It's just registration, they said.....no one will ever take your guns, they said.....

[TAZ]

While I agree with Sean M about the the technical aspect of this round if confiscations instill worry about the big picture when it comes to registration and eventual confiscation. This particular case just isnt a good example of what stupid laws can end up costing the stupid electorate.

First off why don't these confiscation agents get warrants? Are they too lazy or is their PC so thin that even a judge in Commiefornia won't issue a warrant. My guess is that these guys are forced to do good will fishing cause because they have no PC to justify a search warrant.

Second, why can't the DOJ do its job with the budget already allocated. Seems like another example of piss poor planning and execution on behalf of DOJ is being rewarded by more green slips instead of pink slips. But hey it's Commiefornia so why should I expect anything else.

Lastly, I posit that this idiotic plan isn't suffering low performance due to lack of funding, but rather they have run out of gullible idiots who will let them into their homes without a warrant. I would presume that the number of people unaware of the consequences of letting police into our home without a warrant is very low while the number of felons who know and understand the system is high. Even with more money, if the confiscation agents continue in failing to secure warrants their success rate will stay he same. Essentially they are pissing away money that could be spent on better things.

[Odin Bravo One]

Nice Catch-22, isn't it?

Seems to me it sort of runs foul to that whole 'self-incrimination' thing, as well.

When you are convicted of a felony, the rights you have given up as a result are explained to you in full. You are also given a grace period to ensure you are in compliance, such as surrendering your voter ID, and any firearms to proper authorities, or proof of other disposition such as sale of a firearm that would now be illegal to possess. (state laws vary, but all inform you, and most require you sign a document stating you understand).

If you choose not to, and the cops knock on your door after the grace period asking if you have a gun, and you say "yes".........you deserve what is coming next. The crime? Stupidity.

You also have the right to insist that the officers obtain a warrant, not make any statements without a lawyer present, and to refuse a search of your premises.................unless of course you are on parole or probation. You also don't have to hand over the gun you are in unlawful possession of just because they asked. You don't legally have to submit to a breath test for a simple DUI either. Burden of proof still lies on the government.

I think people need to have at least a rudimentary understanding of the law as to what constitutes RS, PC, P&P searches, and violation of 5th Amendment Rights. There is nothing about the bill, as stated in the article, that constitutes any form of gun control, gun registration, or gun seizure for law abiding citizens.

IT IS ALL, 100%, ABOUT OBTAINING MORE FUNDING TO REMOVE FIREARMS FROM CONVICTED FELONS! (Argue over the funding, and why this, and why not that all you want........I could care less about the financial. My point is simply about not allowing enforcement of existing laws turn into BS propaganda and fear mongering that the black, stealth equipped helicopters full of storm troopers are hovering over our gun rights on whisper mode)

My position is just an awful thing I know..........we really should be standing up for the gun rights of dope dealers, pedophiles, rapists, gang bangers, and the rest of high society.

[Dan_S]

IT IS ALL, 100%, ABOUT OBTAINING MORE FUNDING TO REMOVE FIREARMS FROM CONVICTED FELONS!

I don't care if it is "only" about seizing weapons from convicted felons - even if you are correct, and there is nothing more sinister going on with this, I still am not comforted by your pronouncement...

[Odin Bravo One]

Ok........I'm with ya.

It is only a felony conviction we are talking about.

I am probably making more out of that than I should.

[FNFAN]

IT IS ALL, 100%, ABOUT OBTAINING MORE FUNDING TO REMOVE FIREARMS FROM CONVICTED FELONS!

Since funding challenges necessitate this legislation, surely they are selling the confiscated firearms (those not on the "banned list") back to licensed dealers for sale to legally eligible owners -to offset the costs, right?

[Odin Bravo One]

I am quite sure they are not.

Just like the ATF didn't put the transferable NFA items my dealer still had in his possession when he died young of brain cancer back into circulation. Just like they didn't put my beloved M60, and later Mk43 machineguns into circulation when the military stopped using them.

The issue I have is that every anti-gun issue is the biggest issue we have ever faced. I am all for balance of power, limited government, and keeping that government in check. But when every single piece of legislation turns into the worst thing for gun owners ever, I start hearing "Wolf". When I look deeper, and find there is nothing to panic about, let alone arguments that having nothing to do with the legislation (as reported) but try to tie it to some doomsday scenario...........I stop hearing "Wolf", and stop listening all together. There is only so much BS I can consume in a given time period.

[mnealtx]

IT IS ALL, 100%, ABOUT OBTAINING MORE FUNDING TO REMOVE FIREARMS FROM CONVICTED FELONS! (Argue over the funding, and why this, and why not that all you want........I could care less about the financial. My point is simply about not allowing enforcement of existing laws turn into BS propaganda and fear mongering that the black, stealth equipped helicopters full of storm troopers are hovering over our gun rights on whisper mode)

My position is just an awful thing I know..........we really should be standing up for the gun rights of dope dealers, pedophiles, rapists, gang bangers, and the rest of high society.

What felony did the man whose guns were confiscated due to his wife's medication problems commit, then?

[Odin Bravo One]

What felony did the man whose guns were confiscated due to his wife's medication problems commit, then?

I wasn't there.

Were you?

Because if not, neither of us have enough facts to know what actually happened. A pro-gun news article is hardly unbiased, and reports with the spin they want.

[mnealtx]

I wasn't there.

Were you?

Because if not, neither of us have enough facts to know what actually happened. A pro-gun news article is hardly unbiased, and reports with the spin they want.

Sorry - I figured you'd have the low-down, since you've been telling us all through the thread that it's only people with felonies that were getting tagged by this and we were all paranoid for thinking otherwise.

Is Bloomberg non-pro-gun enough to satisfy you, since the Blaze is (evidently) spinning the issue?
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-0...tml?cmpid=yhoo

In an interview as agents inventoried the guns, Lynette Phillips said that while she’d been held involuntarily in a mental hospital in December, the nurse who admitted her had exaggerated the magnitude of her condition.

Todd Smith, chief executive officer of Aurora Charter Oak Hospital in Covina, where documents provided by Phillips show she was treated, didn’t respond to telephone and e-mail requests for comment on the circumstances of the treatment.

Phillips said her husband used the guns for recreation. She didn’t blame the attorney general’s agents for taking the guns based on the information they had, she said.

[Odin Bravo One]

Sorry - I figured you'd have the low-down, since you've been telling us all through the thread that it's only people with felonies that were getting tagged by this and we were all paranoid for thinking otherwise.

Is Bloomberg non-pro-gun enough to satisfy you, since the Blaze is (evidently) spinning the issue?
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-0...tml?cmpid=yhoo

Just because you are paranoid doesn't mean they are not after you..............

It is simply my opinion that in this case, they are not.

And no media is neutral enough for me to believe shit. Which is why I kept my arguments and comments about the legislation directed toward the article, as I do not know what the real law is, or what the real truth on the ground is.