Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Owner gets back guns taken by police
Timesunion.com ^ | 30 July, 2008 | SCOTT WALDMAN

Posted on 07/31/2008 5:19:13 AM PDT by marktwain

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-39 last
To: PapaBear3625
Good option - just make sure if you have a pissed of spouse she/he does not find out about it. Yes I have friends my wife of 25 years does not know about - as she does.
21 posted on 07/31/2008 7:16:29 AM PDT by mad_as_he$$ (Constantly choosing the lesser of two evils is still choosing evil.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: marktwain

stupid woman. there was most likely no need for an OOP here. she just wanted to screw her husband for a little bit and didn’t think of the consequences. why can’t people act like adults?


22 posted on 07/31/2008 7:19:12 AM PDT by thefactor (contributing nothing of value to threads since 2001...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mad_as_he$$
“I'll take you word for it but I thought the preponderance of States require a dealer for transfer. I am most familair with Kalifornia so that is my main reference. In any case do not do something to transfer any guns that might result in a felony rather than a domestic misdemeanor. Isn't there a site for gunlaws (gunlaws.com?) or such?”

Yes. It is:

http://www.gunlaws.com/

It is run by Alan Korwin, a good friend of mine. He is a great guy, and very knowledgeable.

23 posted on 07/31/2008 7:23:33 AM PDT by marktwain
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: longtermmemmory
That is idiotic. Possession of the pawn ticket can be used to show “possession”. Any judge with a dime store law degree will not fall for that BS stunt.

Not quite. Two entities in two different locations can not simultaneously possess the same item(s). It's a good move and it certainly beats giving up your firearms to the police (which is more idiotic). Remember, this is not a divorce case.

24 posted on 07/31/2008 7:32:50 AM PDT by Niteranger68 (When it comes to Obama, just keep the change.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: PapaBear3625

Here you just had to go and tell the world about the one trick that old timers have been using since waaaaaay back when.


25 posted on 07/31/2008 9:01:19 AM PDT by B4Ranch (Having custody of a loaded weapon does not arm you. The skill to use the weapon is what arms a man.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: bmwcyle

I’d have filed the stolen gun report before calling the lawyer’s office.


26 posted on 07/31/2008 9:05:58 AM PDT by Cyber Liberty (Who would McQueeg rather have mad at him: You or the liberals? FREE LAZAMATAZ!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Cyber Liberty

I was not as pissed off as I was later. I had not met her lawyer yet. When I did, we were having a meeting. I got my pound of flesh then. I had her lawyer do pissed off she gave into my demands just to get out of the meeting. A mind is a terrible thing not to play with.


27 posted on 07/31/2008 9:46:33 AM PDT by bmwcyle (If God wanted us to be Socialist, Karl Marx would have been born in America.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: marktwain

We definitely need the law changed in that respect. No person in this country should ever be made to give up their firearms in the case of a divorce or order of protection. Divorce is particularly terrible though.

That’s why when I get married, we’re signing a prenuptial. No matter how much I love her. =)


28 posted on 07/31/2008 9:48:18 AM PDT by wastedyears (Show me your precious darlings, and I will crush them all)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: bmwcyle

Well, to me the deal is the lawyer, if it wanted to be a pain, could simply deny having the gun, making it into a he-said, it said argument about a firearm. Icky to have flopping around during a divorce case. It sounds like it was OK for you in the end, and that’s good.


29 posted on 07/31/2008 9:50:39 AM PDT by Cyber Liberty (Who would McQueeg rather have mad at him: You or the liberals? FREE LAZAMATAZ!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: Cyber Liberty

Lawyers greatest weakness is they think they know everything and they think you are afraid of them. I know they do not and I do not fear them.


30 posted on 07/31/2008 9:55:52 AM PDT by bmwcyle (If God wanted us to be Socialist, Karl Marx would have been born in America.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: SJSAMPLE
I do.A restraining order isn’t a conviction.

Very true.

You can get a restraining order fairly easily, especially when a spouse is involved.

This,too,is true.No judge in his/her right mind is gonna deny an application for a restraining order from a woman so as to avoid ever seeing the headline "Judge Smith Could Have Saved Mary Jones By Approving Restraining Order".

I can assure you that "domestic violence" occurs.I know because I saw it during my 20 year tenure working in a big city ER.I've seen women badly beaten by their hubby/boyfriend.I've seen women who were murdered by their hubby/boyfriend.In fact,one of my most vivid memories of my 20 years was of a woman shot in the forehead by her husband/boyfriend.She didn't even make it to the OR.

OTOH,I'll wager the clothes on my back that some (most likely many) of the claims that women make regarding DV are false.And it's the possibility of false accusations that cause me to demand some kind of hearing that the "defendant" is allowed to attend (and to present evidence in) before the "abuser's" gun rights can be suspended for more than a short period.

31 posted on 07/31/2008 9:56:05 AM PDT by Gay State Conservative (Obama:"Ich bein ein beginner")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: wastedyears
That’s why when I get married, we’re signing a prenuptial. No matter how much I love her. =)

So how will this prenup be worded? "If I ever ask a judge to issue a restraining order against you I agree that you'll be able to retain possession and control of your guns"?

That'll give her a warm fuzzy feeling.

32 posted on 07/31/2008 10:00:19 AM PDT by Gay State Conservative (Obama:"Ich bein ein beginner")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Gay State Conservative
“I can assure you that “domestic violence” occurs.I know because I saw it during my 20 year tenure working in a big city ER.I've seen women badly beaten by their hubby/boyfriend.I've seen women who were murdered by their hubby/boyfriend.In fact,one of my most vivid memories of my 20 years was of a woman shot in the forehead by her husband/boyfriend.She didn't even make it to the OR.”

Did you ever see a man beaten by the woman? Most of the time, they are reluctant to admit it.

Most of the studies that I have read on the subject indicate that in domestic abuse, the victims are evenly split between men and women. It is just that women have political correctness on their side.

Men are more likely to use their hands. Women are more likely to use an implement.

As I read in one of the articles, domestic violence most often tends to be a “dance of mutual destruction”, despite the propaganda that the left has so successfully foisted off on the public.

33 posted on 07/31/2008 10:43:47 AM PDT by marktwain
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: Cyber Liberty
I?d have filed the stolen gun report before calling the lawyer?s office.

Advantage: It hoses the opposing lawyer.

Disadvantage: When cops are involved, personal guns sometimes disappear never to be seen again.

34 posted on 07/31/2008 11:16:03 AM PDT by Still Thinking (Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: Still Thinking

Good point. Problem is, in some places, not involving them amounts to grounds for them to take the guns, regardless.


35 posted on 07/31/2008 11:18:01 AM PDT by Cyber Liberty (Who would McQueeg rather have mad at him: You or the liberals? FREE LAZAMATAZ!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: Cyber Liberty

In this case, how do you figure? Someone was in possession of property stolen from him. He offered them the chance to return it and avoid prosecution. I can’t believe that’s against any law.


36 posted on 07/31/2008 11:22:39 AM PDT by Still Thinking (Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: marktwain
Did you ever see a man beaten by the woman? Most of the time, they are reluctant to admit it.

A few times.That is,there were a few cases where a guy came in assaulted claiming that his wife/girlfriend did it.

Most of the studies that I have read on the subject indicate that in domestic abuse, the victims are evenly split between men and women. It is just that women have political correctness on their side.

I have no personal knowledge that would confirm or refute this statement,However,my *gut* tells me that it's not,in fact,*evenly* split while,at the same time,I'm willing to assume that female on male DV does occur.

Men are more likely to use their hands. Women are more likely to use an implement.

Men use their hands and implements.I know this to be true.Regarding women...I don't know.

As I read in one of the articles, domestic violence most often tends to be a “dance of mutual destruction”, despite the propaganda that the left has so successfully foisted off on the public.

I have no trouble believing that in some cases women who are "battered" are not 100% blameless.That is...sometimes a woman will do or say something that fully warrants an insulting response but not a slap...or a baseball bat...or a bullet.I can also accept that some women fail to take adequate steps at the first sign of abuse but,rather,come back again and again.

37 posted on 07/31/2008 11:27:54 AM PDT by Gay State Conservative (Obama:"Ich bein ein beginner")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: Gay State Conservative

With the prenup, she won’t be able to take half of everything I have, and thus, according to the High Chancellors of the Judiciaries, I won’t be tempted to argue and/or possibly even harm her about anything.

At least, that’s probably how they think in Liberal Land.

Do you really think it’s fair that a women hires a lawyer, steals half your stuff, then files an order of protection against you, and has the firearms your father and grandfather gave you, alone with every one you purchase yourself, confiscated? What if that’s over 150 firearms? THEN, you’d surely be angry at her, and that I do not say in jest.


38 posted on 07/31/2008 12:11:46 PM PDT by wastedyears (Show me your precious darlings, and I will crush them all)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: Still Thinking
You make a great point of logic.

Unfortunately, gun control laws often don't follow logic.

39 posted on 07/31/2008 12:17:51 PM PDT by Cyber Liberty (Who would McQueeg rather have mad at him: You or the liberals? FREE LAZAMATAZ!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-39 last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson