User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 1/3/2012 2:40:44 PM EDT
[#1]
Quoted:
This is in reference to the young widow who shot an intruder last week. The cops took her shotgun. Given that they decided at the scene that this was a good shoot, and that the weapon 's serial number could and should have been run at the scene, and that she is at increased risk due to potential retaliation by the scumbag's buddies/family, how is it justifiable for them to take the weapon? There is certainly no legal basis for them to seize a weapon without cause, it is a flagrant violation of the 2nd and 14th Amendments. There is a serious moral quality to leaving a woman defenseless. Any of the BOTS types want to chime in on the righteousness of violating this woman's civil rights along with their loss of common decency? Hence the reason a person needs duplicates. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/3/2012 2:41:25 PM EDT
[#2]
Quoted:
Hence the reason a person needs duplicates. I understand what you are saying, but that ain't the point. Also, some folks are dirt poor. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/3/2012 2:42:19 PM EDT
[#3]
There's the way it ought to be, and then there's the way it is.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/3/2012 2:42:26 PM EDT
[#4]
The cops don't determine if it's a good shoot, the DA does. The gun is evidence. Sucks, but that's the way it is.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/3/2012 2:42:35 PM EDT
[#5]
Quoted:
Quoted:
This is in reference to the young widow who shot an intruder last week. The cops took her shotgun. Given that they decided at the scene that this was a good shoot, and that the weapon 's serial number could and should have been run at the scene, and that she is at increased risk due to potential retaliation by the scumbag's buddies/family, how is it justifiable for them to take the weapon? There is certainly no legal basis for them to seize a weapon without cause, it is a flagrant violation of the 2nd and 14th Amendments. There is a serious moral quality to leaving a woman defenseless. Any of the BOTS types want to chime in on the righteousness of violating this woman's civil rights along with their loss of common decency? Hence the reason a person needs duplicates. 2 is 1 and 1 is none. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/3/2012 2:43:03 PM EDT
[#6]
Quoted: This is in reference to the young widow who shot an intruder last week. The cops took her shotgun. Given that they decided at the scene that this was a good shoot, and that the weapon 's serial number could and should have been run at the scene, and that she is at increased risk due to potential retaliation by the scumbag's buddies/family, how is it justifiable for them to take the weapon? There is certainly no legal basis for them to seize a weapon without cause, it is a flagrant violation of the 2nd and 14th Amendments. There is a serious moral quality to leaving a woman defenseless. Any of the BOTS types want to chime in on the righteousness of violating this woman's civil rights along with their loss of common decency? Even though it is probably a good shoot, in most jurisdictions it's still reviewed by the prosecutor or grand jury. The LEO's at the scene will seize the weapon as evidence and will be returned once the investigation/ legal review is complete. The LEO's don't determine whether it is or isn't a good shoot, that's done by the suits somewhere else. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/3/2012 2:43:29 PM EDT
[#7]
Two is one.
Also, needs moar castle doctrine. Also, good shoots still tend to suck, in one way or another. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/3/2012 2:43:37 PM EDT
[#8]
Seizing evidence is a normal and expected part of a homicide investigation, which this is.
The evidence will remain in their custody until the investigation is completed, sent to the prosecutor for review, and a charging decision is made. Once the prosecutor and/or grand jury decide to no charge, the property will likely be returned to the owner. Investigations and charging decisions/grand juries take time - often months or more. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/3/2012 2:44:10 PM EDT
[#9]
In many(most?) places, the police are not in a position to just declare the homicide to be justified and cut the shooter loose on the spot. There still has to be an investigation and a decision from the DA or even a Grand Jury declaring it to be justifiable homicide. Until everything is sorted out, the gun is still evidence in a homicide investigation.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/3/2012 2:44:36 PM EDT
[#10]
Quoted:
The cops don't determine if it's a good shoot, the DA does. The gun is evidence. Sucks, but that's the way it is. There it is. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/3/2012 2:44:53 PM EDT
[#11]
It's called evidence.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/3/2012 2:45:28 PM EDT
[#12]
More than likely, despite any "determination" by the local PD's as to the status of a "shoot" many times a shooting will have to go to a grand jury for final determination. At a minimum, someone other than a local police officer makes the final determination (District Attorney, constable, etc).
