Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 27

Thread: Colorado woman has gun stolen by laws.

  1. #1
    Regular Member hhofent's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    Iowa
    Posts
    142

    Colorado woman has gun stolen by laws.

    A colorado woman was in a car accident, and her gun in her purse was taken to the cop shop for "safekeeping". Well it turns out the cops have to do a FFL check before they can return her gun. They are not setup to do the check, therefore they won't return the gun.

    http://www.infowars.com/colorado-wom...ks-to-new-law/

    Video discussing situation:
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K6s9i...le&gl=US&hl=en

    Skip to around 15:00 for relevant part.
    Also the end of video discusses whether blacks have the same rights as whites according to current law.

    Thoughts? Opinions? Unconstructive criticism?

    Sent from an unspecified mobile phone using unspecified software.

  2. #2
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Baton Rouge, Louisiana, USA
    Posts
    125
    Law requires that actions be taken to remove a evidence-less presumption that a person is not entitled to their property, rather than that actions be taken (even a finding of probable cause) to initially establish that they are not? Sounds like a pretty clear cut deprivation of procedural due process rights. State law doesn't get to override the 14th Amendment. She should be looking to sue under 42 USC 1983, if nothing else.

  3. #3
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Las Vegas
    Posts
    460
    She needs to get a lawyer or she will be bullied and red taped into giving up.

  4. #4
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    earth's crust
    Posts
    17,838
    Sue them in small claims.

  5. #5
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Northern Nevada, ,
    Posts
    721
    I had my gun taken from me by the cops and they wanted a bunch of personal info (presumably to run a Brady check) before they would return it almost 2 years later. I declined to provide the info. They said they would destroy my gun.

    I wrote a sternly worded letter to the city attorney. The cops invited me to come retrieve my gun without providing the personal info.

    A lot of the time all you have to do is stand up for yourself and call their bluff.

  6. #6
    Regular Member Maverick9's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    Mid-atlantic
    Posts
    1,505
    Quote Originally Posted by davidmcbeth View Post
    Sue them in small claims.
    Yeah, sue and buy a new gun.

  7. #7
    Regular Member DaveT319's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Location
    Eugene, OR
    Posts
    283
    I thought I had seen where they were finally giving her the gun back...

  8. #8
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    earth's crust
    Posts
    17,838
    Quote Originally Posted by Yard Sale View Post
    I had my gun taken from me by the cops and they wanted a bunch of personal info (presumably to run a Brady check) before they would return it almost 2 years later. I declined to provide the info. They said they would destroy my gun.

    I wrote a sternly worded letter to the city attorney. The cops invited me to come retrieve my gun without providing the personal info.

    A lot of the time all you have to do is stand up for yourself and call their bluff.
    They are whoosies .. worried about going home at the end of the day ... good for u !

    Its what the 2nd amendment is all about -- just think what they would do w/o us owning guns?

  9. #9
    Campaign Veteran since9's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Colorado Springs, Colorado, USA
    Posts
    6,787
    Quote Originally Posted by Seigi View Post
    Law requires that actions be taken to remove a evidence-less presumption that a person is not entitled to their property, rather than that actions be taken (even a finding of probable cause) to initially establish that they are not? Sounds like a pretty clear cut deprivation of procedural due process rights. State law doesn't get to override the 14th Amendment. She should be looking to sue under 42 USC 1983, if nothing else.
    Concur. I know for a fact CSPD reads this site. Don't know about other Colorado law enforcement.

    I wouldn't try to press the matter with the department who confiscated the gun. Some of them behave like children. Write a letter to the DA. They're the ones who know the law, what they can get away with, and what they can't. If law enforcement's actions are about to open the municipality up for liable, they'll Gibbs-slap them and you'll get your gun back.

    If they don't, go ahead and sue them and enjoy the windfall!
    Last edited by since9; 06-01-2014 at 04:23 AM.
    The First protects the Second, and the Second protects the First. Together, they protect the rest of our Bill of Rights and our United States Constitution, and help We the People protect ourselves in the spirit of our Declaration of Independence.

  10. #10
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    earth's crust
    Posts
    17,838
    Quote Originally Posted by since9 View Post
    Concur. I know for a fact CSPD reads this site. <snip>
    Read?

