CA: Police May Confiscate Guns without Notice to Owner Starting January 1

[Rolfe]

Heard about this today-

Police May Confiscate Guns without Notice to Owner Starting January 1

Beginning January 1, police in California may confiscate firearms from gun owners thought to be a danger to themselves or others without giving the owner any notice.

http://www.breitbart.com/california...guns-without-notice-owner-starting-january-1/

 

[carpro]

The left is playing with dynamite here.

Someone is going to get shot trying to confiscate a gun from a law abiding citizen without due process.

Smart law enforcement officers will refuse to violate someone's 2nd and 4th amendment rights.

 

[Zaac]

Heard about this today-

Police May Confiscate Guns without Notice to Owner Starting January 1

Beginning January 1, police in California may confiscate firearms from gun owners thought to be a danger to themselves or others without giving the owner any notice.

http://www.breitbart.com/california...guns-without-notice-owner-starting-january-1/

Just how do they plan on doing this? Show up at someone's house and say "Hey, we violated your rights and obtained your HIPAA confidential health information and discovered that you might not be of sound mind and a possible danger to yourself or others so we're here to get your guns?" Now we're gonna violate some more of your rights.

Who in their right mind thought THIS was a good idea? I know they felt like they needed to do something to combat mentally unstable people shooting up places. But THIS is a recipe for disaster.

 

[Alcott]

It's California. Where smoking a cigarette can get you 5 years in prison, and smoking weed can get you welfare benefits of $500 a week. I heard somebody say that once, anyway. Just how true is it?

 

[HankD]

Just how do they plan on doing this? Show up at someone's house and say "Hey, we violated your rights and obtained your HIPAA confidential health information and discovered that you might not be of sound mind and a possible danger to yourself or others so we're here to get your guns?" Now we're gonna violate some more of your rights.

Who in their right mind thought THIS was a good idea? I know they felt like they needed to do something to combat mentally unstable people shooting up places. But THIS is a recipe for disaster.

It was Big Brother Jerry's idea comrade.

HankD

 

[Zaac]

It was Big Brother Jerry's idea comrade.

HankD

This is going to be so abused. Now all the police have to do if they want to get into someone's home to arrest them is tell a judge they believe there are weapons in the home that pose a threat to the owner or others.

This is like a blank warrant to search for whatever you want under the guise of looking for weapons.

Somebody needs to be recalled for coming up with this. But I'm sure he won't be because it was an ingenious idea. Sounds like something the feds would have cooked up.

 

[HankD]

This is going to be so abused. Now all the police have to do if they want to get into someone's home to arrest them is tell a judge they believe there are weapons in the home that pose a threat to the owner or others.

This is like a blank warrant to search for whatever you want under the guise of looking for weapons.

Somebody needs to be recalled for coming up with this. But I'm sure he won't be because it was an ingenious idea. Sounds like something the feds would have cooked up.

California - say goodbye to the Bill of Rights.

If no resistance then Washington and Oregon are next.
Then everyone else.

Hide your guns, gold and silver.

HankD

 

[Zaac]

California - say goodbye to the Bill of Rights.

If no resistance then Washington and Oregon are next.
Then everyone else.

Hide your guns, gold and silver.

HankD

I think you're right Hank. And not just Washington and Oregon. It might just give other states or jurisdictions within those states some ideas to do this also.

It almost seems like a roundabout way of violating the 2nd Amendment without having it be the fed gov't doing it.

I'm not impressed by much, but I am by this.

All you'll have to do is say person x is on drug y so we need to make sure they don't have any guns in the interest of public safety and their own. And you now have a legal way to take everybody's guns.

 

[HankD]

I think you're right Hank. And not just Washington and Oregon. It might just give other states or jurisdictions within those states some ideas to do this also.

It almost seems like a roundabout way of violating the 2nd Amendment without having it be the fed gov't doing it.

I'm not impressed by much, but I am by this.

All you'll have to do is say person x is on drug y so we need to make sure they don't have any guns in the interest of public safety and their own. And you now have a legal way to take everybody's guns.

It will probably include some prescription drugs so old timers like me will have their guns taken away (the ones they can find).

Any state without a conservative governor is at risk.

Yes this is a MAJOR erosion of the second amendment and everyone is asleep at the wheel including and apparently the NRA.

HankD

 

[poncho]

California - say goodbye to the Bill of Rights.

If no resistance then Washington and Oregon are next.
Then everyone else.

Hide your guns, gold and silver.

HankD

You know the founders of our republic only wrote the fifth amendment because they didn't have anything better to do.

Making a List and Checking it Twice

It seems that the new approach to gun control in America is just creating a magic list of naughty and nice.

That is the sentiment behind the President’s proposal to ban persons on the no-fly list from owning a gun.

American citizens, through mere suspicion by the government, could be denied a constitutional right.

And in reality, it is no different here with this new law in California.

By mere suspicion, the matter can be brought before a judge, who can then order the cops to come and take your guns.

Again, it sounds great when we have an idealistic picture of crazy in our heads.

But that is not how mental health works.

The person next to you on the subway may be struggling with a clinical diagnosis of some sort, and you would have no idea.

People without a diagnosis can often verbally lash out in anger and sound pretty darn crazy when in reality, they just need a minute to cool off.

But if their name makes its way onto the naughty list, then a constitutional right will be denied.

I guess it is a good thing that judges never legislate from the bench or rule out of their own political disposition, right?

(That was heavy sarcasm, by the way.)

http://www.wealthdaily.com/articles...n-without-a-hearing-starting-january-1st/7951

 

[JPPT1974]

Makes you wonder if that will be in all fifty states. As you would think CA is starting something with guns.

 

[HankD]

Makes you wonder if that will be in all fifty states. As you would think CA is starting something with guns.

I believe CA will be the model, however it won't happen in a red State - Jerry has fallen off the left side of the world.

Linda's probably already there.


HankD

 

[heisrisen]

They're just stomping on constitutional rights so they can gear up for martial law in the new world order.

 

[poncho]

Looking at what the globalists are doing to Europe it shouldn't take a prophet a fortune teller or a conspiracy theorist to see what it's going to look like here before Obama's globalist replacement is decided on.