Wednesday 13 March 2013

Gun seizure in California


From Mike Ruppert


I read this twice before sharing... I am still catching my breath. Do not rush to hysterical conclusions or spread bad information. California is moving to retroactively confiscate legally purchased firearms from people who have subsequently been in a mental hospital, convicted of a DUI, or involved in domestic violence disputes and certain other "offenses"... some of which are contrived products of divorce and child custody actions.

But here's where it gets weird.

"In California, some shortcuts are already meaning weapons are being removed from lawful owners. Bloomberg reports cite the example of 48-year-old Lynette Phillips, a California woman who was recently hospitalized for mental illness. When a team of agents went to collect her two registered firearms, they also walked out with one registered to her husband."

'The prohibited person can’t have access to a firearm,' regardless of who the registered owner is, said Michelle Gregory, a spokeswoman for the attorney general’s office."

This is aggressive and provocative beyond belief. Where is the due process? It's totally unconstitutional. Totally. More than that it's wrong. I have near complete certainty that if California pursues these tactics there (inevitably) will be violence. And once those first shots are fired, and other states follow California's lead, the whole country could become a shooting gallery within weeks.

TPTW are pushing for shooting in the streets. They're pushing hard. I can only pray that some institution or the vox populi will rise up to this hard enough to convey the message that the American people are through rolling over for blatant criminality.

"The only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for enough good men to do nothing." -- Sir Edmund Burke.

This makes me sick to my stomach.


California Seizes Guns as Owners Lose Right to Keep Arms
Wearing bulletproof vests and carrying 40-caliber Glock pistols, nine California Justice Department agents assembled outside a ranch-style house in a suburb east of Los Angeles. They were looking for a gun owner who’d recently spent two days in a mental hospital.

13 March, 2013

They knocked on the door and asked to come in. About 45 minutes later, they came away peacefully with three firearms.

California is the only state that tracks and disarms people with legally registered guns who have lost the right to own them, according to Attorney General Kamala Harris. Almost 20,000 gun owners in the state are prohibited from possessing firearms, including convicted felons, those under a domestic violence restraining order or deemed mentally unstable.

What do we do about the guns that are already in the hands of persons who, by law, are considered too dangerous to possess them?” Harris said in a letter to Vice President Joe Biden after a Connecticut school shooting in December left 26 dead. She recommended that Biden, heading a White House review of gun policy, consider California as a national model.

As many as 200,000 people nationwide may no longer be qualified to own firearms, according to Garen Wintemute, director of the Violence Prevention Research Program at the University of California, Davis. Other states may lack confiscation programs because they don’t track purchases as closely as California, which requires most weapons sales go through a licensed dealer and be reported.

Very, very few states have an archive of firearm owners like we have,” said Wintemute, who helped set up the program.

Funding Increase

Harris, a 48-year-old Democrat, has asked California lawmakers to more than double the number of agents from the current 33. They seized about 2,000 weapons last year. Agents also took 117,000 rounds of ammunition and 11,000 high-capacity magazines, according to state data.

We’re not contacting anybody who can legally own a gun,” said John Marsh, a supervising agent who coordinates the sometimes-contentious seizures. “I got called the Antichrist the other day. Every conspiracy theory you’ve heard of, take that times 10.”

The no-gun list is compiled by cross-referencing files on almost 1 million handgun and assault-weapon owners with databases of new criminal records and involuntary mental-health commitments. About 15 to 20 names are added each day, according to the attorney general’s office.

Probable Cause

Merely being in a database of registered gun owners and having a “disqualifying event,” such as a felony conviction or restraining order, isn’t sufficient evidence for a search warrant, Marsh said March 5 during raids in San Bernardino County. So the agents often must talk their way into a residence to look for weapons, he said.

At a house in Fontana, agents were looking for a gun owner with a criminal history of a sex offense, pimping, according to the attorney general’s office. Marsh said that while the woman appeared to be home, they got no answer at the door. Without a warrant, the agents couldn’t enter and had to leave empty- handed.
They had better luck in nearby Upland, where they seized three guns from the home of Lynette Phillips, 48, who’d been hospitalized for mental illness, and her husband, David. One gun was registered to her, two to him.

The prohibited person can’t have access to a firearm,” regardless of who the registered owner is, said Michelle Gregory, a spokeswoman for the attorney general’s office.

Involuntarily Held

In an interview as agents inventoried the guns, Lynette Phillips said that while she’d been held involuntarily in a mental hospital in December, the nurse who admitted her had exaggerated the magnitude of her condition.

Todd Smith, chief executive officer of Aurora Charter Oak Hospital in Covina, where documents provided by Phillips show she was treated, didn’t respond to telephone and e-mail requests for comment on the circumstances of the treatment.

Phillips said her husband used the guns for recreation. She didn’t blame the attorney general’s agents for taking the guns based on the information they had, she said.

I do feel I have every right to purchase a gun,” Phillips said. “I’m not a threat. We’re law-abiding citizens.”

