Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login

Site Notices
Posted: 1/9/2003 5:19:44 PM EST
[url]http://www.nbc5.com/news/1879176/detail.html[/url] I guess this shouldn't suprise me... Guns, Ammo Found Following Routine Traffic Stop Rifles, Handguns And Ammunition Found In Suspect's Home POSTED: 10:07 a.m. CST January 9, 2003 UPDATED: 10:28 a.m. CST January 9, 2003 CHICAGO -- A minor traffic two-car accident turned into a gun bust for Chicago police on the northwest side. Police found a small amount of heroin and about a thousand rounds of ammunition in one of the vehicles. After questioning one of the drivers, police recovered from his two residences 16 handguns, 31 rifles, and thousands more rounds of ammunition. NBC5 reported that the man was charged with unlawful possession of a controlled substance, but will likely not face charges for the weapons, as he appears to be a gun collector. Police, however, say they will confiscate the guns to keep them off the street. Don't you love that last line?
Link Posted: 1/9/2003 5:35:13 PM EST
Charged with a crime. No trial but his legal property seized (stolen) by the state, never to be seen again regardles of the outcome of his trial. Anyone want to tell me again that this country hasn't become a police state in everthing but name?
Link Posted: 1/9/2003 5:41:38 PM EST
Uhm, not to sound reactionary, but... I really wouldn't like an armed white horse user around. Especially when he runs low on his heroine supply. Just as I wouldn't like an armed drunk guy around. Hey, I drink, but impared judgment is impared judgment. Collector or not...sorry, but driving around with H, that's a Game Over sign.
Link Posted: 1/9/2003 5:44:55 PM EST
a. I'm not comfortable with drug-users having access to firearms b. I do not believe the state (especially the police!) can confiscate your personal property without due process. The police can only enforce laws, they can't [b]make[/b] laws.
Link Posted: 1/9/2003 5:46:21 PM EST
not face charges on the guns but they took them away BS fucking chicago gestapo
Link Posted: 1/9/2003 5:54:29 PM EST
Originally Posted By ChuckT: a. I'm not comfortable with drug-users having access to firearms
View Quote
So, people who drink alcohol shouldn't have access to firearms, or people who smoke, or people on prescribed drugs? I
Link Posted: 1/9/2003 6:01:08 PM EST
Damnit [b]Hydguy[/b], you beat me to it. I fear drunk gun owners more than junkies running low for more than one reason. One big reason would be that considering the availability of alcohol, you have a much better chance of running afoul a pissed-off, illgically-minded drunk.
Link Posted: 1/9/2003 6:02:46 PM EST
I do not agree with their last statement at all or the process. But if he is a heroine user how can he not be an addict. If he is an addict then by the wording on the "yellow form" (not sure of the number) then he can't buy a firearm. Hard to collect if you can't buy. I agree that he should not have them if he is not responsible but there should be due process to take the guns away.
Link Posted: 1/9/2003 6:16:13 PM EST
Originally Posted By Hydguy: So, people who drink alcohol shouldn't have access to firearms, or people who smoke, or people on prescribed drugs? I
View Quote
Would you want a drunk guy to be carrying? It's one thing if the guy has whatever at home, locked away. It's another when it's all of 5 feet from him. What if he's an angry drunk? Or a suicidal/depressed drunk? Me, I'm a happy drunk, but I still wouldn't want to be around a firearm, just in case. Cigarettes don't impare your judgment. Alcohol does. So does heroin. So can prescribed drugs, depending on the drug. It's called common sense...
Link Posted: 1/9/2003 6:33:52 PM EST
Funny how they always "find" a small amount of some drug...
Link Posted: 1/9/2003 6:49:43 PM EST
I agree that I don't like the idea of anyone with impaired judgment handling firearms. That being said it sure sounds like the concepts of due process and innocent until proven guilty have been flushed down the crapper in this case.
Link Posted: 1/9/2003 6:51:10 PM EST
I wonder under who's authority did they search the house(s). Something seems fishy here. Hope he didn't give them the ok to do so, and wouldn't think an arrest for drug possession would get you a warrant from a judge, but who knows in Chicago.
