Bang / Guns
See other Bang / Guns Articles
Title: Police May Confiscate Guns without Notice to Owner Starting January 1
Source:
breitbart.com
URL Source: http://www.breitbart.com/california ... tice-owner-starting-january-1/
Published: Dec 29, 2015
Author: AWR Hawkins
Post Date: 2015-12-29 20:33:17 by Stoner
Keywords: None
Views: 18529
Comments: 58
Beginning January 1, police in California may confiscate firearms from gun owners thought to be a danger to themselves or others without giving the owner any notice. This is the result of the implementation of “gun violence restraining orders” (GVROs), which go into effect New Year’s Day. According to KPCC, GVROs “could be issued without prior knowledge of the person. In other words, a judge could issue the order without ever hearing from the person in question, if there are reasonable grounds to believe the person is a threat based on accounts from the family and police.” And since the order can be issued without the gun owner even being present to defend him or herself, confiscation can commence without any notice to the gun owner once the order is issued. To be fair, Los Angeles Police Department Assistant Chief Michael Moore does not use the word “confiscate” when talking about confiscating firearms. Rather, Moore says, “The law gives us a vehicle to cause the person to surrender their weapons, to have a time out, if you will.” KPCC reports that “California law already bans people from possessing guns if they’ve committed a violent crime or were involuntarily committed to a mental health facility.” And now, with GVROs, California law allows judges to bar people from possessing guns even if they have not committed a violent crime or were involuntarily committed. Because of this, Gun Owners of California Executive Director Sam Paredes warns that GVROs “may create a situation where law-abiding gun owners are put in jeopardy.” This will NOT end well !
You can bet that the ones that dreamed this up, promoted it, and voted for it, will NOT be the ones in the line of fire trying to carry this out.
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#1. To: Stoner (#0)
Nor will they or their bodyguards ever be subjected to it. 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) American Indians had open borders. Look at how well that worked out for them.
Yep. The laws are for the peons, not them. As George Carlin said, THEY are in the Club, and we are not! I can't believe there is anyone with two brain cells that is still living in that zoo. 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. There are no Carthaginian terrorists. “The object of war is not to die for your country but to make the other bastard die for his.” - George S. Patton
It means there is substantive or supporting evidence that the person in possession of firearms has shown irresponsible actions about their ownership of firearms. Folks - this stuff is already written on the legal books in every state of the union. It means, "don't beat your wife or kids."
" It means there is substantive or supporting evidence " So, no real proof, other than the word of a pissed off ex wife, or an eager beaver Barney. Sure, sounds right. 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. There are no Carthaginian terrorists. “The object of war is not to die for your country but to make the other bastard die for his.” - George S. Patton
What's new, here?
In California anything is possible with the exception of sanity.
If that's all you know,it is normal. 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) American Indians had open borders. Look at how well that worked out for them.
HorseHillary! What it really means is "If your wife wants to punish you,all she has to say is you beat her one time several years ago,and have threatened to do it again. You are presumed to be guilty,and punished without a trial or any actual evidence. 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) American Indians had open borders. Look at how well that worked out for them.
have you stopped beating your wife yet?
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. There are no Carthaginian terrorists.
Be interesting to see what happens when they go after the Militias.
Eli, Eli, nai erchomai Kurios Iesous.
Pete, Proverbs 32:6 is clear, spare the rod, spoil the wife. Now let's see if anyone can quote Scripture telling you that wife spanking is un-biblical. Eli, Eli, nai erchomai Kurios Iesous.
Sure will. Likewise with the Bloods, Crips, MS 13, mosques, Black Panthers, etc, etc. Of course, they will primarily only go after some old honkey dudes first. I suspect the clowns in favor of this are in for an enormous surprise. They may be wanting a violent reaction. They would use that as an excuse to declare martial law. But I suspect they will get first hand experience of the principle of "Unintended Consequences" You can bet the "gun grabbers" in DC & the other states will be watching. And I suspect the 2nd Amend supporters will be closely watching as well. 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. There are no Carthaginian terrorists.
What's new is that you could lose your 2nd amendment right based on the statements of non-professionals without actually having done anything.
Also, that many innocent law abiding citizens may end up going down in a hail of bullets, or flames ( like Waco ) based on the statements of non-professionals without actually having done anything.
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. There are no Carthaginian terrorists.
