• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

Cops want to test gun for possible crime connection

S

suntzu

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 22, 2008
Messages
1,230
Location
The south land
imported post

that is just pathetic. Just more examples of law enforcement abuse of authority.

I would never voluntarily hand a firearm to the police, especially "to hold for me"

that gun owner is ignorant.
 
C

Citizen

Founder's Club Member
Joined
Nov 15, 2006
Messages
18,269
Location
Fairfax Co., VA
imported post

suntzu wrote:
that is just pathetic. Just more examples of law enforcement abuse of authority.

I would never voluntarily hand a firearm to the police, especially "to hold for me"

that gun owner is ignorant.
Click to expand...
Just un-informed. There was a time when you could do that. He didn't know the policing world had changed.
 
S

suntzu

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 22, 2008
Messages
1,230
Location
The south land
imported post

sudden valley gunner wrote:
Not all cops are crooks, but they will continue to overstep what they are entitled to if we let them.
Click to expand...

Really? Then the ones who are not crooks should stand up and openly take a stand against those who are and out them for everyone to see and quit hiding them and quit making excuses for them.
 
S

suntzu

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 22, 2008
Messages
1,230
Location
The south land
imported post

Citizen wrote:
suntzu wrote:
that is just pathetic. Just more examples of law enforcement abuse of authority.

I would never voluntarily hand a firearm to the police, especially "to hold for me"

that gun owner is ignorant.
Click to expand...
Just un-informed. There was a time when you could do that. He didn't know the policing world had changed.
Click to expand...
He was indeed un-informed....I stand corrected, thank you Citizen:)
 
sudden valley gunner

sudden valley gunner

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 13, 2008
Messages
16,674
Location
Whatcom County
imported post

suntzu wrote:
sudden valley gunner wrote:
Not all cops are crooks, but they will continue to overstep what they are entitled to if we let them.
Click to expand...

Really? Then the ones who are not crooks should stand up and openly take a stand against those who are and out them for everyone to see and quit hiding them and quit making excuses for them.
Click to expand...
I agree, they should, maybe they will if we keep not settling for apologies.
 
Deanimator

Deanimator

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 21, 2007
Messages
2,083
Location
Rocky River, OH, U.S.A.
imported post

Grapeshot wrote:
o->i wrote:
cops are criminals

the sooner everyone realizes this and stops making excuses the sooner we can be free
Click to expand...
Have you posted anything that is not inflammatory regarding LEOs?

Inquiring minds want to know.

Yata hey
Click to expand...
I'm hardly known as a cop groupie, but I think he's an agent provocateur.
 
Grapeshot

Grapeshot

Legendary Warrior
Joined
May 21, 2006
Messages
35,317
Location
Valhalla
imported post

Deanimator wrote:
Grapeshot wrote:
o->i wrote:
cops are criminals

the sooner everyone realizes this and stops making excuses the sooner we can be free
Click to expand...
Have you posted anything that is not inflammatory regarding LEOs?

Inquiring minds want to know.

Yata hey
Click to expand...
I'm hardly known as a cop groupie, but I think he's an agent provocateur.
Click to expand...
Former agent provocateur. RIP.

Yata hey
 
A

autosurgeon

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 29, 2008
Messages
3,831
Location
Lawrence, Michigan, United States
imported post

Just take the gun with you to the hospital. They have a procedure in place to lock it up until you are ready to be discharged. Also you can have it released to a family member as well such as your wife.

My Sister in law works for a large health system and she showed me the written procedure for a patient with a firearm.
 
T

thecolonel

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 31, 2009
Messages
12
Location
, ,
imported post

I am a Nurse practitioner and the emergency dept in which I worked it was common for individuals to be armed when they came to the hospital. The procedure was very straight forward to secure the weapon, while in the hospital. The staff would notify hospital security, they would take the firearm on a hand receipt, the weapon would then cleared, and then placed in a locked weapons locker in the secuity office behind locked doors. When the patient was ready to be discharged the patient would present the receipt to security and they would retrieve the weapon from the locker and it would be given back to him as he left the hospital.

Our hospital served a large rural population in northwest Missouri, CCW very common and open carry not unusual.

Dave
 
N

N6ATF

Banned
Joined
Jul 22, 2009
Messages
1,401
Location
San Diego County, CA, California, USA
imported post

autosurgeon wrote:
Just take the gun with you to the hospital. They have a procedure in place to lock it up until you are ready to be discharged. Also you can have it released to a family member as well such as your wife.
Click to expand...

Or you can be painfully injured on a hike in California like rayra at calguns, airlifted, and then maliciously charged with concealed carry because the hospital following its policy of gun in hospital=call police.
 
Sonora Rebel

Sonora Rebel

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 6, 2008
Messages
3,956
Location
Gone
imported post

I left the following on that Fayettville msg board;

"There was no RAS (Reasonably Articulated Suspicion) for police to sieze this weapon. The 'policy' of your police department is unconstitutional. You know... that 'thing' they all swore an oath to protect and defend? Abuse of authority under color of law is a crime. Since the weapon was surrendered voluntarily for safekeeping and not returned... this constitutes larceny after trust. I'm no lawyer... but I WAS a cop. Any 'ballistics' info is worthless w/o a warrant. Obviously, there was no RAS for a warrant to be issued. These Fayatteville cops need some in-service training on the Constitution. 'Seems they've either forgotten it, never knew it or have (criminally) chosen to ignore it. I hope Mr. Boggs obtains council and sues their drawers off."
 
D

Doug Huffman

Banned
Joined
Jun 9, 2006
Messages
9,180
Location
Washington Island, across Death's Door, Wisconsin,
imported post

sudden valley gunner wrote:
I wish I could remember the law suit and court decision, where the court decided that that is not the duty of the police to protect and serve.
Click to expand...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Police#Protection_of_individuals
Protection of individuals The Supreme Court of the United States has ruled numerous times since 1856 that law enforcement officers have no duty to protect any individual, despite the motto "protect and serve". Their duty is to enforce the law in general. The first such case was in 1856 (South v. Maryland) and the most recent in 2005 (Town of Castle Rock v. Gonzales).[33][/sup]
 
T

TheMrMitch

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 9, 2008
Messages
1,260
Location
Hodgenville, Kentucky, USA
imported post

Colonel and autosurgeon are correct. At least that's the way it is in hospitals near me in Ky.

I've gone in before,scheduled for tests where I had to be put to sleep and the security handled my weapon in a very professional way. The nurse wheeling me out was a little excited when I had her stop by security for my gun.:D
 
ixtow

ixtow

Founder's Club Member
Joined
Nov 25, 2006
Messages
5,038
Location
Suwannee County, FL
imported post

Uhm, back tot he root.

The Police cannot refuse to give you back property that was placed in their possession with your permission. As with giving them permission to search in a place that haven't got PC to do so; it can be revoked at any time. If they fail to comply, pow, right in the kisser. I'm not sure you would even need representation, it's just too easy.
 
C

Citizen

Founder's Club Member
Joined
Nov 15, 2006
Messages
18,269
Location
Fairfax Co., VA
imported post

Sonora Rebel wrote:
SNIP Any 'ballistics' info is worthless w/o a warrant. Obviously, there was no RAS for a warrant to be issued.
Click to expand...
Hmmmm. I wonder. If he willingly turned over the gun, would the government be able to successful claim he waived any privacy interest, the result being the same as if he consented to the search, bypassing the need for a warrant? (Not that I buy this whole privacy angle on the 4th Amendment.)

You would think the serial number would besusceptible tothe PlainView doctrine. But what about actually firing the gun for a ballistics test? Overt actions beyond plain view by the police. More than just a plain view of the firing pin face and the bore.

It would sure seem probable cause would be needed.Also, to me it seems likely that a ballisticstest withouta warrant or PC has been challenged before.

Anybody know of any case law on the subject?
 
ixtow

ixtow

Founder's Club Member
Joined
Nov 25, 2006
Messages
5,038
Location
Suwannee County, FL
imported post

Citizen wrote:
Sonora Rebel wrote:
SNIP Any 'ballistics' info is worthless w/o a warrant. Obviously, there was no RAS for a warrant to be issued.
Click to expand...
Hmmmm. I wonder. If he willingly turned over the gun, would the government be able to successful claim he waived any privacy interest, the result being the same as if he consented to the search, bypassing the need for a warrant? (Not that I buy this whole privacy angle on the 4th Amendment.)

You would think the serial number would besusceptible tothe PlainView doctrine. But what about actually firing the gun for a ballistics test? Overt actions beyond plain view by the police. More than just a plain view of the firing pin face and the bore.

It would sure seem probable cause would be needed.Also, to me it seems likely that a ballisticstest withouta warrant or PC has been challenged before.

Anybody know of any case law on the subject?
Click to expand...
The matter is temporal.

Technically, anything he volunteered to them he volunteered. But, since they have not yet obtained it at the time that he requested his property back, time's up. They can't just keep holding it because they got an idea. Voluntary can be revoked at any time. Without PC, they have committed an illegal seizure.

Any 'information' that could be deemed' evidence' would have to have been obtained before he asked for it back. But even then, there is something to be said about 'investigating' a citizen who is not suspected of any wrongdoing in the first place. One could even argue that if they even wrote down the serial number, they had created an illegal registry. No crime.... No PC.... and on top of it all, Permission Revoked.

Case Closed.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top