Link Posted: 1/9/2003 7:05:11 PM EST
Originally Posted By Hydguy:
Originally Posted By ChuckT: a. I'm not comfortable with drug-users having access to firearms
View Quote
So, people who drink alcohol shouldn't have access to firearms, or people who smoke, or people on prescribed drugs? I
View Quote
1. alcohol, tobacco, and prescribed drugs are [b]not[/b] illegal. this is an important point. 2. heroin is illegal for a very good reason, it is enormously addictive. people who buy/sell/use heroin frequently/always break other laws such as robbery, assault, etc. major drug dealers have no qualms about popping people who get in their way. 3. when you drink, or are affected by prescribed medication, you shouldn't handle firearms.
Link Posted: 1/10/2003 4:38:53 AM EST
I think what is key here is this: How did they start at his car, and then end up at his house, and then take all of his weapons from his house. AND, not charge him with any weapons violations? Oh yeah. It's Chicago. What the hell was I thinking?
Link Posted: 1/10/2003 4:40:03 AM EST
[Last Edit: 1/10/2003 4:40:15 AM EST by bosox]
This line also pisses me off.
Police, however, say they will confiscate the guns to keep them off the street.
View Quote
Link Posted: 1/10/2003 4:44:07 AM EST
Link Posted: 1/10/2003 4:45:48 AM EST
Did they find the guns first and then the heroin? Wonder whose it is?
Link Posted: 1/10/2003 4:52:01 AM EST
[Last Edit: 1/10/2003 4:52:47 AM EST by Torf]
Possession of any controlled substance anywhere in the US is a crime. Remember that in Chicago, guns are mostly banned anyway. There are precious few exceptions. They probably confiscated the guns because the owner did not meet the legal requirements in the city. The news reporter obviously did not know what the real story was, and made some rash assumptions and reported them as "the news". It happens all the time. Lesson: If you own guns illegally, don't do drugs.
Link Posted: 1/10/2003 4:55:47 AM EST
I don't think that smokers should be allowed to have guns. Heroin and booze is OK though. I used to be a chain smokeer and let me tell you, there were times that I would have killed for a cigarette.
Link Posted: 1/10/2003 4:58:14 AM EST
Is possession of heroin in Chicago a felony? If so, doesn't that restrict him from owning firearms?
View Quote
Has anyone noticed that this attitude (not singling you out medicmandan [:)] ) is becoming more and more prevalent in today’s society? If the crime is a felony then so be it. But as I understand he has been arrested and charged, NOT CONVICTED. Again, so much for innocent until proven guilty and due process. It's all part of the ongoing erosion of our rights.
Link Posted: 1/10/2003 5:03:50 AM EST
[Last Edit: 1/10/2003 5:22:36 AM EST by hound]
Airwolf, To back you up and give a second point of veiw, Have you noticed that everyone is being criminalized so that NO ONE will be able to own guns? How many of you boys have "heroes" that were in Vietnam, loaded to the gills and using an M-16? Funny how everyone now is so PC.
Link Posted: 1/10/2003 5:10:14 AM EST
The man will get his guns back, even if they are released into someone elses custody. It IS illegal to confiscate the firearms and keep them, however, in my experience, they've always given them back AS LONG AS THE GUY GOES THROUGH THE PROCESS TO GET THEM BACK.
Link Posted: 1/10/2003 5:32:17 AM EST
Hound, I agree totally. Just take a look at how many crimes are being classed as felonies. I'm 45. I can remember when it was rape, armed robbery, murder, kidnapping (big things where one person deliberately hurt another) and crimes involving LARGE sums of money or property. I've said it before and I'll say it again. At the rate this is going someday it will be a misdemeanor to let your dog crap on the sidewalk and if "special circumstances" are invoked, you'll be going away for 5 to 10. Crazy? Just look at the War On (some) Drugs to see it happening. So much of the legal system is about how to generate revenue for the government and "deny your rights for the rest of your life". Nothing to do with keeping the peace or justice. The decent into hell began when the cops became “law enforcement” rather than Peace Officers.
Link Posted: 1/10/2003 5:39:48 AM EST
[Last Edit: 1/10/2003 5:40:46 AM EST by 2whiskeyP]
Yes the guy is a sh!tbag for having illegal drugs. He is even stupider because he is a gun collecter and should know the consequences. However, not being taken through due process is a BS load of crap IMHO!
Originally Posted By ChuckT: b. I do not believe the state (especially the police!) can confiscate your personal property without due process. The police can only enforce laws, they can't [b]make[/b] laws.
