A phrase that lots of gun owners use that just pisses me off..

[TAB]

I've not seen one fact in this thread that oposes my veiw point... seen lots of emotional statements.

Now as far as a cop siezing your gun during an investagation of a crime( of which all shootings start out to be)... That is a battle you are going to lose, when it happends, when you go the LEO office, when you file in court, when you go to the USCOUS.  Ask any one versed in the law that question... all of them will tell you, you don't have a snow balls chance in hell.( well maybe not the ones that only want your money, but thats another thread)

[twyacht]

In every article of the American Rifleman magazine, there is a small section called "the armed citizen",  in every short article, there are armed citizens sometimes on private property, sometimes NOT, who are confronted with a circumstance that cause them to defend themselves. Most often, a shot is never fired, sometimes some are with lethal consequences.

In any event, when the LEO's show up, and seize a firearm as SOP, you know what? These citizens stand better than a "snow balls chance in hell" to get their firearm back.  If its justified, its not a battle one is going to lose. Read the articles. There are footnotes with dates to verify.

If I have to defend myself whether on private property or not, they can put my firearm in evidence, it will suck, I'll have to go through our wonderful and expensive legal system, BUT, if I'm justified, I'll get it back and be vindicated.

If not, I hope my membership in the NRA, my CCW instructor (who said we could call him), my own lawyer, and any and everyone I can get, will come to my defense.

These are the times we live in.

"Statistically, fighting back is safer than giving in."
Curt Rich

[ericire12]

Wow! TAB, California has really brainwashed you..... you might want to look into moving back to the good old U.S. of A. 

[TAB]

Wow! TAB, California has really brainwashed you..... you might want to look into moving back to the good old U.S. of A. 

how am I brain washed?

is it becuase I speak the truth, rather then what you wish the world is like.

Fact you shoot some one, the gun you used to do so will be taken from you during the investagation.  After the investagation, you may or may not get it back.   All depending on if its still need as "evidence".  The investagation could last 2 mins or  2 years( or longer) 

[tombogan03884]

I've not seen one fact in this thread that oposes my veiw point... seen lots of emotional statements.

Now as far as a cop siezing your gun during an investagation of a crime( of which all shootings start out to be)... That is a battle you are going to lose, when it happends, when you go the LEO office, when you file in court, when you go to the USCOUS.  Ask any one versed in the law that question... all of them will tell you, you don't have a snow balls chance in hell.( well maybe not the ones that only want your money, but thats another thread)

 Boy, are you a glutton for punishment.   
How about where Pathfinder copied down his states law in reply number 5, When Haz reported the Fl. law reply #11 or when I stated the NH state law in reply #16, That was just the first 2 pages.
After the disagreement and abuse you have taken on this subject for the last 19pages, I really have to ask, Do you hurt yourself when you are depressed ?

[Sponsor]

[Hazcat]

Had a gun taken 'for safety reasons'.  Was told I could go the the cop shop to get it back.  I did, they did. No problem.

[tombogan03884]

Had a gun taken 'for safety reasons'.  Was told I could go the the cop shop to get it back.  I did, they did. No problem.

Same story here.

[DDMac]

TECHNICALLY, every Law Enforcement Agency,including or especially Federal Agencies is/are required to register with the local
Sheriff before they engage in any investigation or arrest.  Some Western Sheriffs have made this point in court with mixed results to date.

/quote]

John, could you explain where this requirement is found? Although I am an east coaster, I never heard of this and know it is not in practice here. We (North Carolinians) regularly have Sheriffs arrested for corruption and there is certainly no notice given to them until the warrants are issued and served.
Thanks, Mac.

[JohnJacobH]

John, could you explain where this requirement is found? Although I am an east coaster, I never heard of this and know it is not in practice here. We (North Carolinians) regularly have Sheriffs arrested for corruption and there is certainly no notice given to them until the warrants are issued and served.
Thanks, Mac.

Well, Sheriff Richard Mack has much to say about this. He mentions other Western Sheriffs who probably show up on Google.

Here is my link:

http://johnjacobh.wordpress.com/2008/06/21/the-county-sheriffthe-ultimate-check-balance/

Maybe you should investigate what the Feds are up to in these Sheriff Corruption Investigations.  Chances are it involves the War on Drugs or the War on The Bill of Rights or the War on Civil Liberties. 

Are these Sheriffs DemocRATs or RePULSEvicans?

Best regards,

[Rastus]

..........Maybe you should investigate what the Feds are up to in these Sheriff Corruption Investigations.  Chances are it involves the War on Drugs or the War on The Bill of Rights or the War on Civil Liberties. 

Are these Sheriffs ?

Best regards,

"DemocRATs or RePULSEvicans" good, very good.  Everything has become a schoolyard competition between parties....with the citizen the loser. 

One addition...it's not just the "War on..." it's also the perverted exercise of corrupted power.  Which of course drives the zeal to destroy the Bill of Rights and our civil liberties.