Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 2
Posted: 8/22/2004 5:18:19 AM EST
Seized firearms still held despite court order

By ALAN SCHNEPF, Staff Writer

MUSCOY - The court order is clear: Bruce VonFaulstich gets his guns back.
That was eight weeks ago, but VonFaulstich hasn't seen his 19-gun arsenal since April 2003, when a firearms task force served a search warrant on his messy three-acre spread in Muscoy.

Prosecutors have since agreed the search warrant was flawed. On June 29, San Bernardino Superior Court Judge Kenneth Barr signed an order to return the weapons, minus one assault rifle that can no longer be purchased.

Today, nearly two months later, VonFaulstich is still waiting to get his cache back.

Police and sheriff's deputies seized the guns as part of the California Armed Person Prohibited Program. It's designed to take guns away from people who obtained weapons lawfully, but can no longer legally possess the weapons because of a conviction or a mental illness.

The 2003 warrant served on VonFaulstich's compound was in error because it stated he had a felony assault conviction. That felony would have made him ineligible to own guns.

In reality, the conviction was a misdemeanor he picked up in 1982. He was working as a security guard in Corona and used Mace and a plastic flashlight to break up a fight.

Deputy District Attorney William Lee said certain misdemeanors can put a 10-year suspension on VonFaulstich's right to own guns, but nothing longer.

The California Attorney General's Office is in charge of the task force that took the weapons.

Hallye Jordan, an attorney general's spokeswoman, framed the situation as a Catch-22. If the task force complied with the court order, it might commit a felony because of registration problems with the guns, Jordan said.

"We have questions as to whether any of the weapons are registered,' Jordan said.

That doesn't sit well with VonFaulstich, an outspoken constitutionalist who likes to quote U.S. Supreme Court decisions and wear a plastic bull-riding hat while he tinkers with the junk on his property. A sign on the the gate to his property states, "No Trespass. U.S. Constitution.' He says he's going to sue and that Johnnie Cochran is interested in his case.

"This isn't China. This is America, and this is all wrong,' VonFaulstich said.

In the meantime, San Bernardino County prosecutors working on behalf of the state are requesting that another assault weapon taken in the seizure be destroyed. The two assault rifles were deemed illegal in the early 1990s. People who already possessed the guns were required to register them. Jordan said VonFaulstich did not.

Lee said VonFaulstich will get his weaponry back if he simply takes the trouble to register his guns. VonFaulstich said he doesn't need to do that. Like the assault weapons, he considers his other guns to be "grandfathered in' from any laws passed after he bought the guns.

"I'm not going to jump through hoops. I'm not a bear. I'm not a dog. I'm not going to do it,' VonFaulstich said.

One Second Amendment advocate said VonFaulstich's case isn't the first time the Armed Person Prohibited Program has mistakenly tagged someone as illegally owning guns.

"Their database is all messed up. They're constantly busting people who aren't prohibited,' said Chuck Michel, an attorney who sometimes does work for the National Rifle Association. "Rather than going after the real bad guys, they're going after the people who are inadvertently considered prohibited.'

Jordan said there is no database for the program and that mistakes are rare.

"This is the only one I've heard of, and I would like to see his numbers because I don't think he has them,' she said of Michel.

VonFaulstich did get a visit from authorities on Aug. 11, but they weren't there to return his guns.

Instead, county code-enforcement workers with sheriff's deputies backing them up broke the chain on his gate and spent hours giving him write-ups for the condition of his property.

{ENDHEADLINE} the time they left, VonFaulstich had orders to get rid of 35 inoperable vehicles on his property, the remnants of the former El Cajon Motel that operated on the original Route 66. In addition, he got notice that three of his structures were substandard and that people needed to quit living in two travel trailers and a bus.

VonFaulstich says the visit was unconstitutional because code-enforcement workers are not peace officers.

Further, he said it happened because he's standing up to the government.

County code enforcement chief Randy Rogers said his department was responding to complaints from neighbors.


Link Posted: 8/22/2004 5:21:04 AM EST
I can think of a good reply, but it would get my account locked.