View Quote
[ROFL2]
Link Posted: 1/10/2003 5:57:11 AM EST
As posted by Evil Ed:
Uhm, not to sound reactionary, but... I really wouldn't like an armed white horse user around. Especially when he runs low on his heroine supply. Just as I wouldn't like an armed drunk guy around. Hey, I drink, but impared judgment is impared judgment. Collector or not...sorry, but driving around with H, that's a Game Over sign.
View Quote
Uh, Evil: I don't do drugs, nor do I condone their usage, BUT, how can YOU turn what you would "like" into Law. No, I wouldn't "like" to be around an armed drug user or a drunk either. It, however, is not MY place to shove MY wants on you. Do you have kids? Have you ever spanked your kids? (Note: I did not say "beat", I said "spanked") When your neighbor doesn't "like" to be around child "beaters", should HE be able to impose his will on you? Have you ever gone more than 20 mph over the speed limit? Mabey "I" don't want to be around such a reckless lawbreaker as yourself. Have you ever honked your horn at, or yelled out the window at a bothersome driver? That shows me that you are a volatile person and I don't "Like" being around you. Therefore, if you should be disarmed.[V]
Link Posted: 1/10/2003 6:23:44 AM EST
Link Posted: 1/10/2003 5:48:08 PM EST
You are NOT a felon until convicted. I am wondering about the heroine they "found" myself. The cops do illegally keep recovered stolen guns. Ask me for my police report number and how helpful the BATF was when I ask about my stolen pistol being returned. IMHO, his guns are gone for good, mebbe a new UN sculpture is on the way. With the police state the way it is now I would be thankful I wasn't beaten or maimed in the process. He is alive with a clean record so he can start his collection all over again.
Link Posted: 1/10/2003 6:00:54 PM EST
[Last Edit: 1/10/2003 6:01:39 PM EST by Nitrofish]
Oh...I thought you meant "Guns and Ammo"magazine found in car.....[;)]
Link Posted: 1/10/2003 6:12:34 PM EST
Still, I cannot figure out how they started at his car and ended up at his house. And, if the weapons were illegal, you can be sure as shit that chicago would have charged him with a weapons violation - which they didn't. Not to defend the use of heroin - I am more concerned with the 'seizure' of this mans weapons.
Link Posted: 1/10/2003 6:37:45 PM EST
[Last Edit: 1/10/2003 6:39:05 PM EST by llanero]
[b] I do not believe the state (especially the police!) can confiscate your personal property without due process[/b] Happens all the time thanks to the war on drugs--even without criminal convictions they nab the property in civil court--technically due process but it's a streeeetch. [b]Just take a look at how many crimes are being classed as felonies.[/b] No Sheit man! In Missouri, possession or even knowledge of a MISDEMEANOR amount of controlled substance in your home is considered a FELONY. Cops find a roach in an ashtray in your living room? You are Maintaining a Public Nuisance (class III felony, punishable with up to three years of lodging in a facility maintained by the Missouri Department of Corrections). It's too damned easy to commit a felony these days....[:(]
Link Posted: 1/10/2003 6:44:41 PM EST
Disregarding the obvious, that, being that this is 2003 and all, in all likelihood due process won't appear in this case, I see the last line in the article as a Schrodinger's Cat kinda thing. That is, it's just as likely that the "reporter" fabricated the part about the guns being confiscated as it is that they actually were confisticated. (Either way, though, they're gone --- poof!, as if by magic.) cynic
Link Posted: 1/10/2003 7:23:09 PM EST
[Last Edit: 1/10/2003 7:33:34 PM EST by SGB]
Link Posted: 1/10/2003 7:28:41 PM EST
Link Posted: 1/10/2003 8:44:47 PM EST
Originally Posted By SGB:
Originally Posted By TheRicker: Do you know how easy it is to plant a little "evidence" in a car full of ammo? I'd bet money that this guy's never even seen heroin.
View Quote
Yeah right all evidence is planted and the prisons are full on only innocent people.[rolleyes]
View Quote
Read the papers Saturday, about our fine outgoing Governor Mr. George Ryan. He let four prisoners out on Friday.[:)]
Link Posted: 1/11/2003 2:00:48 AM EST
Handguns are pretty much banned in Chicago. In some states people under felony charges can not legally possess firearms. Heroin possession is a felony in any state.
Link Posted: 1/11/2003 2:19:24 AM EST
Originally Posted By lokt: Funny how they always "find" a small amount of some drug...
View Quote
I'll second that thought.
Top Top