Hence the firearm used will be taken into evidence until the investigation and grand jury trial is over. not sure why suprising, do you know of instance where they has been shooting and people are allowed to use the weapon used? |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/3/2012 2:47:00 PM EDT
[#13]
Standard procedure. When a cop shoots someone their gun is taken too, doesn't matter if it is department or personally owned. Gun is evidence until the prosecutor determines if he will press charges. The gun is also sent off to the state crime lab for ballistics. Just the way it is, no reason to get all butt hurt about it.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/3/2012 2:47:20 PM EDT
[#14]
Quoted:
This is in reference to the young widow who shot an intruder last week. The cops took her shotgun. Given that they decided at the scene that this was a good shoot, and that the weapon 's serial number could and should have been run at the scene, and that she is at increased risk due to potential retaliation by the scumbag's buddies/family, how is it justifiable for them to take the weapon? There is certainly no legal basis for them to seize a weapon without cause, it is a flagrant violation of the 2nd and 14th Amendments. There is a serious moral quality to leaving a woman defenseless. Any of the BOTS types want to chime in on the righteousness of violating this woman's civil rights along with their loss of common decency? The weapon was just used to shoot someone. It's common for said weapon to be placed in evidence until all proceedings are complete. Once the shoot deemed righteous (for example Grand Jury etc).....it is returned. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/3/2012 2:48:04 PM EDT
[#15]
Quoted:
Quoted:
This is in reference to the young widow who shot an intruder last week. The cops took her shotgun. Given that they decided at the scene that this was a good shoot, and that the weapon 's serial number could and should have been run at the scene, and that she is at increased risk due to potential retaliation by the scumbag's buddies/family, how is it justifiable for them to take the weapon? There is certainly no legal basis for them to seize a weapon without cause, it is a flagrant violation of the 2nd and 14th Amendments. There is a serious moral quality to leaving a woman defenseless. Any of the BOTS types want to chime in on the righteousness of violating this woman's civil rights along with their loss of common decency? The weapon was just used to shoot someone. It's common for said weapon to be placed in evidence until all proceedings are complete. Once the shoot deemed righteous (for example Grand Jury etc).....it is returned. I can understand the reasoning behind it. It sucks, but it's the way it is. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/3/2012 2:51:37 PM EDT
[#16]
Common sense is not at work her, legalities are.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/3/2012 2:51:48 PM EDT
[#17]
Two is one, and two dozen is barely enough.
 What sucks in CA is if I was involved in a clear self-defense shooting, I would be legally alright, but I know they would take the gun used for the "investigation" and then I would most likely have to pay what's called the LEGR (Law Enforcement Gun Release) fee of $20 to get back MY PROPERTY when the investigation is over. I couldn't imagine what would happen if it was my only firearm and some homies came back to get revenge. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/3/2012 2:53:02 PM EDT
[#18]
It's evidence, as has been stated already. If cops ice some perp, their guns are seized also to be held as evidence in a homicide investigation.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/3/2012 2:53:40 PM EDT
[#19]
The Weapon is not seized all the time in every case. AT least here in KY it is not done in every case.