    I would not allow anyone to steal my property ... that's why I have guns, duh.

    pew pew pew ....

  11. #11
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    Detroit
    Posts
    136
    Quote Originally Posted by davidmcbeth View Post
    Read?

    I would not allow anyone to steal my property ... that's why I have guns, duh.

    pew pew pew ....
    Man with all the talk you do shouldn't you have overthrown the government by now?

  12. #12
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Granite State of Mind
    Posts
    4,509
    Police can't run a NICS check. NICS access is restricted to Type-01 FFLs only (and whatever class includes pawnbrokers; anyone who sells guns at retail as a dealer).

    But what police can do is run NCIC with nothing more than a name and date of birth. Since she was in an accident, I assume they have her info. If not, they certainly know her name, and it wouldn't take any great detective work to get all her info through the state DL database.

    As part of my job, I run NCIC checks all the time. We require SSNs before running them, just to narrow down the number of false hits, but it's not required.

  13. #13
    Campaign Veteran MAC702's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Nevada
    Posts
    6,520
    Even if there was some screwed up law, how long does it take for the police to pay a local FFL to do a full transfer formality? It would come out of their budget, and the woman would have unnecessary paperwork, but she'd have her gun, at least, while complaining about how screwed up the law about it is.
    "It's not important how many people I've killed. What's important is how I get along with the people who are still alive" - Jimmy the Tulip

  14. #14
    Regular Member DaveT319's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Location
    Eugene, OR
    Posts
    283
    I'm still just trying to understand why a legally owned gun that was seized - unnecessarily - couldn't just be given back? Sounds like a presumption of guilt until proven innocent. It would be one thing if it had been taken during a criminal investigation and not returned until the case was adjudicated. But simply taken for "safe keeping" following a car accident? Something's wrong there.

  15. #15
    Campaign Veteran MAC702's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Nevada
    Posts
    6,520
    Quote Originally Posted by DaveT319 View Post
    I'm still just trying to understand why a legally owned gun that was seized - unnecessarily - couldn't just be given back? Sounds like a presumption of guilt until proven innocent. It would be one thing if it had been taken during a criminal investigation and not returned until the case was adjudicated. But simply taken for "safe keeping" following a car accident? Something's wrong there.
    I agree. If the cops are claiming it is theirs in order to necessitate a transfer to her under the law, that means they stole it from her in the first place.
    "It's not important how many people I've killed. What's important is how I get along with the people who are still alive" - Jimmy the Tulip

  16. #16
    Regular Member DaveT319's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Location
    Eugene, OR
    Posts
    283
    Bingo. No need to transfer something to the current legal owner.

    Someone needs to challenge the law. Now. This can't be legal or constitutional.

  17. #17
    Regular Member solus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    here nc
    Posts
    6,871
    I'm only human; I do what I can; I'm just a man; I do what I can; Don't put the blame on me; Don't put your blame on me ~ Rag'n'Bone Man.

    Please do not get confused between my personality & my attitude. My personality is who I am ~ my attitude depends on who you are and how you act.

    Remember always, do not judge someone because they sin differently than you do!

    Get your facts first, and then you can distort them as much as you please. Mark Twain

  18. #18
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    earth's crust
    Posts
    17,838
    Quote Originally Posted by wizzi01 View Post
    Man with all the talk you do shouldn't you have overthrown the government by now?
    This is my second country !

  19. #19
    Regular Member DeSchaine's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Location
    Kalamazoo, MI
    Posts
    604

    CO cops violating new state laws.

    I know this is something of a gravedig, but I ran across articles on this subject on a different site, and wanted to point something out here.

    The person(s) that removed Mrs. Warren's firearm from her purse, the officers that took custody AND the evidence/property clerk ALL needed to have Background/NICS checks made by an FFL approved person before taking possession. Since that probably didnt happen, where the hell are the charges against them?

    If these laws call for background checks for ANY transfer, almost every officer in every jurisdiction in CO. is violating the new laws any time they take a gun from a suspect or a scene. I suppose the "3. occurring (a) by operation of law" of THIS could be used to cover the cops, but if there was a hospital employee that touched it, they arent covered.