It wouldn't surprise me to see that as a new question on the Form 4473. In fact,the more I think about it,the more shocked I am that it hasn't been s standard 4473 question for years now. 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) American Indians had open borders. Look at how well that worked out for them.
Wasn't there some sort of Biblical rule about not beating her with a switch larger than your thumb? 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) American Indians had open borders. Look at how well that worked out for them.
They may THINK they want a violent reaction from White People,but I'm guessing they won't be so happy with it if it happens. White people don't tend to riot as a shopping tool. They riot to kill people. 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) American Indians had open borders. Look at how well that worked out for them.
White people don't tend to riot as a shopping tool. They riot to kill people. " Hammer,meet nail !! 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. There are no Carthaginian terrorists.
I would love to see that done, www.christianpatriot.com/oath.htm Martial law would be considered an attack. Eli, Eli, nai erchomai Kurios Iesous.
Actually there isn't a proverbs 32it, only goes to 31, but if there was a 32, it would say Spare the rod, spoil the wife for after all , are you sitting down? Solomon, the writer of Proverbs, had 700 wives and 3oo concubines or second class wives. Can you imagine living with 1,000 women? you would need a switch as biga round as your thumb and 6 feet long. Eli, Eli, nai erchomai Kurios Iesous.
It would be peaceful because they would spend every waking moment attacking each other. It's only when you are one on one with them and they feel secure that they start toget nasty. 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) American Indians had open borders. Look at how well that worked out for them.
Could? Explain how I could LOSE any rights without being convicted of a felony.
Naw. There has to substantive evidence in order to show legal certainty consistent with the US Constitution of and about the loss of ANY right in America. You are getting all workeddupped over nothing, Pete. Relax dude and have a doobie or the other way around, which ever comes first.
Have you ever explained that to anyone who has ever been falsy accused of child molesting? 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) American Indians had open borders. Look at how well that worked out for them.
Nope. I don't know anyone that has been a child molester. But, the state better have substantive evidence in order to convict.
They don't have to have ANY evidence RIGHT NOW to confiscate your guns. ALL it takes is an accusation by your wife or child that you are abusive and violent. Guess what you have then,if you do go to court for this later? That's right,a "history of abuse". 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) American Indians had open borders. Look at how well that worked out for them.
That's the subject of the above article. Did you read it? If a judge hears testimony from family and friends that you're a danger to yourself and others, you can lose your second amendment right to keep and bear arms and have your guns taken away.
It can not happen. PERIOD.
Are you suggesting that the jurisprudence concept of "presumption of innocence" is a vestige in the USA? Let me tell you something, Pete, don't worry your pretty head off. What you are reading is about repeat offenders or some other characteristic that requires expedient handling of restraint to avoid a danger to the community. It is considered prudent in rare cases based on substantive or otherwise supporting information beyond mere hearsay. Sorry but the justice system still presumes innocence. Your dignity, much less constitutional RIGHTS can not be taken away at any level of government entertainment unless appropriate adjudicated processes were in effect.
I see. "Don't worry,be happy!",huh? 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) American Indians had open borders. Look at how well that worked out for them.
The California DOJ employs over sixty Special Agents whose mission it is to seize illegally owned guns from ‘prohibited persons’ in the state. (Photo credit: ABC7 News) http://www.guns.com/2014/02/07/california-mans-home-raided-guns-seized-incorrect-information-video/ Career criminals... California Attorney General Kamala Harris, confiscated guns http://www.guns.com/2011/06/20/california-agents-seize-1200-firearms-from-various-owners/ The gun owners were felons and continued their actions. PERIOD.
Oh no. "It" can't happen here.
Ok,so you are a cop. You have to be because nobody else believes that nonsense and cops HAVE to believe it to justify doing the things they do to keep their jobs. 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) American Indians had open borders. Look at how well that worked out for them.
That's the law in California. Oh, you say that's contrary to federal laws? Well, so are California's marijuana laws, but you support them, don't you? You're all for "state's rights" ... but only when the state does things you favor. Welcome to the real world, buckeroo.
Well. Now nobody's going to commit crimes with those guns anymore. Not that they would have anyways.
Enjoy your "law"; while you are at it, save them the tyme & trouble of coming after you and just turn 'em in. You are fuckin' idiot, 'white.
It ain't my law, buck. I don't live in California. If that's what the citizens of California want, who am I (or you) to tell them differently? Right? Butt out.
