• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

California Begins Confiscating Legally-Purchased Guns

dmcowen674

No Lifer
11-26-2013

http://downtrend.com/travis/california-begins-confiscating-legally-purchased-guns/

California Begins Confiscating Legally-Purchased Guns



It is not surprising that the first police raids to take legally-purchased firearms from citizens are in California.


Earlier this year, the state legislature expanded the list of what they call “prohibited persons” – people who have legally registered a firearm but, for various reasons, are no longer allowed their Second Amendment rights.



These reasons were expanded to include people who are behind on state taxes, did not pay toll fees in a “timely” manner and a wide range of other minor misdemeanors or reported mental health concerns.

In preparation for the crackdown, the state authorized $24 million to hire additional officers to track down 20,000 people on the list.

One person on this list was Joe Mendez.


A police officer came to the door and lured Mendez out of his house with a story of a hit and run report. Once outside, he had M16s pointed within inches of his face, was taken into custody and had all weapons removed from his house.
It is important to remember that these were legally- purchased and registered firearms. That gets to the other issue about this initiative.


This case demonstrates what registration lists really are.



They are tools to allow police to confiscate weapons. And, all they have to do in California is come up with a reason you should be on the prohibited persons list; a list that is continuously expanding in its scope and definition.

========================================================================
First California and now New York.

The squeeze play is on.

First California and now New York.

The squeeze play is on.

11-28-2013

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/nov/28/nyc-alarms-notice-immediately-surrender-your-rifle/

NYC alarms with notice: ‘Immediately surrender your rifle’



New York City authorities have been sending out notices to residents who own guns that now violate new ammunition capability laws, demanding they relinquish their weapons

One such notice to a city resident, dated Nov. 18 and posted on The Blaze, reads: “Immediately surrender your rifle and/or shotgun to your local police precinct, and notify this office of the invoice number.



The firearm may be sold or permanently removed from the City of New York thereafter. Permanently remove your rifle and/or shotgun from New York City.”


The letter also advises that the recipient “may call to discuss the matter if you believe your firearm is in compliance, or you may request the option to bring your firearm to a licensed gunsmith for a permanent modification and certification proving that it is permanently modified and in compliance.”


The Associated Press reported that it wasn’t clear if police were taking aggressive steps to root out those who ignored the demands of the letter.

 
Last edited:
There are many things leading the Country to a Civil War.

Just a matter of time which is the lynch pin.

This is high upon the list.
 
If I recall correctly, California passed the law in the beginning of this year empowering & tasking the police with confiscating the firearms from owners who have lost their right to bear for whatever reason. I.E. - were convicted of some felony violation or found to be mentally unstable.

While I'm sure we can understand the spirit, anecdotal stories indicate the police are confiscating weapons based on trivial offenses like being behind on child support or taxes, not paying bridge tolls, bad Arnold Schwarzenegger impressions, and loitering outside buildings with intent to abuse tobacco... 😉

On the other hand, the number of such stories has been relatively low - at least in the national news. So either the application of the law has been... Reasonable... Or the press have conspired to not carry such stories.
 
Last edited:
If I recall correctly, California passed the law in the beginning of this year empowering & tasking the police with confiscating the firearms from owners who have lost their right to bear for whatever reason. I.E. - were convicted of some felony violation or found to be mentally unstable.

While I'm sure we can understand the spirit, anecdotal stories indicate the police are confiscating weapons based on trivial offenses like being behind on child support or taxes, not paying bridge tolls, bad Arnold Schwarzenegger impressions, and loitering outside buildings with intent to abuse tobacco... 😉

On the other hand, the number of such stories has been relatively low - at least in the national news. So either the application of the law has been... Reasonable... Or the press have conspired to not carry such stories.


probably the latter. Can't have democrat's looking like a bunch of anti gun nutters.
 
I saw this the other day from a link someone put on Facebook, but couldn't confirm with any real news outlets. When something more substantial than Alex Jones discusses this, I'll take notice.
 
I saw this the other day from a link someone put on Facebook, but couldn't confirm with any real news outlets. When something more substantial than Alex Jones discusses this, I'll take notice.

Probably a good idea. Paranoid sources are usually not the most accurate. I'm all for finding ways for people to pay their unpaid taxes, this is not the route I'd support for that though.
 
This is a typical McOwned thread, something designed to cause an outrage without any real evidence that something outrage worthy actually transpired.
 
Originally Posted by Londo_Jowo
This is a typical McOwned thread, something designed to cause an outrage without any real evidence that something outrage worthy actually transpired.

Ya but for once he picked a good topic.

Typical loser Jowo response attacking me rather than the topic. 🙄
 
Per California law; those people are classified as criminals.
Criminals are not allowed to have guns.

The problem is not the confiscation but the determination of the law.
 
I knew it!

That explains the North Korean army's presence in my neighbourhood.

My neighbours might have stopped them but California disabled its fabled citizen's militia.
 
Hmm.... gun nutters are gonna have a field day with this if accurate and rightfully so.

Does that mean that they are no longer "gun nutters" , but just reasonable and politically aware citizens who care about their Constitutional rights?
 
Per California law; those people are classified as criminals.
Criminals are not allowed to have guns.

The problem is not the confiscation but the determination of the law.

When the law says "Criminals are not allowed to have guns" then anyone who runs a stop sign or fails to inspect all the lights on their car before driving can have guns confiscated.
 
California Gun Owners are being educated so that they do not fall for trickery by police with no warrant.

Also the new list of prohibited persons did not pass......

Legal CA gun-owners are 100% for the confiscation of once-legal weapons from convicted felons or violent criminals. We are also 100% against where the money came to enforce this, and the abuse that seems to be going on.
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted by Londo_Jowo
This is a typical McOwned thread, something designed to cause an outrage without any real evidence that something outrage worthy actually transpired.



Typical loser Jowo response attacking me rather than the topic. 🙄

Can you please find an additional source or more information on this topic? This will interest many on this forum, we just need some better sources.

IF THIS IS TRUE, I am curious how much these 20,000 people owe. They apparently spent some 24 million to hire the people to enforce this, I assume this does not cover operating expenses. So the 20000 people would need to average $1200 just to break even on the hiring costs. Certainly possible, but considering they cited unpaid tolls, I wonder.

Of course in CA, no cost is too great to confiscate a firearm.

I hope this is indeed BS.
 
If there was proof that abuses of the law was taking place then I would consider it a good topic however, that isn't the case.

If it's not occurring yet, it will be at some point. Being vigilant about government abuse is a good thing.
 
Last edited:
Can you please find an additional source or more information on this topic? This will interest many on this forum, we just need some better sources.

IF THIS IS TRUE, I am curious how much these 20,000 people owe. They apparently spent some 24 million to hire the people to enforce this, I assume this does not cover operating expenses. So the 20000 people would need to average $1200 just to break even on the hiring costs. Certainly possible, but considering they cited unpaid tolls, I wonder.

Of course in CA, no cost is too great to confiscate a firearm.

I hope this is indeed BS.

Google is a search engine

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/04/19/california-gun-confiscation-bill_n_3117238.html

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/tense-moments-as-california-agents-confiscate-illegal-guns/

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-...s-guns-as-owners-lose-right-to-bear-arms.html

http://visiontoamerica.com/9782/california-police-confiscate-guns-refuse-to-return-them/

http://www.prisonplanet.com/gun-confiscation-begins-in-california.html
 
Doesn't look like they're taking away guns from those who can legally do so in California.

Almost 20,000 gun owners in the state are prohibited from possessing firearms, including convicted felons, those under a domestic violence restraining order or deemed mentally unstable.
 
Back
Top