I remember reading about an old lady that shot an intruder a while back and the police did not take her gun. I guess it varies jurisdiction to jurisdiction. But I do think that when seized it is the Department's responsibility to return the weapon to the owner in good working order(at least as good as when it was seized). No rust or other damage to the weapon. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/3/2012 2:54:34 PM EDT
[#20]
Quoted:
This is in reference to the young widow who shot an intruder last week. The cops took her shotgun. Given that they decided at the scene that this was a good shoot, and that the weapon 's serial number could and should have been run at the scene, and that she is at increased risk due to potential retaliation by the scumbag's buddies/family, how is it justifiable for them to take the weapon? There is certainly no legal basis for them to seize a weapon without cause, it is a flagrant violation of the 2nd and 14th Amendments. There is a serious moral quality to leaving a woman defenseless. Any of the BOTS types want to chime in on the righteousness of violating this woman's civil rights along with their loss of common decency? Oh for the love of god. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/3/2012 2:55:47 PM EDT
[#21]
standard procedure. A similar thread came up and I said something to the effect of don't use your rare/expensive gun for home defense, if you use it, it'll be confiscated. Consensus was that people care more about protection than their gun. Screw that. Use a Glock, they're everywhere, a dime a dozen. Don't use your pre-86 transferable full auto Uzi worth $20000 or whatever
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/3/2012 2:57:51 PM EDT
[#22]
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
This is in reference to the young widow who shot an intruder last week. The cops took her shotgun. Given that they decided at the scene that this was a good shoot, and that the weapon 's serial number could and should have been run at the scene, and that she is at increased risk due to potential retaliation by the scumbag's buddies/family, how is it justifiable for them to take the weapon? There is certainly no legal basis for them to seize a weapon without cause, it is a flagrant violation of the 2nd and 14th Amendments. There is a serious moral quality to leaving a woman defenseless. Any of the BOTS types want to chime in on the righteousness of violating this woman's civil rights along with their loss of common decency? Hence the reason a person needs duplicates. 2 is 1 and 1 is none. This, every gun that I like has a twin, or a triplet, hell when it comes to shotguns I wouldn't even miss 1 or 2 lol... Its a shitty situation none the less.. This is also why I laugh when people drop ridiculous amounts of money on a super duper evil home defense gun with lasers and can openers.... Your $2000+ tinker toy will be getting finger fucked by the man, meanwhile your stuck with your thumb up your ass and your granddads over under when all the perps buddies and family are pissed at you..... |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/3/2012 2:57:54 PM EDT
[#23]
Quoted: The cops don't determine if it's a good shoot, the DA does. The gun is evidence. Sucks, but that's the way it is. THIS ...and the police have up to a year to file with the DA. Shit, at my department, a duty or pool weapon that is used in an OIS is placed into evidence and replaced with another department issued weapon. No conspiracies here. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/3/2012 2:58:24 PM EDT
[#24]
Quoted:
This is in reference to the young widow who shot an intruder last week. The cops took her shotgun. Given that they decided at the scene that this was a good shoot, and that the weapon 's serial number could and should have been run at the scene, and that she is at increased risk due to potential retaliation by the scumbag's buddies/family, how is it justifiable for them to take the weapon? There is certainly no legal basis for them to seize a weapon without cause, it is a flagrant violation of the 2nd and 14th Amendments. There is a serious moral quality to leaving a woman defenseless. Any of the BOTS types want to chime in on the righteousness of violating this woman's civil rights along with their loss of common decency? Investigations of homicide are not complete in a matter of a couple of hours. The weapon used in the homicide...even a justified one...is evidence relevant to the investigation. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/3/2012 2:58:46 PM EDT
[#25]
Quoted: Two is one, and two dozen is barely enough. What sucks in CA is if I was involved in a clear self-defense shooting, I would be legally alright, but I know they would take the gun used for the "investigation" and then I would most likely have to pay what's called the LEGR (Law Enforcement Gun Release) fee of $20 to get back MY PROPERTY when the investigation is over. I couldn't imagine what would happen if it was my only firearm and some homies came back to get revenge. Tired of hearing Kalifornians bitching about gun laws. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/3/2012 2:58:51 PM EDT
[#26]
Quoted:
It's called evidence. i assume, if cop shops perp then his weapon is also impounded during the investigation. any shooting thats probably what happens.. now if you are involved in a shoot and your weapon happens to be 'desirable' it can be difficult to get it back after the investigation is over.. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/3/2012 2:59:42 PM EDT
[#27]
Quoted:
standard procedure. A similar thread came up and I said something to the effect of don't use your rare/expensive gun for home defense, if you use it, it'll be confiscated. Consensus was that people care more about protection than their gun. Screw that. Use a Glock, they're everywhere, a dime a dozen. Don't use your pre-86 transferable full auto Uzi worth $20000 or whatever A person should not have to worry about what type of weapon they use. It should be returned if a justifiable homicide in good working condition with no damage after the investigation is done. It bothers me that if a weapon is seized by the police you should have to worry about getting it back and in good condition. That does not reflect well on Law enforcement if you have to worry about such things. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/3/2012 3:01:24 PM EDT
[#28]
Any shooting the gun is going to be taken as evidence and forensics done on it.