Link Posted: 8/22/2004 5:31:32 AM EST
Link Posted: 8/22/2004 5:33:09 AM EST


Kali
Link Posted: 8/22/2004 5:36:27 AM EST
[Last Edit: 8/22/2004 5:36:45 AM EST by TexasRooter]
Sounds to me like he needs to buy a D8 and some 1/2 plate.
Link Posted: 8/22/2004 5:36:44 AM EST
Isn't that nice....
Link Posted: 8/22/2004 5:38:51 AM EST
[Last Edit: 8/22/2004 5:39:37 AM EST by FLAL1A]
It is harrassment, and it sucks, but if I were an antigun prosecutor out to grind this guy's face in the dirt, I'd do it the easy way: return the guns and then throw his ass in jail for possession of unregistered firearms. The delivery of the guns by the government would be no more and obstacle to prosecution than is the delivery of dope by the government in a drug sting.

This guy is playing with fire. Maybe he should move to Nevada and demand their return there.
Link Posted: 8/22/2004 5:41:33 AM EST

Originally Posted By Red_Beard:
I can think of a good reply, but it would get my account locked.



Yeah.
Link Posted: 8/22/2004 5:43:08 AM EST
Link Posted: 8/22/2004 5:44:23 AM EST

Originally Posted By TexasRooter:
Sounds to me like he needs to buy a D8 and some 1/2 plate.





Link Posted: 8/22/2004 5:44:57 AM EST

Originally Posted By Tactical_Jew:
That doesn't sit well with VonFaulstich, an outspoken constitutionalist(This is why they are after him. These JBT's are just a bunch of Nazi's) who likes to quote U.S. Supreme Court decisions and wear a plastic bull-riding hat while he tinkers with the junk on his property. A sign on the the gate to his property states, "No Trespass. U.S. Constitution.' He says he's going to sue and that Johnnie Cochran is interested in his case.

In the meantime, San Bernardino County prosecutors working on behalf of the state are requesting that another assault weapon taken in the seizure be destroyed. The two assault rifles were deemed illegal in the early 1990s. People who already possessed the guns were required to register them. Jordan said VonFaulstich did not.(Kali government = Nazi JBT's)

Lee said VonFaulstich will get his weaponry back if he simply takes the trouble to register his guns. VonFaulstich said he doesn't need to do that. Like the assault weapons, he considers his other guns to be "grandfathered in' from any laws passed after he bought the guns.

"Their database is all messed up. They're constantly busting people who aren't prohibited,' said Chuck Michel, an attorney who sometimes does work for the National Rifle Association. "Rather than going after the real bad guys, they're going after the people who are inadvertently considered prohibited.'(And I bet they are toooo proud to admit that their system is messed up. Butt wipes!)

VonFaulstich did get a visit from authorities on Aug. 11, but they weren't there to return his guns.

Instead, county code-enforcement workers with sheriff's deputies backing them up broke the chain on his gate and spent hours giving him write-ups for the condition of his property. HARASSMENT! When are groups of people going to not put up with this?

Further, he said it happened because he's standing up to the government.

County code enforcement chief Randy Rogers said his department was responding to complaints from neighbors. (Yeah, right.)






Link Posted: 8/22/2004 5:51:41 AM EST
[Last Edit: 8/22/2004 5:53:14 AM EST by Airwolf]
Yup, the guy DARED to get "uppity" with the Man and not play compliant sheep and now they are paying him back as only a gooberment agency can.

Disgusting.

I wish Lockyer would get abducted by aliens in the middle of the night and never been seen again.

I can't get out of this lunatic asylum fast enough to suit me, hopefully before someone sends the cops after my "arsenal" (or is that "cache")?
Link Posted: 8/22/2004 5:54:07 AM EST
I'd think that a false arrest suit would net enough to replace the guns and fund his relocation to a free state.
Link Posted: 8/22/2004 6:01:30 AM EST
Link Posted: 8/22/2004 6:29:53 AM EST
[Last Edit: 8/22/2004 6:35:00 AM EST by photoman]
Why do they have to give them all back but the one gun that can't be bought anymore? they should be giving all the guns back.

ETA Registered or not the reason for taking them was flawed. the warrent was flawed as such, registered or not it's an illegal search and seizure. They need togive him everylast gun back.
Link Posted: 8/22/2004 6:38:57 AM EST
WHAT THE FUCK!
Link Posted: 8/22/2004 6:41:46 AM EST

Originally Posted By photoman:
Why do they have to give them all back but the one gun that can't be bought anymore? they should be giving all the guns back.