No one was arrested. Most seized weapons are destroyed, Gregory said.
It’s not unusual to not arrest a mental-health person because every county in the state handles those particular cases differently,” Gregory said by e-mail. “Unless there’s an extenuating need to arrest them on the spot, we refer the case” to the local district attorney’s office, she said.

Convicted Felons

Agents more often arrest convicted felons who are prohibited from buying, receiving, owning or possessing a firearm, Gregory said. Violation of the ban is itself a felony.

The state Senate agreed March 7 to expand the seizure program using $24 million in surplus funds from fees that gun dealers charge buyers for background checks.

Andrew Arulanandam, a spokesman for the National Rifle Association, a gun lobby based in Fairfax, Virginia, that says it has more than 4 million individuals as members, didn’t respond to a request for comment on the program.

Sam Paredes, executive director of the Folsom-based advocacy group Gun Owners of California, praised the program, though not how it is funded.

We think that crime control instead of gun control is absolutely the way to go,” he said. “The issue we have is funding this program only from resources from law-abiding gun purchasers. This program has a benefit to the entire public and therefore the entire public should be paying through general- fund expenditures, and not just legal gun owners.”



California seizes guns from owners - and it might become a national model

In California, the government is already coming for the guns.



Steel workers look over a pile confiscated illegal weapons in  Rancho Cucamonga, California (AFP Photo / David McNew)

RT,
March 12, 2013 17:18



Notwithstanding the Second Amendment, rules and regulations across the United States outline certain restrictions for who can legally possess a firearm. In the state of California, factors such as a felony conviction or a history of mental health issues mean roughly 20,000 gun owners are holding onto their firearms illegally. Slowly but surely, though, Golden State police officers are prying them away. There’s more, though: backers of the program suggest this becomes a nation-wide practice, and are asking the White House to help make it happen.

Very, very few states have an archive of firearm owners like we have,” Garen Wintemute of the Violence Prevention Research Program tells Bloomberg News. Wintemute helped set up a program on the West Coast that monitors not just licensed gun owners but also watches for any red flags that could be raised after admittance to a mental health institute or a quick stint in the slammer.


Wintemute says that as many as 200,000 people across the United States may no longer be qualified to own firearms, and in California they are making sure that number drops day by day. In one example cited in this week’s Bloomberg report, journalists recall a recent scene where nine California Justice Department agents equipped with 40-caliber Glock pistols and outfitted in bulletproof vests knocked on a suburban residence, requested to speak to a certain gun owner and then walked away with whatever arsenal they could apprehend.

California Attorney General Kamala Harris seized roughly 2,000 weapons last year, reports Bloomberg, as well as 117,000 rounds of ammunition and 11,000 high-capacity magazines. But as concerns escalate about a possible war against the right to bear arms in America, will other states soon follow suite?

In California, some shortcuts are already meaning weapons are being removed from lawful owners. Bloomberg reports cite the example of 48-year-old Lynette Phillips, a California woman who was recently hospitalized for mental illness. When a team of agents went to collect her two registered firearms, they also walked out with one registered to her husband.

The prohibited person can’t have access to a firearm,” regardless of who the registered owner is, said Michelle Gregory, a spokeswoman for the attorney general’s office.

In other cities and towns across the country, Americans are standing up against what many say are unconstitutional attempts to disarm the United States. In New York State, new legislation is making it harder for Americans to purchase firearms, and one provision will provide gun owners with a felony charge if they ignore new registration rules — which is enough on its own to make owning guns illegal. Across the board more states are demanding stricter background checks, but as efforts to remove weapons from the hands of Americans — voluntarily and involuntarily — are ramped up, though, those that disagree are doing what they can to keep their country armed.

In the wake of last year’s massacres in Aurora, Colorado and Newtown, Connecticut — among others — lawmakers and the public at large have called on Americans for a mass disarming. Gun buyback programs are being touted in countless cities, and in California the attorney general is hoping for even more help at getting guns away from their once-lawful owners — Attorney General Harris has asked Vice President Joe Biden for help and has asked state lawmakers to increase the number of agents tasked with collecting weapons up to 33. She also told Mr. Biden that she thought the efforts coming out of California could be a good model of a national program, reports Bloomberg.

Meanwhile, though, others are making sure weapons aren’t being put to waste. Residents in Maine hit the polls this week to vote on a law that would require everyone in the town of Byron to register a high-powered weapon.

"It was never my intention to force anyone to own a gun who doesn't want to. My purpose was to make a statement in support of the Second Amendment,” Head Selectman Anne Simmons-Edmund tells US News & World Report.


"I'm just here because I'd rather see weapons stay with people, rather than turned in to be melted," a man named Joe, who declined to provide his last name, tells the Bainbridge Island Review"I'm here to exercise the Second Amendment," he added. "Even if I don't get anything, honestly, I'd just rather see people keep them."

No comments:

Post a Comment

Note: only a member of this blog may post a comment.