Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Site Notices
11/22/2017 10:05:29 PM
Posted: 9/20/2004 8:10:51 AM EST
link

(Dalzell-AP) Sept. 19, 2004 - Sumter County Sheriff's deputies seized an arsenal of 124 guns after responding to domestic violence complaint involving a 78-year-old man.

A Department of Social Services case worker had reported that Alex B. Deas had squeezed his wife's arm until the skin tore.

Deputies heard from family members about the gun collection and obtained a search warrant. A search turned up a $100,000 worth of weapons and ammunition.

Sumter County Sheriff Tommy Mims says the arsenal included a German practice grenade and a machine gun mounted in one of the upstairs bedrooms.

Deas is charged with criminal domestic violence and unlawful storing and keeping of a machine gun. The machine gun charge can bring a ten-year sentence or a $10,000 fine.
Link Posted: 9/20/2004 8:12:41 AM EST

Originally Posted By renotse:
link

Deputies heard from family members about the gun collection and obtained a search warrant.




scary.
Link Posted: 9/20/2004 8:17:56 AM EST

The machine gun charge can bring a ten-year sentence or a $10,000 fine.


That sounds "off" to me...

Sly
Link Posted: 9/20/2004 8:23:19 AM EST
AAAAHHHHH!!!!!

He had a practice grenade! That is aweful, simply terrible...
Link Posted: 9/20/2004 8:25:19 AM EST
Will they also remove all knives, bats, blunt instruments, etc...?

After all they are trying to "protect" his wife, aren't they?


Deputies heard from family members about the gun collection and obtained a search warrant.


Yup, scary is right.
Link Posted: 9/20/2004 8:30:14 AM EST

Originally Posted By atomicferret:
AAAAHHHHH!!!!!

He had a practice grenade! That is aweful, simply terrible...



Having a practice grenade (or an inert one) in the PRK is an infraction for the first "offence" and a Misdemeanor for the second (or later) time punishable for up to one year in prison. That is unless your a gang member, then it's a Misdemeanor the first time.

Yeah, just one more reason to despise this fucked up state.
Link Posted: 9/20/2004 8:36:09 AM EST
Anyone hear if the "machine gun" was a real F/A or just a non-gun or semi?
Link Posted: 9/20/2004 8:36:15 AM EST
wonder if the "family members" will ever see any of that value as in inheritance..
Link Posted: 9/20/2004 8:39:02 AM EST
I'm surprised nobody noticed the line about this 78yo man breaking the skin with his grip.
Link Posted: 9/20/2004 8:44:11 AM EST

"Deputies heard from family members about the gun collection"


Poor guy, married into a family of brown shirts.
Link Posted: 9/20/2004 8:56:03 AM EST
Funny how everyone is automaticlly labeling the male as the grand victim in the incident without knowing the full details of what happened.
Link Posted: 9/20/2004 9:11:24 AM EST


... A search turned up a $100,000 worth of weapons and ammunition...



Newbie!
Link Posted: 9/20/2004 9:18:54 AM EST

Originally Posted By Airwolf:

Originally Posted By atomicferret:
AAAAHHHHH!!!!!

He had a practice grenade! That is aweful, simply terrible...



Having a practice grenade (or an inert one) in the PRK is an infraction for the first "offence" and a Misdemeanor for the second (or later) time punishable for up to one year in prison. That is unless your a gang member, then it's a Misdemeanor the first time.

Yeah, just one more reason to despise this fucked up state.


Really? I have one that I bought at the swap meet a billion years ago for $5. It's an inert pineapple grenade. Hmm.
Link Posted: 9/20/2004 9:20:55 AM EST

Originally Posted By NCPatrolAR:
Funny how everyone is automaticlly labeling the male as the grand victim in the incident without knowing the full details of what happened.



well come on he grabbed her, big fucking deal. All a woman has to do in most states is say you touched her and your toast there goes your right to own a weapon.
Link Posted: 9/20/2004 9:30:53 AM EST

Originally Posted By Mak762:

Originally Posted By NCPatrolAR:
Funny how everyone is automaticlly labeling the male as the grand victim in the incident without knowing the full details of what happened.



well come on he grabbed her, big fucking deal. All a woman has to do in most states is say you touched her and your toast there goes your right to own a weapon.



Not only say but ACCUSE. If she files for a protection order you are done, no guns, nothing. I know a guy that had this done to him by his ex-wife just to piss him off. Had to "sell" his firearms to comply with the law. The PO went away but not after she raked him over the coals. I can vouch that this guy was not a threat before, during, or anytime after the PO was filed, but she had to push his buttons.
Link Posted: 9/20/2004 9:31:41 AM EST
You are only proving my point. Thanks
Link Posted: 9/20/2004 10:01:17 AM EST
[Last Edit: 9/20/2004 10:02:02 AM EST by magnum_99]

Originally Posted By NCPatrolAR:
You are only proving my point. Thanks



No GENIUS, the point everyone is making is how incredibly simplistic it is for a (so-called) "victim" of DV to put into motion process to make it impossible for the "accused" to continue to own or possess guns.

Protections orders are ROUTINELY granted in divorce cases (and in some cases, as a matter of procedure without ANY showing of violence) and other DV cases. Moreover, a mere MISDEMEANOR for DV results in the loss of all 2nd Amendment rights. Thank Billy Bob Clinton for that one.

The point is that the context of DV is simply another way to rob gun owners of their rights where it was NEVER shown that any actual incident involving a weapon occurred, but merely based upon the liklihood that a weapon may be used in the future.

Hmmm, can you say denial of due process?

The law sucks. It's merely a "feel good" measure to remedy past wrongs and inaction by screwed-up police and prosecutors who either ignored or poo-pooed womens' legitimage claims that they were victims of abuse.

But guess who pays?
Link Posted: 9/20/2004 10:07:58 AM EST

Originally Posted By Wobblin-Goblin:
I'm surprised nobody noticed the line about this 78yo man breaking the skin with his grip.



While inexcusable and all, there may be a medical reason that her skin tore. Certain meds such as prednisone, when combined with the natural effects of aging will cause the skin to become quite thin and fragile. I have seen old folks tear thier own skin quite badly, resulting in massive superficial wounds. If she takes any one of many geriatric related disease drugs her skin might just be very prone to accidental tearing.

Or not.
Link Posted: 9/20/2004 10:11:11 AM EST
Thanks for telling me what comes with DV cases...its not like I deal with them each and every night I go to work. Personally I cant stand half the DV laws policies in place currently
Top Top