From TCSD's post I don't see him coming apart or acting like a Nazi.  It seems childish to resort to calling someone names because they don't agree with you.  I would rather be stopped by him than the author of this thread.

In tcsd1236's very first post he demonstrates his lack of knowledge concerning trespass laws, his lack of reading comprehension in picking up on my relating that my wife also asked her brother to go out side.  He wraps up his very first post by insinuating that I am a lair.



Now just whom is calling whom names?

tcsd1236's earns his being categorized with little Nazi-like minded Gestapo types with his statement of...



Pardon me, but in all the law classes that I've ever attended if you are told to get out, by law, you have to get out, unless there is some type of crime in progress, there was not any crime in progress, once the trespass violation was abated.

To display such arrogance, and ignorance of the law and the constitution is worthy of the label little Nazi-like minded Gestapo type.

You either support and defend the whole constitution or not, you JIMBEAM don't seem to comprehend that.  Someone who has sworn an oath to uphold and defend the constitution is not at liberty to trample on any of my rights in carry out their responsibilities.

Furthermore tcsd1236 was not there, and he attributed actions to the incident that did not occur and that were not related in any of my posts, but he did not let that stop him.



He's calling me a lair again.



Here he is calling me a lair again.

Of course all of this is readily available in the posts should any one care to read them throuly enough to see that tcsd1236 doesn't give a hoot about the consitution or any of your rights, he's more concerned with going



and



Now if that's not a little Nazi-like minded Gestapo type then I don't know what is.

There are none so blind than those who will not see.

[whacko]   [sniper]

[img] http://www.ushmm.org/outreach/34138.htm[/img]

Try2TakeIt,
Your initial post did'nt say anything about your wife asking her brother to leave, that statement came later. I don't need glasses or have comprehension problems. That she asked to leave would change the situation. I do have one question for you. This occurred  well over a year ago, right? In that time have you got a copy of the report?  I'm almost reluctant to post in this thread again. It seems like everyone who disagrees with anything you said gets the full fury of your name calling, generalizations, and insults.

[BLUE][size=3]Lessons I've learned from this thread

* Many will automatically assume you aren't telling the whole truth, instead believing that the cops MUST have been justified, or they wouldn't have behaved the way they did

* Many will attribute behaviors to you that aren't based in fact, but based on their personal biases

* For all those that claim knowing your rights will protect you, not one of those folks have come forward and acknowledge that we have a former LEO who knew the law and knew his rights and STILL got trampled by System

* For all those that state "get a lawyer and sue the bastards" I haven't seen one of you address the issue that this man DID try to sue and nobody would take the case w/out an exorbenant amount of cash up front

* Like so many issues today, this thread clearly separates AR15.com people into opposing camps

* Few people will give you the benefit of the doubt, always assuming the LAW had a good reason to do what they did

* For all the talk of "my home is my castle", not too many seem to actually view it that way[/BLUE][/size=3]

True the initial posting did not include the above, however, I did make the information available in my follow up to tcsd1236 post.

tcsd1236 then posted the following.



Now, given that I was not, did not, and do not, intend to write a novel I did make the information available.  tcsd1236 continues to attempt to add to or subtract from even though he was not present.

cont...

cont...

I made the incident available to those interested to show that you can have your rights trampled by police in their overzealous and misguided ignorance of the law.

The fact that I don't pull punches in identifying mindless drones and am willing to expose them and call them what they are after their posts support the label seems to offend you.  What should be more of an offense to you is here you have an active police officer posting in his own words what amounts to him saying your rights and the constitution are not his concern.

Now that's offensive, the fact that I point it out in the manner that I do is the only thing that you see wrong here?

Then you are not looking very close.  If you are offended by me pointing this out to you then perhaps you are to sensitive to handle someone being straight forward with you.

Disagree with me all you want, but, if, you, like tcsd1236, say, that my rights were not trampled than I will point out to you and any other person that no violation of law occurred upon which my property could lawfully been seized.  The handguns were subject to being melted down within 15 days or some such amount of time.  The officer involved would not release the firearms with out the FOP lawyers getting involved.  The threats of melting all of my firearms was made numerous times through out the ordeal during which I was surrounded in my own living room by police demanding that I tell them the whereabouts of the rest of my firearms, while other fine up standing police reduced my wife to tears in our bedroom.

No that's not Nazi tactics at all, and those that support such tactics are not Nazi like in their thinking.

Certainly I am the one at fault because I point all this out and offend the sensibilities of those that become incensed by my categorizing those that did this and those that support this as Nazi-like.

