Bang / Guns
See other Bang / Guns Articles
Title: Police Spokesman Says Cops Should Confiscate Firearms, Even if it’s Illegal
Source:
Free Thought Project
URL Source: http://thefreethoughtproject.com/po ... s-illegal/#zxdVsWSB6fIzUxOh.99
Published: Oct 17, 2015
Author: Justin Gardner
Post Date: 2015-10-17 11:08:36 by Deckard
Keywords: None
Views: 1604
Comments: 8
Richard Beary, president of the International Association of Chiefs of Police, does not like the fact that some cops are hesitant to confiscate guns from people deemed “dangerous” to themselves or others. The Police Executive Research Forum conducted a survey of 266 police agencies in 42 states and found the following: “More than a third of top police officials either believe they have no legal authority or did not know whether they could seize firearms from people who have been determined by a judge to be a danger to themselves or others… Of those officials who believed they had such authority, more than half said they rarely or never used it in the past year… Moreover, 60% of respondents said their agencies had no program or protocol for carrying out firearm confiscations.” In response to these findings, Beary said that cops should err on the side of violating civil rights. “This is a problem. I’m not surprised that officers are apprehensive or intimidated … If there is a question, I would rather we confiscate. If we get hit with a lawsuit, then I’ll deal with it..” With the gun debate flaming up again after the tragic mass shooting in Oregon, some authorities are drawing their lines in the sand. This particular facet of the gun rights issue has to do with certain conditions that, in the eyes of the courts, render people ineligible to own a gun. “Federal law prohibits firearms purchases from licensed dealers to people who have been found mentally defective, incompetent to handle their own personal affairs and those involuntarily committed to a mental institution.” A judge can rule that people meeting these criteria can have their guns confiscated, on the basis that they are a danger to themselves or others. For law enforcement advocates, the survey results paint a troubling picture. They believe that confiscating guns from former criminals or the mentally ill is crucial to reducing gun violence and preventing mass shootings. “This is clearly not an everyday part of law enforcement, and it should be,” said Josh Horwitz, executive director of the Coalition to Stop Gun Violence. “In most cases there is not a good process for removing guns. This is an area of big concern. We’re allowing people to be armed when they are considered to be most dangerous.” In 2001, California began the most aggressive gun confiscation campaign in the country. The Armed and Prohibited Persons program has seized thousands of firearms from “people who previously purchased one or more guns legally but later have become ineligible to possess firearms due to criminal conviction, mental instability or other conditions.” California Dept. of Justice agents have conducted 14.012 investigations since 2013, confiscating firearms in a majority of those cases. In Maryland, cops have “the discretion to seize a firearm and send to our property warehouse for safekeeping” if they believe the situation has become unsafe. They don’t track the number of weapons seized. The practice of confiscating guns from those deemed dangerous by a judge or police officers is perhaps the grayest area for those debating gun control. The opinion that a person is dangerous to themselves or others is being made by government authority figures, not by medical professionals. This opens up the possibility that normal people who are not actually “dangerous” are being denied their second amendment rights. The question must be asked whether mass confiscation of guns from those deemed mentally ill or from former criminals actually has any impact on the rate of gun violence and mass shootings. Has it succeeded in ferreting out the few who decide to carry out senseless violence? 
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#1. To: Deckard (#0)
Even more effective would be prosecuting the criminals who carry guns in violation of the law. They're dangerous, too. Instead, illegal possession of a gun is the first charge dropped in a plea agreement to obtain a conviction for other lesser crimes.
The man is FUCKING liar; the taxpayer will pay for his excessive tyranny. Who the FUCK is this man operating outside the law? He needs jail tyme, BIG TYME.
Another bunch of half-wits who believe they are supreme inspiring confidence in police departments.
Another bunch of half-wits who believe they are supreme " Yes, and spoken by one of the half-wits that is not going to be one of the stooges that are sent to kick doors down and possibly get shot at. He is only going to give the orders, then stand in front of cameras & microphones, and "Play the Role". A real "Tuff Guy" with no balls. Reminds me of the Generals that gave orders in WWI to go over the top. Or, Janet Reno giving orders to go into WACO. SPIT ! Si vis pacem, para bellum Those who beat their swords into plowshares will plow for those who don't Rebellion to tyrants is obedience to God.
A judge can rule that people meeting these criteria can have their guns confiscated, on the basis that they are a danger to themselves or others. Could someone please point me to the last time someone was involuntarily or voluntary committed to a mental institution,and allowed to take their guns inside with them? Thank you. Why is democracy held in such high esteem when it’s the enemy of the minority and makes all rights relative to the dictates of the majority? (Ron Paul,2012)
Let 'em start gun confisction in the black neighborhoods first. Let's see if those pussy cops have any balls.
I agree! Or, they can try to go down & disarm the Bloods, Crips, MS-13, or go raid some of the Muslim Mosques. Lets see how that goes. I am betting they will not. They will first go jump on some "good ol boy" raid him at O Dark 30 after he has worked a double shift, and have a team of 100, to get one guy, and take a squirrel rifle, and a Confederate Battle Flag. "Hoo Rah, yeah, we're bad ! " LOL !! Si vis pacem, para bellum Those who beat their swords into plowshares will plow for those who don't Rebellion to tyrants is obedience to God.
People look at that! A police official advocating that they do something that is ILLEGAL !! Think about that folks, and let it sink in !! Si vis pacem, para bellum Those who beat their swords into plowshares will plow for those who don't Rebellion to tyrants is obedience to God.
"The practice of confiscating guns from those deemed dangerous by a judge or police officers is perhaps the grayest area for those debating gun control."
#2. To: Deckard (#0)
If there is a question, I would rather we confiscate. If we get hit with a lawsuit, then I’ll deal with it..”
#3. To: Deckard (#0)
Police Spokesman Says Cops Should Confiscate Firearms, Even if it’s Illegal
#4. To: rlk (#3)
" Police Spokesman Says Cops Should Confiscate Firearms, Even if it’s Illegal
#5. To: Deckard (#0)
“Federal law prohibits firearms purchases from licensed dealers to people who have been found mentally defective, incompetent to handle their own personal affairs and those involuntarily committed to a mental institution.” (adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});
#6. To: Deckard (#0)
#7. To: Logsplitter (#6)
" Let 'em start gun confisction in the black neighborhoods first. Let's see if those pussy cops have any balls. "
#8. To: Deckard, All (#0)
" Police Spokesman Says Cops Should Confiscate Firearms, Even if it’s Illegal "
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]