ETA Registered or not the reason for taking them was flawed. the warrent was flawed as such, registered or not it's an illegal search and seizure. They need togive him everylast gun back.



Because under Ca law (apparently) that gun is contraband, and can't be legally owned by anyone. They don't give the dope back after a successful attack on a search warrant, either.
Link Posted: 8/22/2004 6:44:25 AM EST
[Last Edit: 8/22/2004 6:45:19 AM EST by Specop_007]

Originally Posted By TexasRooter:
Sounds to me like he needs to buy a D8 and some 1/2 plate.



Haha, took me a minute to get that one....

I heard it best here
"A patriot must always be ready to defend his country against his government."
- Edward Abbey
Link Posted: 8/22/2004 7:06:19 AM EST
"19-gun arsenal"
"messy three-acre spread"
"VonFaulstich's compound"

He must be evil and has to be put down by the Gov.


GM
Link Posted: 8/22/2004 7:06:42 AM EST
The people doing that to him are the enemies of the constitution and of America. They should be slain where they stand the very instant they come onto his property to do him harm in any way. I have no sympathy for them.
Link Posted: 8/22/2004 7:13:34 AM EST

Originally Posted By TexasRooter:
Sounds to me like he needs to buy a D8 and some 1/2 plate.



Yep looks a good case for dozer rage
Link Posted: 8/22/2004 7:31:25 AM EST

Originally Posted By Waldo:

Originally Posted By TexasRooter:
Sounds to me like he needs to buy a D8 and some 1/2 plate.



Yep looks a good case for dozer rage




....DON"T MAKE ME GO DOZER ON YOU ....
Link Posted: 8/22/2004 8:56:11 AM EST
It wouldn't surprise me if they push him just far enough to make him want to press the reset button.

Of course, he'll just be described as another lone gun-nut wacko who "went on a shooting spree."
Link Posted: 8/22/2004 9:10:54 AM EST
Link Posted: 8/22/2004 9:23:56 AM EST

Originally Posted By TomJefferson:
I guess it's kind of hard to get all those guns back that are now in the personal collections of were sold to their friends by the local LEOs and city officials.

Sorry couldn't resist.

Tj



fixed :D
Link Posted: 8/22/2004 9:33:28 AM EST

Originally Posted By Paul:
I'm not currently aware of any weapons band in the early 1990's that you can't possess now - if they were legally registered in 1999. deemed illegal that's just flat out wrong on at least three levels - nobody deems shit illegal - it's judges and leglisators enforcing and passing laws that make something illegal. The ban is straight up un-Constitutional last time I checked, and finally even the un-Constitutional law permits them if registered - it didn't make them illegal.



I would wager that the weapons they are refering to must be banned rifles under the original Roberti-Roos. If I remember correctly, Colt and other manufacturers went to court against the R-R ban and lost their case in 92 or 93 when the California Supreme Court upheld R-R.
Link Posted: 8/22/2004 9:34:35 AM EST
this sucks
Link Posted: 8/22/2004 12:13:05 PM EST
Sounds like the kind of guy everyone would love to have a neighbor.
Link Posted: 8/22/2004 2:42:25 PM EST

Originally Posted By AR15fan:
Sounds like the kind of guy everyone would love to have a neighbor.



because he lives like a pig or because he has gunz?

Link Posted: 8/22/2004 4:30:50 PM EST

Originally Posted By photoman:
ETA Registered or not the reason for taking them was flawed. the warrant was flawed as such, registered or not it's an illegal search and seizure. They need to give him every last gun back.



So going by your theory, if a drug case gets tossed out on a technicality we have to give the cocaine back to the dealer?
Does that area require registration of all long guns?
Link Posted: 8/22/2004 4:45:49 PM EST

Originally Posted By tcsd1236:

Originally Posted By photoman:
ETA Registered or not the reason for taking them was flawed. the warrant was flawed as such, registered or not it's an illegal search and seizure. They need to give him every last gun back.



So going by your theory, if a drug case gets tossed out on a technicality we have to give the cocaine back to the dealer?
Does that area require registration of all long guns?