Exactly when can one call a spade a spade than, pray tell.

No, I have not as yet taken time to get a copy of the report.  I will, but why do you ask.  You see I was present during the whole thing, I do not necessarily need a copy of what the police that participated say happened.

In closing, when I went through the academy the instructors would routinely point out that the pen is mightier than the sword... they were in as much telling their trainees that you can write your way out of anything if you know how.  Sounds like lying to me.  So what do you think a report will have in it.

Happens more often than you would care to know about.

But I don't want to offend anyone.

If you look over his posts, tcsd1236 has all but said openly, "If we come to your place looking for a problem, we're not leaving until we have one -- even if we have to create it."  It's right there, between the lines.  

His posts also make it very clear he is happy to trample your rights because he's afraid of being sued (even though we all know you can't sue the Police for failure to protect).  

He's just one example of a pervasive problem.  We can blame a lot of it on evil/stupid legislators who write laws to create crime, to force an arrest one way or another.  But the LEO in the field still has discretion, if he has the courage and integrity to exercise it.  

There are still many LEO's out there who take seriously that "Serve and Protect" motto, who truly consider themselves Peace Officers and whose only goal is public safety.  But they become fewer in number every day.  Many departments are looking for something else.  

Remember the stories about the guy who always wanted to be a cop, aced the entrance exam (as one might expect of an intelligent man in his 40's, he posted the highest score ever on an exam designed for kids just off the street), then was told he was too smart to be a cop.  He fought it as long as he could, but lost his legal battle.  

In the incident described, there's no coercion of the wife (except by police), no effort to prevent her leaving, no screaming fight.  Only an obnoxious relative who didn't belong there.  I hope the wife involved has learned that calling police only makes things worse.  She triggered a self-feeding system.

Police and crime/criminals, along with judges, legislators and jailors, form a symbiotic system.  Police NEED crime; so do all the others who profit by it.  Do you really think a speeding ticket is only about public safety?  

This will not stop, until the consequences become too expensive to that system.  

Brace yourselves, our society is going down.  

"There's no way to rule innocent men.  The only power any government has is the power to crack down on criminals.  Well, when there aren't enough criminals, one *makes* them.  One declares so many things to be a crime that it becomes impossible for men to live without breaking laws.  Who wants a nation of law-abiding citizens?  What's there in that for anyone?  But just pass the kind of laws that can neither be observed nor enforced nor objectively interpreted--and you create a nation of law-breakers--and then you cash in on the guilt."

--Ayn Rand,  “Atlas Shrugged”



..."And how we burned in the camps later, thinking: What would things
have been like if every Security operative, when he went out at night to make an arrest, had been uncertain whether he would return alive and had to say good-bye to his family? Or if, during periods of mass arrests, as for example in Leningrad, when they arrested a quarter of the entire city, people had not simply sat there in their lairs, paling in terror at every bang of the downstairs door and at every step on the staircase, but had understood they had nothing left to lose and had boldly set up in the downstairs hall an ambush of half a dozen people with axes, hammers, pokers, or whatever else was at hand....The Organs would very quickly have suffered a shortage of officers and transport and, notwithstanding all of Stalin's thirst, the cursed machine would have ground to a halt!"

--Alexandr Solzhenitsyn, “The Gulag Archipelago”

You guys need to stop "reading between the lines"  I gathered from TCSD's post that if he is called to your house he needs to find out what actually happening before he leaves.

I don't believe they should have taken his weapons but I feel that limiting his movements and temporarily securing weapons that were immediately available was correct while they tried to determine the actual situation.

I think that the whole issue comes down to the question of 'prior restraint'. No crime was committed (except perhaps by the police), yet in contravention of established Constitutional law, department POLICY (not law) was used to deprive two persons of their freedom, security and property in the name of preventing a crime that MIGHT happen.

I believe that this simple issue is what seperates a democratic government  (Constitutional Republic in our nation and most states cases) from a totalitarian one.

Unfortunately, we have entered the slippery slope toward totalitarianism and there seem to be few intent on stopping the slide.

Tachyon

I must correct myself. Upon re-reading the messages, I believe that Try2TakeIt indicated the his brother-in-law was 'in his face,' and that 'spittle' struck him. That, in most places now constitutes assault and battery as the defender was struck by and item or matter originating with the attacker. Many places now allow this to be prosecuted as assault with a deadly weapon if the attacker is infected with any of a number of life threatening diseases.

The officers responding in this case did apparently seek to make a mountain out of a molehill and in doing so did seem to neglect their duty to uphold the law in the case of this assault.

Tachyon (I am not a lawyer.)