• If you enjoy the forum please consider supporting it by signing up for a NES Membership  The benefits pay for the membership many times over.

Always a salient reminder

Joined
Mar 7, 2008
Messages
3,499
Likes
368
Location
Western Ma
Feedback: 15 / 0 / 0
Hi All:

I was skimming the Blogosphere over coffee this morning and I came across this short but cogent piece from the ever interesting Western Rifle Shooters Association. At first read it's simply another "Weapon's Cache Discovered" story, where the "criminal" could be many of us but for the fact that the discovery of the arms came about because the owner acted erratically and or irresponsibly.

But as I read it, and per Mike's comments at the bottom, it got me thinning that it's always good to evaluate one's personal exposure. In other words, If any of the individuals in your life who are aware of the extent of your "interest" in firearms were to turn unreasonably against you:

a. What kind of damage could they cause (nature and extent)?
b. Can this risk can be mitigated?
C. Is it feasible attempt to do so in your life?

EX.
You're partner, should they choose, could bring a world of legal difficulty down upon you was she/he so inclined. However, the need for honesty in a relationship may exceed the need for security. Thus causing you to risk being open to support the relationship.

Conversely

Your new brother in law could also cause damage though perhaps not as easily. Nonetheless, you could mitigate the risk by not telling him anything about your hobby, which is feasible since you don't really like him anyway.


Then there's what you write on the interweb. Most likely, it will never be used against you as Prima Fascia evidence of guilt (God I hope this remains true), but, as corroborating evidence in some future circus trial, it may well come back to slap you.

Regardless of how it manifests, we all have a degree of exposure, and I personally found the story a good reminder and an opportunity to consider my own.



Guns & ammo confiscated from Indy home

Posted: Oct 10, 2008 04:18 PM
Updated: Oct 10, 2008 07:33 PM

INDIANAPOLIS (WISH) - ATF officers confiscate more than 100 weapons and 50,000 rounds of ammunition from a home on the city's northeast side.

Police were called out to a home in the 7000 block of Lantern Road Thursday night. The homeowner's 15-year-old daughter had called police to say her father was missing and she found a suicide note.

In the course of the investigation, police found the guns and ammunition inside the house. Officers were alarmed when they noticed a mortar round and an eight foot long Russian recoilless rifle. 24-Hour News 8 was told a judge issued a search warrant. That's when ATF agents were called in to catalogue and remove the weapons. The ATF calls the weapons cache a little bit unusual.

The ATF confiscated the weapons. They are now investigating to see if the homeowner had the proper permits and licenses to own all of the weapons.

Early Friday morning around 3 a.m. IMPD officers located the homeowner sleeping in his truck. He was parked outside a church about a block away. He has been taken in for detention and evaluation. Child services is taking care of his 15 year old daughter. As of right now he does not face any charges for owning those weapons.

Make sure you watch the video (not linkable). If it's the version I just heard over the air, it contained the usual scare language about "arms caches", "arsenal", and the obligatory "I'm surprised he had that many guns" neighbor interview.

They'll do it to you, too, just as soon as they have a chance. After all, given that the mission is to cow ordinary gunowners into submission, the G isn't going to be able to accomplish that simply by throwing Constitutional idealists like Wayne Fincher into prison.

Lesson: OPSEC and COMSEC begin at home.

More gunowners have been undone by "tips" to police from angry spouses/family members than any other single investigative tactic.

Consider what your exposure is on that front.

Act on your findings.
 
I have been wondering about that as well but couldn't come up with anything.

One of my best friends had a restraining order taken out on him by his x-gf which he got vacated. There was no grounds for it.

However, had he been a gun owner at the time I could see how the situation would have been much much worse.

So how does one protect themselves from other people's opinions and consequently the police acting on them.

Nowadays it's quite easy for people to get restraining orders. What protects those who have been unjustly restrained?
 
a judge issued a search warrant.

On what grounds? Wouldn't like to see that affadavit? "I saw a mortar round". I'll guess it was inert, but even if not, say it is a bona fide "destructive device" -- don't they have to do some background first (the reason they are registered, anyway). How do you assume a crime on the sight of a possible mortar round?

The ATF confiscated the weapons.

On what grounds? They admit in the next sentence that they have no idea whether they are "legal" (actually, I'll guess that they do know that they are legal, but they wanted to take them anyway).

The prevent a suicide (a crime) doesn't fit because the guy was already gone. If he was planning to do the deed and left a note, he already took what he needed.
 
I would guess that in the presence of a Suicide note, if such exists, it's probably standard proceedure to take away weapons until a phych evaluation is done.
 
I know, in this case, he "brought them in," inasmuch as his action led to a predictable situation in which .gov was likely to find his firearms. But I think the take-away is that it's rarely (so far) been the JBT going door to door, but rather people doing dumb or simply dramatic things that lead to incidental discoveries, all of which beget media correlation, exaggeration, and permutation as the story makes its ways through the cycle.
 
the abuse of the 209A laws and the lifelong effect they have on gun owners at the state AND federal levels could be discussed forever.

Easiest way for the government to revoke your RIGHT to gun ownership without a trial of any sort is an allegation that results in a restraining order. Even though after an order is denied, or vacated all records of it are supposed to be destroyed. Why are people denied issuing or renewals of gun permits on the basis of an allegation that is not criminal in nature? Yes or no have you stopped beating your wife?
 
Always Think Forfiture
The ATF confiscated the weapons. They are now investigating to see if the homeowner had the proper permits and licenses to own all of the weapons.

Sieze first, investigate later. Nothing new there. [thinking]
 
Back
Top Bottom