Legal Gun Confiscation In The Works

AUTHOR

November 26, 2013 1:19pm PST

Just as “If you like your health insurance you can keep it,” proved to be false, so did gun control activist’s claims that, “No one is talking about confiscating any guns.”  Turns out there is a new — and legal — threat to gun owners allowing the government to confiscate your guns and not return them.

Ammoland writer, Dean Weingarten, has released an article demonstrating the legalities of the unconstitutional acts.  He writes that the guns are allowed to be confiscated, but the hard part is getting them back, and this is where the government slips through the loophole.

According to state law, you cannot get your confiscated guns back without a court order.  Seeing how a judge isn’t going to take time out of his day to do this for you, you will have to hire a lawyer.  The tricky part here is that the cost of hiring that lawyer, will probably be more than what the gun is worth.  This in turn makes it not even worth the time of those involved who otherwise go and purchase a new firearm.

Weingarten even brings up a case where a man’s guns were confiscated for no reason whatsoever. He explains the story saying:

The student was stopped for a routine traffic stop.  While stopped, the officer asked him if he had any guns in the vehicle.  The student replied that he had rifles locked in the tool box that was attached to the bed of the pickup truck.  The officer demanded that the student open the tool box, which he did.  The officer then confiscated the rifles.  The student was never charged with a crime, but the police refused to return the rifles unless they received a court order ordering them to do so.

This means that for no reason, not even justified by cause for search and seizure, a legal gun owner had his weapons forcefully removed from his possession and never given back. The only thing the man did wrong here was tell the police officer the truth that he had a weapon with him.

Being a gun owner, this is extremely frightening.

Weingarten describes this as a legal form of gun confiscation, but his example seems to leave me puzzled as there was no cause to take the man’s legally owned weapon.

Do you guys think this is actually legal, or an abuse of power?

comments

You must login in order to leave a comment.