Also the vast majority of places the LEA is not the official determination of good shoot/bad shoot. The LEA might give their recommendation but it's the DA/Grand Jury that makes the determination. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/3/2012 3:03:19 PM EDT
[#29]
Quoted: The cops don't determine if it's a good shoot, the DA does. The gun is evidence. Sucks, but that's the way it is. This. Still has to be processed as evidence. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/3/2012 3:07:30 PM EDT
[#30]
Quoted:
Quoted:
standard procedure. A similar thread came up and I said something to the effect of don't use your rare/expensive gun for home defense, if you use it, it'll be confiscated. Consensus was that people care more about protection than their gun. Screw that. Use a Glock, they're everywhere, a dime a dozen. Don't use your pre-86 transferable full auto Uzi worth $20000 or whatever A person should not have to worry about what type of weapon they use. It should be returned if a justifiable homicide in good working condition with no damage after the investigation is done. It bothers me that if a weapon is seized by the police you should have to worry about getting it back and in good condition. That does not reflect well on Law enforcement if you have to worry about such things. You can pretty much bet that however they get the weapon is how it's going to come back. However if your weapon is dry, has blood or sweat on it the cops are not going to clean it. If the storage area is not moisture controlled they can and do rust. Just like those folks who say they wouldn't put their $2k 1911 on the ground if ordered to do so. To me it's a tool, tools get damaged. I'm more worried about a shoot being ruled justifiable and not get shot my self than some gun getting a rust spot on it. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/3/2012 3:12:38 PM EDT
[#31]
I picked a used LCR in 357 for my MIL. In the event she ever has to use it I have another gun she borrow until she gets her's back. I feel for this young women, but I can understand why the cops had to take here gun.
One another note, I got that LCR for $300, yeah me. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/3/2012 3:13:54 PM EDT
[#32]
Quoted:
The cops don't determine if it's a good shoot, the DA does. The gun is evidence. Sucks, but that's the way it is. this..... |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/3/2012 3:14:04 PM EDT
[#33]
Quoted:
Quoted:
standard procedure. A similar thread came up and I said something to the effect of don't use your rare/expensive gun for home defense, if you use it, it'll be confiscated. Consensus was that people care more about protection than their gun. Screw that. Use a Glock, they're everywhere, a dime a dozen. Don't use your pre-86 transferable full auto Uzi worth $20000 or whatever A person should not have to worry about what type of weapon they use. It should be returned if a justifiable homicide in good working condition with no damage after the investigation is done. It bothers me that if a weapon is seized by the police you should have to worry about getting it back and in good condition. That does not reflect well on Law enforcement if you have to worry about such things. It's evidence; they can't exactly strip it and clean it. Have you ever gotten blood on a firearm? My 1911's beavertail and hammer are all rusty and crappy from that sucker biting me. There's no excuse for deliberate abuse, of course. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/3/2012 3:14:22 PM EDT
[#34]
Keep in mind that the firearm seized as evidence, if ever returned, will be fucked like a prom date. Those fancy Kimbers will go through a meat grinder and be lucky if it functions afterwards.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/3/2012 3:16:17 PM EDT
[#35]
Quoted:
Keep in mind that the firearm seized as evidence, if ever returned, will be fucked like a prom date. Those fancy Kimbers will go through a meat grinder and be lucky if it functions afterwards. Why? |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/3/2012 3:16:54 PM EDT
[#36]
Quoted:
Keep in mind that the firearm seized as evidence, if ever returned, will be fucked like a prom date. Those fancy Kimbers will go through a meat grinder and be lucky if it functions afterwards. That's not true. Most firearms are generally returned the way they were recovered. Every now and then one will get rusty because of how long it was held and it was not lubed before being seized or blood/sweat. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/3/2012 3:18:29 PM EDT
[#37]
Quoted:
Quoted:
Keep in mind that the firearm seized as evidence, if ever returned, will be fucked like a prom date. Those fancy Kimbers will go through a meat grinder and be lucky if it functions afterwards. That's not true. Most firearms are generally returned the way they were recovered. Every now and then one will get rusty because of how long it was held and it was not lubed before being seized or blood/sweat. Thanks. That is what I thought. Did not understand what he was driving at. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/3/2012 3:18:37 PM EDT
[#38]
If a person is a known resident of the home, and there is clear evidence of a break in and the assailant was armed, and the homeowner shoots the person, that is not a criminal homicide, and is pretty easy to determine at the scene. Small town Henry putting little Suzy to bed at night hears a crash at the window. One of the local drug thugs has busted in. He grabs his gun and hides his little girl. Before he can get the door shut, the thug rushes through the door with a knife and Henry shoots him.