You're an idiot.
Link Posted: 8/22/2004 4:49:03 PM EST
[Last Edit: 8/22/2004 4:50:22 PM EST by fight4yourrights]
1. Can't give back what you already sold

- and / or -

2. Takes time to get them back from the Private Collections they went into

3. Why give them back at all? What's he going to do, sue?
Link Posted: 8/22/2004 5:37:50 PM EST

Originally Posted By 1776:

Originally Posted By tcsd1236:

Originally Posted By photoman:
ETA Registered or not the reason for taking them was flawed. the warrant was flawed as such, registered or not it's an illegal search and seizure. They need to give him every last gun back.



So going by your theory, if a drug case gets tossed out on a technicality we have to give the cocaine back to the dealer?
Does that area require registration of all long guns?




You're an idiot.






Link Posted: 8/22/2004 5:59:50 PM EST
[Last Edit: 8/22/2004 6:02:06 PM EST by tcsd1236]

Originally Posted By 1776:

You're an idiot.


You have to try harder than that.My point was valid.Nor was I the only person to make that comment, as I saw once I read the thread in its entirety.
Oh, and the repeated comments about the weapons going into private collections are really bizarre. That kind of stuff might have happened in the old days, but would be impossible today under modern evidence control procedures.
Link Posted: 8/22/2004 6:04:22 PM EST

Originally Posted By tcsd1236:

Originally Posted By 1776:

You're an idiot.


You have to try harder than that.My point was valid.



Precisely so. The classification of the weapons as contraband is unconstitutional and/or stupid; however, if they are legally contraband, then no person may have any protectable ownership or possessory interest in them. If the law in Ca is as I (and apparently Tcsd) take it to be, the guns are exactly like so many kilos of cocaine seized in the execution of a defective warrant.
Link Posted: 8/23/2004 7:21:57 AM EST

Originally Posted By tcsd1236:

Oh, and the repeated comments about the weapons going into private collections are really bizarre. That kind of stuff might have happened in the old days, but would be impossible today under modern evidence control procedures.




[Lundberg]Um, yeah, I'm gonna go ahead and hafta sorta disagree with you there.[/Lundberg]


There was a news story posted here a few months back citing an investigation or arrests that were made in a large CA city dept. relating to stolen evidence firearms.

Improbable today = yes
Impossible today = no
Link Posted: 8/23/2004 7:30:11 AM EST

Originally Posted By 1776:

Originally Posted By tcsd1236:

Originally Posted By photoman:
ETA Registered or not the reason for taking them was flawed. the warrant was flawed as such, registered or not it's an illegal search and seizure. They need to give him every last gun back.



So going by your theory, if a drug case gets tossed out on a technicality we have to give the cocaine back to the dealer?
Does that area require registration of all long guns?




You're an idiot.



You're right!

He is an idiot!!!
Link Posted: 8/26/2004 8:10:16 PM EST
If it is impossible to restore them to him, they should have to pay him free market value, from OUTSIDE of Cali. For each of the guns.
Link Posted: 8/26/2004 10:01:46 PM EST
Link Posted: 8/26/2004 10:19:55 PM EST

He says he's going to sue and that Johnnie Cochran is interested in his case.


I wonder if Johnny will use the "Chewbacca Defense"??
Link Posted: 8/26/2004 10:22:30 PM EST

If it is impossible to restore them to him, they should have to pay him free market value, from OUTSIDE of Cali. For each of the guns.


Minus the illegal ones I agree. However, this guy DOES sound like a freakin SLOB!

It's SO much harder to look legitimate if you scream white trash. And liek it or not, we live in a very appearance driven society.
Link Posted: 8/26/2004 11:15:08 PM EST
[Last Edit: 8/26/2004 11:20:52 PM EST by G-Rated]
People outside of CA are often living in a fantasy world. They talk often of "from my cold dead fingers", "revolution", etc. No such things will happen. Outside of LA and the Bay Area, CA has a lot of gun owners and is fairly conservative...on par with the rest of the country. A simple look to CA will show you the future.


Here's what we have:

-incremental ban (AR15/AK)
-state registration of handguns
-new "armed prohibited persons database" created by cross-referenceing the handgun database with records of whatever misdemeanors or felonies they decide on. Individuals are identified and search warrants are then issued.

So, after the ban on AR15/AKs, a handfull of people registered them, while most everyone else didn't. Most likely, the majority didn't know of the new law or said "F-it". There were no mass confinscations, no major confrontations. The guns were simply deemed illegal. Most holders of unregistered AWs go about their lives as usual until the unlucky situation happens where they get searched for whatever reason. Maybe your neighbor told the police he thought he saw pot plants inside your house, maybe you dispatch a feral animal and the police decide it's animal cruelty. In this case, it was a screw-up combined with the new "armed prohibited persons" program. Individual searched, nasty assault weapon siezed. Unfortunately for the CA DOJ, they made an error with the warrant and they will not get to prosecute this guy, but they still get to keep the AW.

The end result is that 99% of the people never hear about it and 99.9% don't give a crap.

To add icing on the cake, I was told by one gun-shop that unpaid parking tickets will result in you being denied during the CA background check.
Link Posted: 8/26/2004 11:24:38 PM EST

Originally Posted By Toxie:

If it is impossible to restore them to him, they should have to pay him free market value, from OUTSIDE of Cali. For each of the guns.


Minus the illegal ones I agree. However, this guy DOES sound like a freakin SLOB!

It's SO much harder to look legitimate if you scream white trash. And liek it or not, we live in a very appearance driven society.



That reminds me, I need to clean up the place and pick up all the loose ammo and gun parts.
Link Posted: 8/26/2004 11:25:15 PM EST
Link Posted: 8/27/2004 12:02:44 AM EST

Originally Posted By swingset:

He says he's going to sue and that Johnnie Cochran is interested in his case.


I wonder if Johnny will use the "Chewbacca Defense"??



Link Posted: 8/27/2004 2:07:59 AM EST
Link Posted: 8/27/2004 10:36:51 AM EST

Originally Posted By FLAL1A:
It is harrassment, and it sucks, but if I were an antigun prosecutor out to grind this guy's face in the dirt, I'd do it the easy way: return the guns and then throw his ass in jail for possession of unregistered firearms. The delivery of the guns by the government would be no more and obstacle to prosecution than is the delivery of dope by the government in a drug sting.

This guy is playing with fire. Maybe he should move to Nevada and demand their return there.



Isn't what they're doing to him what either you or Johninaustin* called "paperfucking" a guy in a thread a week or so ago?


* I'm pretty sure now it was John, but still not sure.
Link Posted: 8/27/2004 10:46:43 AM EST

Originally Posted By tcsd1236:

Originally Posted By 1776:

You're an idiot.


You have to try harder than that.My point was valid.Nor was I the only person to make that comment, as I saw once I read the thread in its entirety.
Oh, and the repeated comments about the weapons going into private collections are really bizarre. That kind of stuff might have happened in the old days, but would be impossible today under modern evidence control procedures.



Sorry, tcsd. If he has to try harder than that, so do you. While most of what you and and FLAL1A have said is "legally correct*," the highlighted part is laughable when classified as an absolute.

I'll give you that it's both harder and less common, but by no means "impossible."


*Though I believe most 2A laws to be un-friggin'-constitutional, apparently the SCrOTUS, as a whole, believes otherwise. Hopefully, someday, they'll come around.

FWIW, I do understand your drug analogy/analogies and your input is appreciated (though again, for the record, not necessarily agreed with/upon by me).
Link Posted: 8/27/2004 10:47:39 AM EST

Originally Posted By goodmedicine:
"19-gun arsenalCOLLECTION"
"messyRURAL three-acre spread"
"VonFaulstich's compoundRANCH"



Well doesnt that paint a different picture. It's not what is said but how it is said.
Link Posted: 8/27/2004 10:48:13 AM EST

Originally Posted By Dracster:

Originally Posted By tcsd1236:

Oh, and the repeated comments about the weapons going into private collections are really bizarre. That kind of stuff might have happened in the old days, but would be impossible today under modern evidence control procedures.




[Lundberg]Um, yeah, I'm gonna go ahead and hafta sorta disagree with you there.[/Lundberg]


There was a news story posted here a few months back citing an investigation or arrests that were made in a large CA city dept. relating to stolen evidence firearms.

Improbable today = yes
Impossible today = no



@tcsd: Oh, yeah, sorta what he said, though I was thinking about some other cases.
Link Posted: 8/27/2004 10:50:00 AM EST

Originally Posted By Combat_Jack:
If it is impossible to restore them to him, they should have to pay him free market value, from OUTSIDE of Cali. For each of the guns.



Hey, C_J, don't you mean fair market value? What? Oh, no - you meant what you said, and you're sticking by it? Oh, I get it now........

Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 2
Top Top