You are a dumb fuck. Archaic laws can not be enforced by any level of US, State, County, Special District, City or the local dawg pound governments that denies the presumption of innocence of any US Citizen. Well ... unless you believe in a government that denies your rights to liberty, freedoms, rights and your individual dignity. Again, 'White you are a dumb fuck.
Comments (41 - 58) not displayed.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/LatestYou can bet that the ones that dreamed this up, promoted it, and voted for it, will NOT be the ones in the line of fire trying to carry this out.
#2. To: sneakypete (#1)
" Nor will they or their bodyguards ever be subjected to it. "
#3. To: Stoner (#0)
if there are reasonable grounds to believe the person is a threat based on accounts from the family and police.
#4. To: buckeroo (#3)
" if there are reasonable grounds to believe the person is a threat based on accounts from the family and police. "
#5. To: Stoner (#4)
[S]o, no real proof, other than the word of a pissed off ex wife, or an eager beaver Barney.
#6. To: Stoner (#0)
Beginning January 1, police in California may confiscate firearms from gun owners thought to be a danger to themselves or others without giving the owner any notice.
#7. To: Stoner (#2)
I can't believe there is anyone with two brain cells that is still living in that zoo.
#8. To: buckeroo (#3)
Folks - this stuff is already written on the legal books in every state of the union. It means, "don't beat your wife or kids."
#9. To: sneakypete (#8)
#10. To: rlk (#6)
" In California anything is possible with the exception of sanity. "
#11. To: Stoner (#0)
#12. To: paraclete, sneakypete (#9)
have you stopped beating your wife yet?
#13. To: BobCeleste (#11)
" Be interesting to see what happens when they go after the Militias. "
#14. To: buckeroo (#5)
"What's new, here?"
#15. To: misterwhite (#14)
#16. To: paraclete (#9)
(Edited)
have you stopped beating your wife yet?
#17. To: BobCeleste (#12)
Now let's see if anyone can quote Scripture telling you that wife spanking is un-biblical.
#18. To: Stoner (#13)
They may be wanting a violent reaction.
#19. To: sneakypete (#18)
" They may THINK they want a violent reaction from White People,but I'm guessing they won't be so happy with it if it happens.
#20. To: Stoner (#13)
hey may be wanting a violent reaction. They would use that as an excuse to declare martial law.
#21. To: sneakypete (#17)
#22. To: BobCeleste (#21)
Can you imagine living with 1,000 women?
#23. To: misterwhite (#14)
What's new is that you could lose your 2nd amendment right based on the statements of non-professionals without actually having done anything.
#24. To: sneakypete (#8)
HorseHillary! What it really means is "If your wife wants to punish you,all she has to say is you beat her one time several years ago,and have threatened to do it again. You are presumed to be guilty,and punished without a trial or any actual evidence.
#25. To: buckeroo (#24)
Naw. There has to substantive evidence in order to show legal certainty consistent with the US Constitution of and about the loss of ANY right in America.
#26. To: sneakypete (#25)
#27. To: buckeroo (#26)
But, the state better have substantive evidence in order to convict.
#28. To: buckeroo (#23)
"Could? Explain how I could LOSE any rights without being convicted of a felony."
#29. To: misterwhite (#28)
#30. To: sneakypete (#27)
They don't have to have ANY evidence RIGHT NOW to confiscate your guns. ALL it takes is an accusation by your wife or child that you are abusive and violent.
#31. To: buckeroo (#30)
Are you suggesting that the jurisprudence concept of "presumption of innocence" is a vestige in the USA? Let me tell you something, Pete, don't worry your pretty head off. What you are reading is about repeat offenders or some other characteristic that requires expedient handling of restraint to avoid a danger to the community. It is considered prudent in rare cases based on substantive or otherwise supporting information beyond mere hearsay.
#32. To: buckeroo (#30)
California Agents Seize 1,200 Firearms From Various Owners 
"We (government) need to do a lot less, a lot sooner" ~Ron Paul
#33. To: hondo68 (#32)
#34. To: sneakypete (#31)
I see. "Don't worry,be happy!",huh?
#35. To: buckeroo (#33)
The gun owners were felons and continued their actions. PERIOD.
#36. To: buckeroo (#29)
"It can not happen. PERIOD."
#37. To: hondo68 (#32)
"California Attorney General Kamala Harris, confiscated guns"
#38. To: misterwhite (#36)
That's the law in California.
#39. To: buckeroo (#38)
"Enjoy your "law"
#40. To: misterwhite (#39)
.
.
.
[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]