Well, Jack, the guy that sits two rows over at church, and who's daughter Linda Sue plays on the same soccer team as Suzy, is the cop that investigate. He sees the incident and gets Henry's side of the story. He knows Henry like we said before, and after taking a good look at the perp, he sees that it's Jaquavous J Raray that he's locked up three times for meth distribution and CDV four times. Last time his baby mama was in the hospital and almost died. Jack says to Henry. " Henry, You know, you and I are good friends and all, but you might be a cold blooded killer in this case." " I need to take your gun. I know it's your only one, you told me that at the high school football game last month just after you bought it, but I'm gonna have to take it anyway. By the way, we just got a report that Jaquavous' gang buds are coming to kill you and rape your wife and daughter. Just call us if they show up. We should only be 20 minutes out unless we're on a call on the other side of the county." "Have a good day, see you Sunday." That's the way that story SHOULDN"T play out, but does in little town America. There has to be another way when the evidence for a good shoot are so clear. For years it didn't work that way, why should it now. Is the system better for the changes. Hell no. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/3/2012 3:19:51 PM EDT
[#39]
........is to be expected. Plan accordingly.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/3/2012 3:20:13 PM EDT
[#40]
Reason #1 to own a glock...fire it and forget it. Get another one just like it.
Then you won't lose your sweet 1911 when the authorities arrive. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/3/2012 3:20:39 PM EDT
[#41]
The police determined a homicide had taken place and launched an investigation which includes statements, evidence, and arrests (but these may not necessarily all occur at once or in one place). You have to understand that a justifiable homicide is still a homicide and must be investigated. Her weapon was taken as evidence until they have explored all avenues that could be associated with the alleged crime. For all they know, there may be some convoluted murder-for-hire plot that may not have been evident just at the scene and they could easily have lost the case if the firearm was inadmissible in court due contamination or a lapse in custody. It sucks but them's the breaks.
No rights were violated in this case. Police seized the firearm during the process of a homicide investigation, which will soon be proven to be a justifiable homicide. It just wasn't Joe Law's prerogative to declare it a good shoot. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/3/2012 3:22:16 PM EDT
[#42]
crossbows are pretty lethal, and quiet |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/3/2012 3:23:01 PM EDT
[#43]
Quoted:
If a person is a known resident of the home, and there is clear evidence of a break in and the assailant was armed, and the homeowner shoots the person, that is not a criminal homicide, and is pretty easy to determine at the scene. Small town Henry putting little Suzy to bed at night hears a crash at the window. One of the local drug thugs has busted in. He grabs his gun and hides his little girl. Before he can get the door shut, the thug rushes through the door with a knife and Henry shoots him. Well, Jack, the guy that sits two rows over at church, and who's daughter Linda Sue plays on the same soccer team as Suzy, is the cop that investigate. He sees the incident and gets Henry's side of the story. He knows Henry like we said before, and after taking a good look at the perp, he sees that it's Jaquavous J Raray that he's locked up three times for meth distribution and CDV four times. Last time his baby mama was in the hospital and almost died. Jack says to Henry. " Henry, You know, you and I are good friends and all, but you might be a cold blooded killer in this case." " I need to take your gun. I know it's your only one, you told me that at the high school football game last month just after you bought it, but I'm gonna have to take it anyway. By the way, we just got a report that Jaquavous' gang buds are coming to kill you and rape your wife and daughter. Just call us if they show up. We should only be 20 minutes out unless we're on a call on the other side of the county." "Have a good day, see you Sunday." That's the way that story SHOULDN"T play out, but does in little town America. There has to be another way when the evidence for a good shoot are so clear. For years it didn't work that way, why should it now. Is the system better for the changes. Hell no. You could have shot Bin Laden mowing down school kids with his AK-47 and the cops are going to seize the Hi-Point you used to shoot him with. All on video with 200 witnesses, does not matter. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/3/2012 3:24:24 PM EDT
[#44]