    If nothing else, if I was the Warrens, I'd sue the PD, the CA, and whoever actually removed the firearm from her purse for violation of the 4th Amendment.

  20. #20
    Regular Member Elhuero's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Colorado Springs
    Posts
    24
    The CSPD reads this site?

    I highly doubt they do. No ticket money can be generated from reading the internet.

  21. #21
    Campaign Veteran since9's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Colorado Springs, Colorado, USA
    Posts
    6,787
    Quote Originally Posted by Elhuero View Post
    The CSPD reads this site?

    I highly doubt they do.
    They do.
    The First protects the Second, and the Second protects the First. Together, they protect the rest of our Bill of Rights and our United States Constitution, and help We the People protect ourselves in the spirit of our Declaration of Independence.

  22. #22
    Regular Member The Truth's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Location
    Henrico
    Posts
    2,139
    Molon Labe.
    Sic semper evello mortem tyrannis.

    μολὼν λαβέ

    Quote Originally Posted by stealthyeliminator
    So in actuality you have no evidence that anything wrong took place, you only believe that it could be spun to appear wrong. But it hasn't been. The truth has a funny way of coming out with persistence, even if it was spun negatively the truth would find its way because these people will not accept less.
    Quote Originally Posted by WalkingWolf View Post
    The truth causes some people so much pain they can only respond with impotent laughable insults. Life must be rough for those people.

  23. #23
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Location
    Colorado
    Posts
    29
    Quote Originally Posted by Bernymac View Post
    She needs to get a lawyer or she will be bullied and red taped into giving up.
    Sue them. Right. Good luck with that.

    In Colorado, like many states, government agencies enjoy tort immunity AND free, unlimited legal resources in the form of a DA or city/county attorney that will fight a citizen lawsuit using taxpayer money. So, what that means in the real world is that you get to pay for your lawyer, and your taxes pay for the government's lawyer, and even if you win, the agency is likely immune from civil liability. The agency has absolutely no economic incentive to settle out of court.

    Just to file a complaint in Colorado for a case involving less $15,000 is around $100 in county court, $225 in District Court, plus whatever fees are involved in service of process, plus whatever you might pay a lawyer.

    If you win, the agency will probably appeal because: (1) it costs them nothing to do so since they are spending taxpayer money and (2) they will not want the press of a loss or what they believe would be bad precedent. Now pay your lawyer for an appeal.

    To add insult to injury, your civil suit will be heard by a judge who sees the police and the DA every day, which realistically means that s/he is biased against civil suits naming local law enforcement as a defendant.

    Depending on what you might sue them for, you can also be liable for the government's attorneys' fees if you lose. For example, if you sue your local Sheriff for denying your CHP and appeal that denial, if you lose in court 18-12-207(3) provides that "Following completion of the review, the court may award attorney fees to the prevailing party." So if you roll the dice and go to court to prove you're right and lose in front of the judge who has lunch with the DA every day, your downside risk is the expense of your lawyer plus the expenses incurred by the city defending against your lawsuit.

    While it is wrong on so many levels, it would be way cheaper to buy a new gun and work to vote the Mayor/County Commissioner/Sheriff out of office.

  24. #24
    Regular Member DaveT319's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Location
    Eugene, OR
    Posts
    283
    You make some good points. Even if you ultimately win, it'll just be cheaper to write it off and buy a new one. And if you lose, it'll DEFINITLY be more costly. Sucks the deck is stacked against us being able to get justice against OUR government.
    Last edited by DaveT319; 01-18-2015 at 08:21 PM.

  25. #25
    Regular Member OC for ME's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    White Oak Plantation
    Posts
    12,272
    If it is confiscated, regardless of duration, I will abandon it. If I am disarmed, the handgun never leave my sight, and the handgun is returned to me. As long as the cop did not record the serial number and other details I will retain it.
    "I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty than to those attending too small a degree of it." - Thomas Jefferson.

    "Better that ten guilty persons escape, than that one innocent suffer" - English jurist William Blackstone.
    It is AFAIK original to me. Compromise is failure on the installment plan, particularly when dealing with so intractable an opponent as ignorance. - Nightmare

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •