Political abuse in Lincoln Nebraska ? ? ?

imported post

From another hunting related forum - - -

"I got a call from a buddy of mine today who lives in Lincoln, NE. Today police officers showed up at his place of employment and gave him a free taxi ride home to his house. The confiscated all of his firearms without a warrant. They informed him and his lawyer who was on his cell phone that if he didn't comply with handing over his firearms that he would be arrested and his house would be searched. All of his firearms are registered. He has a Nebraska conceal and carry permit and a permit to purchase. Here's the catch.

Lincoln recently passed an ordinance that any person who has any kind of drug charge with in the last 10 years can not own a fire arm within city limits. My buddy got caught smoking pot at a party 8 years ago. He got wrote a $100 ticket for the small amount of marijuana he had. 8 YEARS AGO!!! He was 22 years old. Just about everyone I know has tried pot at one point or another in their life. He has never had any other legal problems in his life.

The officers apologized to him and agreed that it wasn't right but claimed they had to do their job. This is absurd. I can understand not allowing felons to have guns. I can understand not allowing drug dealers to have guns. I can understand not allowing people to have unregistered hand guns even but his guns are all registered. Taking a fellow hunters guns less than a week before the season opens over a $100 ticket 8 years ago is absolutely ridiculous. His lawyer has requested help from a very well known NRA lawyer who has agreed to help on the case. I guess there is a Supreme court ruling that is supposed to happen in another state any day and it will help determine how they will go about their case. Another thing that bugs me is that all of his firearms were purchased before this ordinance was passed.

Here is a tip for any of you Lincoln'ers. If you have registered firearms and any kind of misdemeanor drug violation take your guns to someone else's house. I was told this all started because one of the guns he legally purchased was from a pawn shop and the police have been monitoring these places looking for illegal activities.THIS IS A VIOLATION OF OUR 2ND AMENDMENT RIGHTS IF YOU ASK ME!!!! I NEVER WOULD HAVE IMAGINED THIS HAPPENING IN THE USA. "



What in the world is wrong with these politicians in Lincoln Nebraska ?



BB

imported post

If a felon may properly be disbarred his rights under color of law then we can all be legally disarmed by merely lowering the bar of 'felony' sufficiently as has been done in many cases of domestic abuse, veterans diagnosed with PTSD - and now your friend in Lincoln, Nebraska.

Which part of "shall not be infringed" is not understood.

Either we are equal or we are not. Good people ought to be armed where they will, with wits and guns and the truth.

imported post

The ordinance is in violation of State Law! Nebraska has statewide preemption on firearms laws. Cities are only allowed to restrict the use, not possession or carrying, of firearms.

See Nebraska Laws Sections 14-102, 15-255, 16-227 and 17-556. The only way that the ordinance could possibly be valid is if it existed prior to September 6, 1991 (69-2427).

imported post

Is there a court of competent jurisdiction that is charged with enforcing the law against the State and its sub-divisions?

Wisconsin gun laws are also preempted by the State but sub-divisions enjoy evident and apparent immunity - for lack of a court officer's action.

imported post

Bay Bob wrote:

From another hunting related forum - - -

"police officers...confiscated all of his firearms without a warrant. All of his firearms are registered.

I can understand not allowing people to have unregistered hand guns"

Click to expand...

BB, I understand that you are quoting another. Cannot this person see that the two statements above are fundamentally in conflict?

imported post

What happened to ex post facto? You cannot be punished for something that was previously okay. Nor can you be punished a 2nd time for the same crime.

If it were me, I'd be challenging the law on several grounds. Pre-emption being one of them. The reasons cited above too. I'd also go after the law on the grounds that it was not written as to allow it being retroactive.

I was always taught that sentencing for a given offense was to be done with the laws as written at the time of the offense, not at the time of sentencing.

A complete and utter crock. His lawyer had best be filing an injunction. The gun owner had best have gotten a receipt for his possessions. If he didn't get one from the police, I'd file charges againstthem and the city for theft / burglary / robbery (as appropriate).

imported post

darthmord wrote:

Nor can you be punished a 2nd time for the same crime.

Click to expand...

...in the same jurisdiction. Hence parallel state and federal charges.

imported post

Doug Huffman wrote:

If a felon may properly be disbarred his rights under color of law then we can all be legally disarmed by merely lowering the bar of 'felony' sufficiently as has been done in many cases of domestic abuse, veterans diagnosed with PTSD - and now your friend in Lincoln, Nebraska.

Which part of "shall not be infringed" is not understood.

Either we are equal or we are not. Good people ought to be armed where they will, with wits and guns and the truth.

Click to expand...

+1000

The problem with current progressive lawmakers is that their goal isn't to properly represent their constituents, but instead, their goal is to regulate us until they have control over everything we do.

I would not put it past the progressives to begin authoring laws that fine gun owners for talking about their guns in public or to make illegal reloading at home.

I'm anticipating progressives also making laws that require homeowners to buy toilet flushing permits. Hell, in California, they're going to be installing remotely controlled electric meters which they'll be able to turn off if you use more than your quota. Why not do the same with water? This is where we are headed if we do not stop these people and kick them out of government.

imported post

darthmord wrote:

What happened to ex post facto? You cannot be punished for something that was previously okay.

Click to expand...

The government did it a few years ago with the Lautenburg amendment. I don't

know if the wording has changed or not, but if you had ever been convicted of

spousal abuse you couldn't have firearms.

imported post

Bay Bob wrote:

From another hunting related forum - - -

"I got a call from a buddy of mine today who lives in Lincoln, NE. Today police officers showed up at his place of employment and gave him a free taxi ride home to his house. The confiscated all of his firearms without a warrant. They informed him and his lawyer who was on his cell phone that if he didn't comply with handing over his firearms that he would be arrested and his house would be searched. All of his firearms are registered. He has a Nebraska conceal and carry permit and a permit to purchase. Here's the catch.

Lincoln recently passed an ordinance that any person who has any kind of drug charge with in the last 10 years can not own a fire arm within city limits. My buddy got caught smoking pot at a party 8 years ago. He got wrote a $100 ticket for the small amount of marijuana he had. 8 YEARS AGO!!! He was 22 years old. Just about everyone I know has tried pot at one point or another in their life. He has never had any other legal problems in his life.

The officers apologized to him and agreed that it wasn't right but claimed they had to do their job. This is absurd. I can understand not allowing felons to have guns. I can understand not allowing drug dealers to have guns. I can understand not allowing people to have unregistered hand guns even but his guns are all registered. Taking a fellow hunters guns less than a week before the season opens over a $100 ticket 8 years ago is absolutely ridiculous. His lawyer has requested help from a very well known NRA lawyer who has agreed to help on the case. I guess there is a Supreme court ruling that is supposed to happen in another state any day and it will help determine how they will go about their case. Another thing that bugs me is that all of his firearms were purchased before this ordinance was passed.

Here is a tip for any of you Lincoln'ers. If you have registered firearms and any kind of misdemeanor drug violation take your guns to someone else's house. I was told this all started because one of the guns he legally purchased was from a pawn shop and the police have been monitoring these places looking for illegal activities.THIS IS A VIOLATION OF OUR 2ND AMENDMENT RIGHTS IF YOU ASK ME!!!! I NEVER WOULD HAVE IMAGINED THIS HAPPENING IN THE USA. "



What in the world is wrong with these politicians in Lincoln Nebraska ?

Click to expand...

That must be why they call it... stinkin' Lincoln....

Ouch, that one hurts! Losing all your guns to the caretaking of the local po-po.

Can you provide a link to the other forum's thread?

Has there been any news reporting of this confiscation?

imported post

Sure Hank !

Not 100% sure you can see it, but hope you can - - -



http://www.refugeforums.com/refuge/showthread.php?t=746622



Now we busted his chops a bit and it turned into a pi$$ing contest with some of "the regular suspects" but the story is in the first post.



BB