Quoted: Keep in mind that the firearm seized as evidence, if ever returned, will be fucked like a prom date. Those fancy Kimbers will go through a meat grinder and be lucky if it functions afterwards. This is how we package them: .jpg)   |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/3/2012 3:25:29 PM EDT
[#45]
Quoted:
Quoted:
Keep in mind that the firearm seized as evidence, if ever returned, will be fucked like a prom date. Those fancy Kimbers will go through a meat grinder and be lucky if it functions afterwards. That's not true. Most firearms are generally returned the way they were recovered. Every now and then one will get rusty because of how long it was held and it was not lubed before being seized or blood/sweat. This is the truth. A guy accidentally shot himself in the head with a Desert Eagle .50 AE over in Cleveland, OK a few years ago. It was during an argument with his wife. (No mag but forgot there was one in the chamber.) One of the local officers told me that she had an airtight alibi because her body was outlined in a splatter pattern on the far wall so there was no way she could have pulled the trigger herself. His wife came to the station to collect the weapon after the matter was settled. She wanted to hock the weapon for whatever she could get out of it...(bitch) |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/3/2012 3:26:56 PM EDT
[#46]
Quoted:
Quoted:
Keep in mind that the firearm seized as evidence, if ever returned, will be fucked like a prom date. Those fancy Kimbers will go through a meat grinder and be lucky if it functions afterwards. This is how we package them:
Yep, tagged, boxed and sealed. The only difference from those pics is an evidence tag will be attached to the firearm, an evidence sheet to the outside of the box and the box sealed with red evidence tape. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/3/2012 3:28:11 PM EDT
[#47]
Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: This is in reference to the young widow who shot an intruder last week. The cops took her shotgun. Given that they decided at the scene that this was a good shoot, and that the weapon 's serial number could and should have been run at the scene, and that she is at increased risk due to potential retaliation by the scumbag's buddies/family, how is it justifiable for them to take the weapon? There is certainly no legal basis for them to seize a weapon without cause, it is a flagrant violation of the 2nd and 14th Amendments. There is a serious moral quality to leaving a woman defenseless. Any of the BOTS types want to chime in on the righteousness of violating this woman's civil rights along with their loss of common decency? Hence the reason a person needs duplicates. 2 is 1 and 1 is none. This, "sure Officer, I don't mind if you take my shotgun" (goes in house to load pistol) |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/3/2012 3:31:52 PM EDT
[#48]
It's probably never been challenged up to the higher courts. IMOP, if there is no arrest, they have no reason to confiscate the weapon. I do understand the reasoning behind it though.
A few years ago, here in the Dallas area, a business owner shot multiple robbers on different evenings and had to buy a new shotgun after each one. I remember it because a local reporter cornered him and nearly made him cry calling him a killer. She was fired and last I checked, she still didn't have employment. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/3/2012 3:32:56 PM EDT
[#49]
Quoted:
Quoted:
The cops don't determine if it's a good shoot, the DA does. The gun is evidence. Sucks, but that's the way it is. THIS ...and the police have up to a year to file with the DA. Shit, at my department, a duty or pool weapon that is used in an OIS is placed into evidence and replaced with another department issued weapon. No conspiracies here. we changed over from revolvers to g-23's in 1992. We had a guy with an AD with NO INJURIES, prosecutor's office returned his revolver to us, IIRC 2007 or 8, if the gun is involved in a fatal shooting, it NEVER gets returned, even after the case is completely adjudicated, Prosecutor's office keeps the gun in evidence forever. In the case of this particular job, if she didnt have another shotgun, she WOULD have one of mine before the night was over. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/3/2012 3:36:14 PM EDT
[#50]
Quoted:
It's probably never been challenged up to the higher courts. IMOP, if there is no arrest, they have no reason to confiscate the weapon. I do understand the reasoning behind it though. A few years ago, here in the Dallas area, a business owner shot multiple robbers on different evenings and had to buy a new shotgun after each one. I remember it because a local reporter cornered him and nearly made him cry calling him a killer. She was fired and last I checked, she still didn't have employment. It's evidence from a homicide. Charges can still be filed at a later date. |
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
