am impressed by the depth of this thread.... it is an eye opener for many of us that believed this type of thing couldn't happen..... Although the CA authorities were not outwardly mean to this young man, they certainly were cold and uncarring..... Where I'm from origionally, S. Dak, theres a good chance one of the officers would have taken you to a shelter area, or perhaps even put you up for the night! I know several that would... they sure a hell wouldn't convescate your weapons.... I will continue to post information as it becomes available... Thanks to all for their help and concern...till...later...GT

[AGE]

GT,

Here in WV where I'm visiting, LE (at least the sheriffs--I've met and talked with two of them) seem to be very helpful if you wear a white hat. I believe the unfortunate traveler would have been treated very well here. If he could prove need and military affiliation they would probably even lend him an old tommy gun (they aren't using it).

Anyway, let us know how it turns out.

[colcolombo]

AGE,

Am I missing something? I don't understand your statement "if you wear a white hat".

Could you clarify that? Perhaps it's an expresson I have not heard.

Thanks,

Joe

[wterrell]

In July, my family and I took a driving vacation to the Sonoma Coast region of Kalif. I was fully aware of the gun laws of that state. I weighed the value of my wife and daughters' safety against the penalties for non-compliance of their gun laws.
I loaded up my Smith/Wesson with bullets and placed it in the glove compartment of my vehicle.
At times you must defy the law. Life is too long to live with the consequences of compliance. Life is also too short to die because of the consequences of compliance.
Laws are merely suggestions or guidelines of how you should live your life. How you actually conduct yourself is solely your responsibility. If you or yours are harmed or die because of compliance of the law, you are responsible, not the law. It was your choice. You cannot shirk responsibility.
That is what upsets the police. They are not the absolute, final authority and power.
Upset George III also!

[Herb]

Colcolumbo, it's an old expression that came about because of the old western movies, Roy Rogers, Gene Autry, Tom Mix and other 'good guys' always wore white cowboy hats and the 'bad guys' always wore black cowboy hats. I am really glad to hear that our KA traveler has a good chance of getting his weapons back with the help of the Army, please keep us posted on this situation JR.

[colcolombo]

Wes.

I agree with you 100%. As long as the gun is in a locked glove compartment, the police have no authority to search it except upon PROBABLE CAUSE to believe the glove box contains contraband. A favorite trick of some officers is to ask you to voluntarily search your car. This is no more than a fishing expedition. Just say "No, I don't believe so." Some will come back at you with, "Well we can always get a search warrant hoping this will make you relent. Just say, "Sir I am not going to consent to a search." "If you have probable cause to search my car, I will wait here till you get the warrant". At this point, if you relent, appellate courts have held that the permission granted in lieu of the search warrant was a coerced permission and any fruits of the search are not admissable. So, just say "NO" unless they produce a search warrant. Be sure and read the affidavit for the warrant and find out what the probable cause was. That should be a hoot!!!

Herb,

Thanks for clearing up the white hat. What astounded me was you remember Tom Mix. Did you ever send off a box top and watch the mailbox for your Tom Mix Secret Code Ring??????

Joe